Same Question, Or Different Question

[lwf]

Yes...it is possible. This is my attitude. I am pro-life...for me. So I made sure to marry someone for whom abortion wasn't an option either. These are the choices I made. My wife made her choices, and picked me for being compatible on this level as well. (Of course this wasn't the ONLY consideration...lol...but it was discussed before things got overly serious).

Fact is, any pro-life person can do this, and live their life however they like, while minding their own business and allowing others to live their life however they like. Something being legal isn't something being mandatory.

Are there pro-choice people who believe in mandatory abortions?

 

[OlNate]

Are there pro-choice people who believe in mandatory abortions?

Not sure...but sometimes you would think so, given the pushback. :shrug:

 

[CuriousCitizen]

Pro-life here and I find your last statement very strange. Pro-life with allowing abortion as a legal option is simply pro-choice. There would be no difference between the two if you believe it is a person's choice, regardless if you see a fetus as a life or not. A fetus either has human rights or it does not, I do not see an in between where you can say "I believe a fetus is a human life, but someone should be able to kill it if they want to and don't think it is life". So for the second question I believe it should be outlawed except possibly the cases of rape, and incest. If the mother's health is at risk what I morally think is the best option is to induce labor and deliver the child IF safe. If the child lives then you have saved a life and if not you gave them a chance and did not murder a person. If this is not safe at all for the mother abortion would be the only option.

 

[minnie616]

Pro-life here and I find your last statement very strange. Pro-life with allowing abortion as a legal option is simply pro-choice. There would be no difference between the two if you believe it is a person's choice, regardless if you see a fetus as a life or not. A fetus either has human rights or it does not, I do not see an in between where you can say "I believe a fetus is a human life, but someone should be able to kill it if they want to and don't think it is life". So for the second question I believe it should be outlawed except possibly the cases of rape, and incest. If the mother's health is at risk what I morally think is the best option is to induce labor and deliver the child IF safe. If the child lives then you have saved a life and if not you gave them a chance and did not murder a person. If this is not safe at all for the mother abortion would be the only option.

If the woman’s health is at risk from pregnancy complications and labor is induced before the fetus is viable, the hospital calls that an abortion.

 

[CuriousCitizen]

If the woman’s health is at risk from pregnancy complications and labor is induced before the fetus is viable, the hospital calls that an abortion.

That is interesting but i completely disagree that that is an abortion. It is not euthanasia to take away a life saving device if the person wants it. And it is not murder to not help someone live but it is if you kill them. Thats the difference to me one allows for a chance at life and one purposefully ends life.

 

[Scrabaholic]

That is interesting but i completely disagree that that is an abortion. It is not euthanasia to take away a life saving device if the person wants it. And it is not murder to not help someone live but it is if you kill them. Thats the difference to me one allows for a chance at life and one purposefully ends life.

Abortion is termination of pregnancy. Minnie's example most certainly is abortion.

 

[CuriousCitizen]

Abortion is termination of pregnancy. Minnie's example most certainly is abortion.

Well now youre playing semantics with me. Abortion is the PURPOSEFUL ending of life of an unborn fetus. Being that the fetus would be born, giving it a chance to live, and not actively killed it, this is clearly not an abortion. The idea behind an abortion is ending the life of the child, in this case it is trying to safe to life of the mother with doing as little damage to other life as possible.

 

[MrWonka]

For example, isn't it extremely possible for a person to to say: "I am pro-life, but I do believe abortion should remain a legal option."

No. An option is a choice. If you think abortion should be a legal option then you are by definition pro-choice.

 

[Lursa]

Pro-life here and I find your last statement very strange. Pro-life with allowing abortion as a legal option is simply pro-choice. There would be no difference between the two if you believe it is a person's choice, regardless if you see a fetus as a life or not. A fetus either has human rights or it does not, I do not see an in between where you can say "I believe a fetus is a human life, but someone should be able to kill it if they want to and don't think it is life". So for the second question I believe it should be outlawed except possibly the cases of rape, and incest. If the mother's health is at risk what I morally think is the best option is to induce labor and deliver the child IF safe. If the child lives then you have saved a life and if not you gave them a chance and did not murder a person. If this is not safe at all for the mother abortion would be the only option.

Why do you find it "acceptable" to kill the unborn in cases of rape and incest, or to save the life of the mother? Please be specific.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Are the below questions the exact same questions to you?

1) Are you pro-life, or pro-choice?

2) Do you believe abortion should be outlawed, or remain legal?


I tend to think they are very different questions unless there's qualifying discussion and definitions beforehand.

Do you think if these questions were randomly polled to the same people (without the qualifying discussion) over the course of a few months, that the results might be contradictory?


Isn't it quite possible for a person to honestly answer those questions in a very contradictory manner?

For example, isn't it extremely possible for a person to to say: "I am pro-life, but I do believe abortion should remain a legal option."

Bold: That is me. To a T. So obviously for me it is extremely possible.

As for the questions, just depends on your POV. I can see how they're different, I can also see how they are the same.

 

[joko104]

Are the below questions the exact same questions to you?

1) Are you pro-life, or pro-choice?

2) Do you believe abortion should be outlawed, or remain legal?


I tend to think they are very different questions unless there's qualifying discussion and definitions beforehand.

Do you think if these questions were randomly polled to the same people (without the qualifying discussion) over the course of a few months, that the results might be contradictory?


Isn't it quite possible for a person to honestly answer those questions in a very contradictory manner?

For example, isn't it extremely possible for a person to to say: "I am pro-life, but I do believe abortion should remain a legal option."

Those are great questions. I'm pro-choice. Now, let me think... do I think abortion should be legal or illegal? Wow, that's a tough one. I'll have to think about that. :lol:

 

[Scrabaholic]

Well now youre playing semantics with me. Abortion is the PURPOSEFUL ending of life of an unborn fetus. Being that the fetus would be born, giving it a chance to live, and not actively killed it, this is clearly not an abortion. The idea behind an abortion is ending the life of the child, in this case it is trying to safe to life of the mother with doing as little damage to other life as possible.

Definition of abortion
1 : the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: such as
a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation
— compare MISCARRIAGE
b : induced expulsion of a human fetus
c : expulsion of a fetus by a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy
— compare CONTAGIOUS ABORTION

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abortion

If it's before viability, the zef *will* die so the definition fits.

 

[CuriousCitizen]

Why do you find it "acceptable" to kill the unborn in cases of rape and incest, or to save the life of the mother? Please be specific.

I said possibly I have not made up my mind about those cases. They make up such a small percentage of abortions that part of me thinks that policy should not cover them, but another part of me recognizes that it must be unbelievably hard to carry that child. Empathy makes bad politics but personally I am not sure that I can separate them.

 

[Lursa]

I said possibly I have not made up my mind about those cases. They make up such a small percentage of abortions that part of me thinks that policy should not cover them, but another part of me recognizes that it must be unbelievably hard to carry that child. Empathy makes bad politics but personally I am not sure that I can separate them.

So I am still asking...why are those cases 'different' for you?

And are you considering that making abortion illegal even for rape, incest, and when the mother's health is in danger would be best?

 

[minnie616]

Well now youre playing semantics with me. Abortion is the PURPOSEFUL ending of life of an unborn fetus. Being that the fetus would be born, giving it a chance to live, and not actively killed it, this is clearly not an abortion. The idea behind an abortion is ending the life of the child, in this case it is trying to safe to life of the mother with doing as little damage to other life as possible.

False.

An abortion is the removal ( natural or induced )of the fetal contents before viability.

The medical term for a miscarriage is spontaneous abortion.

A septic abortion is the fetus contracts a septic infection and dies within the womb.

A missed abortion is when the fetus dies within the womb and is not naturally expelled in a timely manner.

 

[minnie616]

That is interesting but i completely disagree that that is an abortion. It is not euthanasia to take away a life saving device if the person wants it. And it is not murder to not help someone live but it is if you kill them. Thats the difference to me one allows for a chance at life and one purposefully ends life.

Delivery before viability is an abortion.

Interesting article about deliveries between 20 and 23 weeks.

Setting: All deliveries to mothers resident in Trent Health Region.

Patients: 1306 babies delivered at 20–23 weeks gestation.

Results: Termination of pregnancy accounted for 33% of deliveries at 20–23 weeks; these were excluded from further analysis. Spontaneous delivery occurred at a frequency of 2.5/1000 deliveries; 30% died before the onset of labour, 27% died during labour, and 35% showed signs of life at birth. Of the latter, 8% were not registered as statutory live births. Of the live born infants, the largest group (39%) had a heart beat but no other signs of life. There was no trend for infants of lower gestation to show fewer signs of life. Duration of survival varied widely (median 60 minutes at 20–22 weeks), and this did not increase with gestation until 23 weeks (median six hours), probably because of selective treatment. Survival curves are presented for each gestation group. At 23 weeks, 4.5% survived to 1 year of age; all were > 500 g birth weight. Below 23 weeks gestation, none survived, and 94% had died within 4 hours of age.

Conclusions: This information on surviving labour, signs of life at birth, duration of survival, and birth weight at 20–23 weeks gestation should help decision making in the management of pre-viable delivery.

https://fn.bmj.com/content/88/3/F199

 

[Dragonfly]

No. An option is a choice. If you think abortion should be a legal option then you are by definition pro-choice.

I think a large quantity of people can be personally pro-life, but have absolutely no desire to force others into not having a choice.

 

[CuriousCitizen]

I never said that they had a good chance of living i simply said a chance. And yes the definition covers any deaths caused by early labor i did read the definition after you posted it. However, you are providing a subset of a subset. A subset of women have medical problems that prevent them from being able to carry to term and another subset of that subset are carrying children below the time of viability. This is such a small percentage of all abortions that I honestly dont think policy should be too concerned about it and that there is nothing anyone can do to save the child. I would rather argue about the vast majority of abortions that happen because of the decision to end life. For clarification, protect the mother's life first, then see if you can save the child too.

 

[CuriousCitizen]

I think a large quantity of people can be personally pro-life, but have absolutely no desire to force others into not having a choice.

This is consistent with pro-choice arguments. Just because someone is pro-choice doesnt mean they themselves will get an abortion, but want others to have the choice. If you are pro-life you are by definition against abortion.

 

[Gianna_Flores]

Yes! In my opinion both the questions are same as both signifies the same meaning ie, either abortion is legal or illegal. And to answer if the abortion should be legal or illegal, i prefer abortion to b legal. As sometimes women or couples are not ready to have a child yet due to many reasons. So in that cases it should be legal. So basically I am a pro-choice.

 

[CFI302]

They are different questions. Much like:

1) Do you want to own/buy a semi-auto rifle?

2) Should semi-auto rifles be banned?

One may have no personal desire to own a certain type of gun yet believe that outlawing ownership of that type of gun is beyond the power of government.

If you support someone else making a choice that takes a life, there is no difference.

 

[Lursa]

If you support someone else making a choice that takes a life, there is no difference.

And the govt, making the choice for the woman, who dies in childbirth...is that different?

And please dont reduce the unborn or women to numbers, that's dehumanizing.

Every single pregnancy risks a woman's life...it's not predictable.

 

[CFI302]

And the govt, making the choice for the woman, who dies in childbirth...is that different?

And please dont reduce the unborn or women to numbers, that's dehumanizing.

Every single pregnancy risks a woman's life...it's not predictable.

The government isn't making such decisions, the woman is.

You want to know what's dehumanizing, over 60 million abortions in 45 years.

When a woman does what it takes to get pregnant, she assumes the risk.

 

[Lursa]

The government isn't making such decisions, the woman is.

You want to know what's dehumanizing, over 60 million abortions in 45 years.

When a woman does what it takes to get pregnant, she assumes the risk.

The govt would be making the decision FOR the woman if abortion was illegal :doh Please try to keep up.

Ah...more dehumanizing numbers...sure you understand the meaning of that word?

And a woman does accept the risks of having sex. An abortion is a risk as well, just less of one. She has sex knowing she has choices and thus she accepts the consequences of her decision.

 

[CFI302]

The govt would be making the decision FOR the woman if abortion was illegal :doh Please try to keep up.

Ah...more dehumanizing numbers...sure you understand the meaning of that word?

And a woman does accept the risks of having sex. An abortion is a risk as well, just less of one. She has sex knowing she has choices and thus she accepts the consequences of her decision.

Oh, you want to play what if and avoid reality? Why didn't you say so.

A woman that has an abortion because she doesn't like the results isn't accepting the consequences.

It wouldn't bother me if every woman that chose to kill what they produced for convenience suffered the same end result of the innocent life they killed.