• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

No unborn human needs or wants legal rights (1 Viewer)

Bodhisattva said:
You want to help pro-lifers? That is sweet... but when you say "their mistake" you should really realize that they are flat out lying.
Click to expand...

Some pro-lifers (especially Christians) are really ignorant, not just telling stupid lies. I have seen people insist there is no reason for the government to get involved because chairities are available to help. That may be true where they live but not in most areas with poor pregnant women. So I do not think just being pro-life automatically makes every single comment the ;erson makes about abortion a lie, even if the majority of them are.
 
Blue Donkey said:
I oppose forcing women to be passive during their pregnancies. If she carries a fetus to term, that's great, but it must be her choice. I do not believe in telling women they should abort their pregnancies just because of what could happen to their babies either. If the woman knows she does not want a baby, I would tell her to schedule an appointment with a female counselor instead of listen to people like us.
Click to expand...
Understood.

FWIW, assuming your self-assessment is accurate, you don't sound as though you're pro-abortion.
 
Blue Donkey said:
When pro-lifers say all "unborn babies" (which are really zygotes, blastocysts, embryos, and fetuses) have the right to life, they completely ignore all of the proven biological facts about in-utero human development. Their mistakes not only include using the wrong temrinology to describe what these human lives and abortion are, but also why only born people need or should have any legal rights. I assume nobody on DP is an expert on obstetrics or human embryololgy. I hope this will help pro-lifers to learn all about that aspect of abortion vs. motherhood instead of just the fact that all pregnant girls and women need the legal right to choose that is already given to them.
Click to expand...

The woman's choice is all that matters.
 
COTO said:
Understood.

FWIW, assuming your self-assessment is accurate, you don't sound as though you're pro-abortion.
Click to expand...

I actually would love it if every pregnant girl could get a free aboriton ASAP without notifying any family members. They all need to abort their pregnancies for many reasons. Of course that will never happen.
 
Blue Donkey said:
So was every other human being more than one minute old. What is your point?
Click to expand...

exactly...just think about it. cmon. you can do it lol i know it didn't go over your head.
 
Dayton3 said:
Pregnant girls and women by and large to not "need" to get rid of them. At least not via abortion. If they truly do not want the "fetus" then they can put it up for adoption once born.

Standard adoption procedure by the way is for the adoptive parents to pay the medical bills for the prenatal care and delivery of the baby.
Click to expand...

Its not a separate person until birth.
 
COTO said:
A pro-choicer is distinguished from a pro-abortionist by how he regards passive attempts to influence a pregnant mother's choice, and by how he characterizes the act of abortion.

A pro-choicer has no opposition to waiting periods, doctors showing mothers sonograms of their fetuses, or groups like Save the Storks who provide free ultrasounds to mothers to show them the developing foetus (which significantly decreases their likelihood to abort). A pro-choicer tolerates websites and literature that calls abortion immoral and unnecessary. Most importantly, a pro-choicer doesn't take a position that abortion is beneficial (or even necessary) for society.

By contrast, a pro-abortionist resists any attempt to sway the choice of mothers in favour of carrying pregnancies to term, including (but not limited to) waiting periods, doctors showing sonograms to mothers, doctors informing parents, prayer vigils in front of abortion clinics, and groups like Save the Storks. A pro-abortionist abhors the characterization of abortion as immoral/unnecessary, and supports banning websites and literature that promote this view. Finally, a pro-abortionist actively defends/promotes abortion as beneficial (or necessary) to society, and invests time and effort extolling the "benefits" of aborting and the costs of carrying to term.

Which of the two descriptions above would you say best characterizes you?
Click to expand...

Lol..... pro choicers dont support causing mothers more unnecessary pain by stupid sonogram scare tactics. Only anti-choicers.
 
COTO said:
A pro-choicer is distinguished from a pro-abortionist by how he regards passive attempts to influence a pregnant mother's choice, and by how he characterizes the act of abortion.

A pro-choicer has no opposition to waiting periods, doctors showing mothers sonograms of their fetuses, or groups like Save the Storks who provide free ultrasounds to mothers to show them the developing foetus (which significantly decreases their likelihood to abort). A pro-choicer tolerates websites and literature that calls abortion immoral and unnecessary. Most importantly, a pro-choicer doesn't take a position that abortion is beneficial (or even necessary) for society.

By contrast, a pro-abortionist resists any attempt to sway the choice of mothers in favour of carrying pregnancies to term, including (but not limited to) waiting periods, doctors showing sonograms to mothers, doctors informing parents, prayer vigils in front of abortion clinics, and groups like Save the Storks. A pro-abortionist abhors the characterization of abortion as immoral/unnecessary, and supports banning websites and literature that promote this view. Finally, a pro-abortionist actively defends/promotes abortion as beneficial (or necessary) to society, and invests time and effort extolling the "benefits" of aborting and the costs of carrying to term.

Which of the two descriptions above would you say best characterizes you?
Click to expand...


Waiting Periods For Abortion | Guttmacher Institute
Over 90% of the women seeking abortion have made their decision and do not change it. Waiting periods and forced sonogram viewing have no effect on women's decision to get an abortion. These delaying tactics are enacted into law by old white conservative anti-women males and are designed to punish women that control their own reproductive lives. They have no effect on changing women's mind and they do not decrease the total number of abortions done every year. However, they do delay the abortion often into the 2nd trimester making abortions later an more expensive. States that enacted these laws have found that the number of abortions go down in their state but increase by that same number in neighboring states.

The only women that consider abortion immoral are anti-abortion women. These are the women that scream murderer, whore and baby killer at women going into a clinic and then sneak off to get an abortion in the same clinic if they have an unwanted pregnancy. These anti-abortion women get abortions at exactly the same rate as pro-choice women.

I would say the best characterization of you people in the anti-abortion movement is hypocrite, followed by misogynist, misanthropist and bully.
 
Blue Donkey said:
When pro-lifers say all "unborn babies" (which are really zygotes, blastocysts, embryos, and fetuses) have the right to life, they completely ignore all of the proven biological facts about in-utero human development. Their mistakes not only include using the wrong temrinology to describe what these human lives and abortion are, but also why only born people need or should have any legal rights. I assume nobody on DP is an expert on obstetrics or human embryololgy. I hope this will help pro-lifers to learn all about that aspect of abortion vs. motherhood instead of just the fact that all pregnant girls and women need the legal right to choose that is already given to them.
Click to expand...

So, who died and left you spokesperson for the unborn?:roll:
 
Blue Donkey said:
When pro-lifers say all "unborn babies" (which are really zygotes, blastocysts, embryos, and fetuses) have the right to life, they completely ignore all of the proven biological facts about in-utero human development. Their mistakes not only include using the wrong temrinology to describe what these human lives and abortion are, but also why only born people need or should have any legal rights. I assume nobody on DP is an expert on obstetrics or human embryololgy. I hope this will help pro-lifers to learn all about that aspect of abortion vs. motherhood instead of just the fact that all pregnant girls and women need the legal right to choose that is already given to them.
Click to expand...

On what basis does anyone need rights, Blue Donkey? What determines whether any living thing needs rights?
 
Felis Leo said:
On what basis does anyone need rights, Blue Donkey? What determines whether any living thing needs rights?
Click to expand...

If you really don't know that, try living in a place where no living thing has any rights, including humans.
 
Blue Donkey said:
If you really don't know that, try living in a place where no living thing has any rights, including humans.
Click to expand...

It is a philosophical question that I am asking, Blue Donkey.

On what basis does anyone need rights? Personal preference alone? You want rights and therefore you should have them?
 
Felis Leo said:
On what basis does anyone need rights, Blue Donkey? What determines whether any living thing needs rights?
Click to expand...

A Hobbes guy! Do you live in the state of nature?
 
Blue Donkey said:
If that is all you can say, you have no mental capability in your head to understand what the words "person" and "birth" mean.
Click to expand...

or I find using minimal responses reduces the chances of what I post being repeated out of context.
 
Felis Leo said:
It is a philosophical question that I am asking, Blue Donkey.

On what basis does anyone need rights? Personal preference alone? You want rights and therefore you should have them?
Click to expand...

The first right is obviously the right to life. How does a homo sapiens individual get that right? What does it encompass? Who is responsible for giving it to another person? There is no single easy answer that can be applied across the entire spectrum of human rights so my focus is limited to those of the parents, or just the mom in some cases, and the rights of a newborn baby after its umbilical cord is cut.

Why do you believe your family needs the right to life?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom