I don't like it when people talk about 'when life begins', when quite clearly an embryo or foetus is alive in the scientific term. But life isn't sacred in a blanket sense, it's more important to look at the quality of the life.

So for me, killing a bundle of cells that can't think or feel at even a basic level doesn't offend and I'm fine with abortion early in the pregnancy.

:laughing:

How exactly would that abortion work? Push him down the stairs?

Stuff into vagina. Vacuum out.

there is a difference between being aware [ or conscious] and remembering

i assume youre not a vegetarian? are we arguing about if you should kill animals now too? lets not. if theres a thread about that in here id like to find it. . .

Me and ethan already had a long debate about THAT topic. I was saying that by Unfan's definition of life, human fetuses' lives are as valuable as animals', which I, along with most of the Republicans against abortion, think are essentially worthless.

.

Because I don't think animals can love anything. Apparently anyone who has ever owned a pet ever disagrees with that, which is weird cause I've had many pets... I don't think any of them were about to leap in front of a bullet to save my life or anything. That's the end of me talking about that.

My point of course being that TheUnfan can't use his definition as a defense for pro-lifers when pro-lifers are usually the people that devalue animal life.

The good ole coat hanger trick, might take a little while, but it will work!

Ha ha, I think youre getting rover confused with underdog. Im a 'pro-lifer' and I value animal life.

I'm confused. I'd never use my argument to back up a pro-life stance. I'm pro-choice, so it would be counterproductive.

Also, I'm 100% fine with animals dying for consumption.

I'm pro-choice .. as a biologist, I don't really see anything holy about an embryo. We're a god-forsaken bunch.

It's an interesting moral topic and I've read through the answers here and it doesn't seem like a lot are actually providing any arguments why they should be pro-life or pro-choice. From a utilitarian perspective, the right thing to do is whatever causes the least amount of pain and/or most amount of happiness. Because you can't know if the child will be happy or not, you could argue that when taking such a decision, you should look at the now and whatever you think might happen. The possibility of the child living a happy life is just speculation and could be disregarded. Since it's logical to assume that a fetus does not have the capability to suffer much because of an abortion, it should not have the same moralistic consideration as that of an adult person, for example the mother. In other words, you should do what maximizes the happiness of people such as the mother and father, not the fetus which is probably neither happy or sad about the decision.

Obviously, from such a utilitarian standpoint, you have to be pro-choice because it's the only feasible, practical way to attempt to make such a philosophy work. Granted, most people are not wholly utilitarian because it justifies gruesome acts for the sake of the better good. For example you kill one to save a hundred. Such a situation would be easy to defend from a utilitarian perspective, but normative ethics may have a problem with it (ex. "thou shalt not kill"). Still, utilitarian ethics are often used in life and death situations. For example if you do first aid in a situation where there are several victims, should you focus your effort on the person which is hurt the most and will most likely die or should you rather try and save those you are more likely to be able to help?

I'm not sure if I'm 100% utilitarian when it comes to pro-life or pro-choice, but I don't think the potential of being a person automatically grants the same moralistic considerations as actually being one. Thus, I think the one you have to consider is the mother (/parents) and so she should get to choose.

Besides, we can use those little suckers for stemcell research!

I guess I read through your post too quickly. Let's just say it's too shaky a fact for either side to go on really, as human lives are different from animals'.

I don't think people necessarily extend more moralistic concern for people than they do for animals. Many would rather the japanese whaler dies than the whale he's hunting. How we feel about other people depends on many things, for example family relations, are they an "us" or "them", etc.

Also, you shouldn't think we're so different from animals. We're not, we're just smart. When they trained the gorilla Coco to use sign language, she was able to express a range of emotions that we typically think of as human such as love and jealousy. She also had memories of her parents getting killed by hunters. In short, we have a lot in common with other animals and there's no reason to think what motivates humans to action are not motivators in other mammals.

Maybe it is how you look at it, it seems the pro-choice defense is mostly related to the death of the fetus, where as the way I look at it, being pro-life is more of initially preventing such an event to have the opportunity to occur. If that makes any sense? I feel it is the means to an end provided by irresponsibility in the first place. My arguement really is focused more on preconception and manning up to your responsibilities. I feel abortion is a mulligan on life. This is why there a numerous contraceptions. If you play the lottery and lose do you get your money back? Basically, just man up. I guess since God was brought up, you could say its not his way, but dont quote me on this, for I am not a God fearing man and believe that this run on sentence can not be backed up by facts, only others beliefs.

I don't necessarily think the right way to promote responsibility is by taking away people's freedoms. Furthermore, by using the "manning-up" argument for being pro-life, you're extrapolating the argument into something which it isn't. This is simply about wether or not people should have the freedom to get abortions if they want - not their feelings of responsibility.

I think there are ways to have the freedom of abortion and promote responsibility in a society at the same time. If your reason for being pro-choice has more to do with people owning up to responsibilities, then I think it's better to start looking for other ways to achieve that goal than argue with the pro-choicers.

I think you meant pro-life, and I agree to an extent with the last paragraph. I completely see the debate as how one looks at it, apparently we are arguing two completely different views on the matter. I take a moral stand point as opposed to the political. I am arguing a more personal belief as opposed to the law and the freedom to get an abortion. Im not looking to achieve any goals, that why I am extremely reluctant to post here. I dont really know how to express my opinions about this, but I am not arguing for a pro-life society, more of expressing my views on abortion. Basically, Im against abortion outside of rape, yet still dont really care about what anyone else does. ****, I cant really explain what I'm trying to say, it's 8am here and I have yet to sleep.

Sorry, yeah I meant pro-life in my last paragraph .. :D

It sounds like you're not really extremist pro-choice, but more like you're for compromise. For example that rape victims that get pregnant are allowed, but f.ex not someone acting irresponsibly on a night out. I'm more lenient I think, but I can see where you're coming from.

Most of the pro-lifers I've read and seen on the telly tend to argue normative ethics, thou shalt not kill, and say that abortion is as bad as killing a person. From that argument, even rape victims can't have abortions because being raped doesn't justify "murder" (abortion). It's this whole stance in general that I particularly don't agree with.

No, its certainly not. But I doubt few having sex don't know that father/motherhood is a potential outcome.

I'm pro-choice. To clarify my position though, i'd like to point out its about choice not

• its not yet a human so it isn't murder
• its my body blah blah blah
• we shouldn't have it if we can't afford it

For me, I don't need to include that list in the policy of it all. Those things are for individuals to decide I will say though that I believe people that have the children when they can't are generally a larger strain on your community than any person should be.

And for christ sakes, take your accidental mircles our out of all Supermarkets, grocery stores, and restaurants.

And all kinds of public transport, please.

I largely agree with this too, but since the train is already loud, and its warm enough here to bike now, I don't mind letting them ride the train...

although strollers and the stairs...really? go last, please.

Tags: kill all humans

Perfect.

That's fucked up.

Pro-Choice. Most people are wasteful, ignorant sacks of neuroses, and there are way too many of us already.
That is my simplified answer.
And to any body telling people that they shouldn't be having sex unless they're ready to be a parent; its only trying to punish them for living the type of life that you gave up.
We are humans, but we are also animals. We are chemical equations. A fetus is more or less a parasite until it eventually comes out, grows up a little bit and gets a job. ;)







just kidding about the job thing.

In all honesty, I think parenthood can be a beautiful thing. But its also been so over-produced and bastardized and perverted that, in my opinion, most people shouldn't be having kids. And if they do choose to, please... 2 people=1 child. Over population is a real bitch. I put the Earth before my desire to have "a little me running around! Oh, wouldn't that be great?" **** no. I was a little **** growing up, there does not need to be another child version of me.

Thats why this debate blows, most people just have ****ing ignorant comments. Thanks to they few that try and entertain the topic intelligently. 'Your pro-choice because you cant get pregnant putting it into another dudes ass'

Wait. Who's having *** sex?

why?


@Thrice

Me?

hahaha and im a roman catholic!

No, no one really, these are pretty much pointless like I first said because its filled with garbage.

most of us are. whats your point?

that's the cutest fetus i've ever seen.

I'll bet I was a pretty cute fetus.

I am Pre-Choice. It's where you kill everyone in the room before they can make up their mind.

I'm gonna make a bumper sticker out of that.

i'm definitely with thrice on this one although i lean just a little more towards choice.

it seems too many people are looking at the practice like a nifty little "undo" feature just like in windows when they decide they effed up at the most basic purpose of their freaking existence. oh shoot i done got drunk and knocked up!!! i'll just ctrl-z the fetus and bam! i can go back to being an irresponsible cumdumpster woohoo!

that's not to say there aren't valid reasons to abort but there are more than a few very valid and very worthwhile couples out there waiting to adopt so why deny good parents? gonna make your social life suck for the next 9 months? awww..... maybe bring a little shame to the homestead? mummy and daddy going to feel shame :( oh no! the neighbors are going to talk in hushed tones!!!

there are plenty of other ways to have an orgasm besides unprotected intercourse. if you don't think you're ready to raise a baby then you shouldn't be using that method. there's a reason it's the only way life lives on, if you can't wrap your head around it then you're not mature enough to be doing it. just because you can doesn't mean you need to.

The "you brought it on yourself" piece of the argument that I see some pro-lifers use seems almost a bit vindictive. So people that are immature should not have sex. You know what? I agree with that. However, that doesn't stop immature people from having sex. What do you do when they do get pregnant? Are you gonna say "well, tough **** kiddo" and that's your argument for denying them abortion?

To me, that seems more rooted in bitterness than any kind of logic. In other words, I don't think that's something worthy of basing an important moral decision on.

And what does it matter to you if those immature kids do get an abortion? You think getting pregnant and having an abortion is not a bad experience for a young mother? You think she can't learn from that and is just gonna go out there and get pregged up again?

I'm against abortion morally

But it's hard to say that when the term "pro life" is used so carelssly by people who cling on to their belief that women are satanic monsters who love nothing more than to kill babies and ruin the foundation of the American family by getting a college education.

So there's a lot of sexism behind the pro life movement, there's no denying that. But that doesn't mean you're a sexist if you're against abortion. Radical feminists who try to push that on people are idiots. I just don't think killing babies is ok, that's all there is to it.

Personally, I would like to know to know if anyone here are pro-life based on actual ethics/moral theory and then maybe discuss the topic from there. Abortion is a moral dilemma, yet very few people deal with it as such - or at least they don't word it well.

I'm sure most people have some kind of moral compass when they state their opinions on the matter, but what drives that compass? Why do some consider it immoral to have an abortion?

Gee. I woulda thunk saying "I don't like killing babies" was pretty straightforward.

I said I'm only against it morally though. Legally I think it should depend on the circumstances. So under circumstances like rape or risk of the mother dying, yeah, women have the right to choose. Well actually you're right that overall it should be the woman's choice.

So my advice to the "pro life" fundamentalist christians is this. If you want to put a halt on abortion there are more effective ways of doing it than trying to make it illegal. First off try not to be the raging retards that you are and accept that we don't really need to be fruitful and multiply anymore, we've done enough of that. So try to actually ecourage people to use condoms and birth countrol, or hell, the more masturbation and oral the better. And teach kids about sex because abstinence does jack sh*t, telling kids to abstain from something without explaining what they're abstaining from actually is NEVER works.

And simply educating women about the other alternatives to abortion, and reward them for choosing those alternatives instead. That more than anything should be the goal.

It's not a bad post and like you say, I do agree.

This joke or stab seems a bit ignorant, though. A baby and a fetus is not the same. Are you certain that a weeks old fetus feels pain or sadness like a baby? Most believe they don't and that can make all the difference.