Hartsock
Banned
Reading this will give me nightmares for a week.
Life At Conception
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
Reading this will give me nightmares for a week.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
I'd be surprised if this Act gets traction right now, but it is the way to effectively overturn Roe. v. Wade.
Interesting discussion. I personally don't get the liberal acceptance of abortion. I don't understand how "my body my choice" became a mainstream sentiment that people freely advocate as if it's common sense. I agree that abortion is a necessary evil when the pregnancy presents a health risk to the mother. And I understand the practical side of making abortion available as to avoid dangerous underground procedures. But I do not understand the cultural acceptance. I have yet to hear a morally consistent defense of abortion on demand, and I think allowing it to become a social norm is surely a net negative for society.
Making abortion illegal does not reduce the incidence rate of abortion.
You don't think the moral argument behind the famous violinist case is consistent?
Hartsock
Banned
I dont think people should have abortions, I dont think it is a good or healthy thing to do. I think if you get pregnant you should have the kid, love it, raise it, do the best you can. But, I also think it is immoral to bring a child in to this world if you won't love it or will just pass it on to the government to worry about. If you aren't going to be responsible for your child and you are going to **** up its life, dont get pregnant, but if you do either carry it and find an adoptive family, or have an early term abortion, the earlier the better. I think abortion should be an option. I would never do it, but who am I to tell someone else they cant?
I agree with your first statement. It is what I meant when I said that I understood the practical reasons of providing legal abortion.
The violinist argument is completely artificial. The protagonist finds herself in a situation where her life is completely taken over by strangers using her against her will to help someone she's never met. I don't see how that relates to abortion at all? It is an artificial and somewhat farcical scenario that bares no relation to the subject. I can create a similar scenario, but with the hero finding the violinist passed out in his vomit after drinking too much of her home brewed alcohol, and her deciding not to flip him over because it is her body, and thus her choice. The scenario is artificially constructed to reach a certain conclusion.
I was certainly raised to be a good pro-choice atheist, but I too have a hard time getting it to completely jive with my overall philosophical outlook. There are many moral(philosophical) inconsistencies and even more arbitrary distinctions. I don't like that and to me it is an indication that we're all operating under some false premise that we are taking for granted.
In a lot of ways, I sorta think the government's business ends at my skin, and there is absolutely no legal jurisdiction by the government or anyone else over what goes on inside me. A pregnancy, and the reality that this is another human being inside a woman is just the kind of thing to prove man's incompetence to logically and consistently apply any of our notions about wrong or right. I think it is an excellent example for refuting the whole concept of elitists with their fascist models of governance imposing their views on mankind.
there just isn't any natural authority for doing so.
And if the "Right to Life" folks win this political battle and force their view on the nation, I believe there will just be millions upon millions of women not telling anybody their pregnacy test was positive, which they did in their bathroom, or what they did about it. There will be a huge "black market" for abortifacients, maybe big enough and profitable enough to make drugs like heroin and meth small change.
The woman finds herself attached to an embryo/fetus she has never met. You really don't see that?
Some people, with more patriarchal mindset, see the embryo/fetus as some sort of extension of the man who did the insemination (at least, morally), but I did not think you were among them.
In your scenario, is it a crime to refuse to flip over the violinist? Should it be?
Yea maybe if there weren't so many viagra/steroid up little boys running around dipping their sticks there wouldn't be so many pregnancies. Seriously, your comment is putting all the blame on the women.
Religious beliefs should never be part of law in a democracy. I certainly think that men should have some say in whether they want their child. You can't expect the man to be financially responsible if he has no say. I am against partial-birth abortions but feel the government has no right to tell any one what to do with their bodies. Making laws prohibited some never works just look at prohibition, drugs etc. People will find a way around the law. Do we really want to start throw women into jail because they took the morning after pill? Our prisons are already filled up enough, so how about all the conservatives move on to some other issue that matters.
while this response is pretty good, the first bold is just not consistent with "democracy" if the people in a democracy are religious. Neither is the last if the people are conservative.
democracy has by some thinkers been called a "dictatorship of the majority", deemed to validate the will of some slight majority over the liberty of the minorities in any way the majority wishes. That was a consideration in the minds of some of our founders in favoring a representative constitutional republic with a Bill of Rights and a statement in the text of the Constitution about how it conveyed to the Federal Government no power not enumertated in the Constitution itself, with the Tenth Amendment reserving all other powers to the States, or to the People.
this seems a little atypical for you.
so you would support forcing a woman to submit to a medical procedure (one that does not benefit her) against her wishes?