Freebase Dali

I've never had any kids. My perspective is one not attached to personal emotion, however, I still can't help but see the actual logic involved with whether an unborn child is considered a sentient life form or not. A potential person, or argued differently, an actual human in the making (unless we're defining humans as "those who have exited a vagina") is still being killed (Or... "gently prevented from existing", if that sounds better) in the procedure.
The obvious separation here is the line society draws between the acceptability of termination and the unacceptability of it, based on what we dictate via the arbitrary line we've come to accept.

While I don't disagree with the decision to terminate as a whole, I would definitely hope that this is less of a "women's rights" thing, and more of a human decency thing, whether it's more decent and necessary for the mother to abort, or allow the child to live. That's all I'm saying.

__________________

John Wilkes Booth

I'm pro-life and pro-choice. 100% in favor of both life and choices.

Zer0

But are you in favour of life or the choice of a termination?

__________________

Astronomer

I thought my stance would be pretty controversial but I feel the same as here what FD has stated in this phrase- pro situational.

If you become pregnant and there is situational realities that mean you would not be able to care for the child adequately or it poses a health-risk to the mother or the baby (be it physical or psychological), I believe there should be a choice to abort the pregnancy. Same goes for if a woman was raped and became pregnant, or other situations where the sexual intercourse resulting in pregnancy was not wanted.

Being able to just abort any pregnancy you incur accidentally seems to take away from the adult responsibility you have when you enter a sexual relationship (i.e. the knowledge that if you choose to have sexual intercourse you are aware that there is a possibility a pregnancy could result, even if you are using contraception.)

Of course, the whole "situational" aspect of it is vague and subjective, it depends completely on the person who is going through the ordeal, their physical and mental state, whether they feel as though they could adequately care for a baby, etc. So I guess my stance almost leans towards "pro-choice" but I still believe it is situational and adults still need to take some responsibility rather than a "quick fix" because they were short-sighted in their sexual endeavours.

And yes, my decision is probably based more on an emotional connection I have with the issue than it should - I am close to somebody who lost their baby during the second trimester, I also know that my big sister was born at 26 weeks and is today an amazing person.

__________________

John Wilkes Booth

I was just poking fun at the dishonest euphemisms.

The pragmatist in me leans towards being in favor of abortion simply because I feel like the more control that people have over when they procreate, the better.

Morally, I can understand the pro-life point of view. Some of the defenses of abortion I see tossed around (it's not life/not a human) are pure nonsense. The argument that it's not conscious is a little more compelling, but still pretty iffy imo. You could probably make that same argument for new born babies - it just depends on where you want to draw that line.

But I guess I just don't have that rigid a moral code and don't view killing it as some sort of sin that won't be forgiven. I just look at cause and effect. Killing people is 'wrong' for all sorts of practical reasons. I can't think of a practical reason for why abortion is wrong - only the truism that killing innocent humans is always wrong. To me the benefits of increasing control over procreation outweigh strict adherence to that principle in this case.

Guybrush

I am pro choice, perhaps more than most. I think as long as we're largely talking about a lump of cells, completely dependent on its connection with the mothers body and generally lacking in capacity to suffer for the decisions made by its mother, then it's up to the mother if she wants to abort. Parents who argue the pro-life angle because of experiences with their own children often have the wrong perspective, I think. These lumps simply are not walking, talking children and just because they can be doesn't mean we should treat them as. You can't know for sure what these fetuses can or can't be so why base your choice in this matter on those kind of assumptions?

Arguing what's better for society, I don't think that wanting to abort is harmful to society or otherwise symptomatic for criminals. Hence, I don't think we will do society a favour by spending more money on stopping these women from getting their wishes. Someone who gets an abortion today may still have chidren in the future; a child she and perhaps her partner can support and who is wanted and/or healthy.

So it seems to me abortion can factor into giving us us freedom of choice, happier families and a healthier populace. A question to pro-lifers then, what does prohibiting abortion give us? And if someone has an illegal abortion, what does society gain from punishing that person? Having an abortion often comes with guilt and regret. Isn't that enough?

__________________
Something Completely Different

Astronomer

I think it's easy to base your choice on those kind of assumptions if you are a parent who has had the experience of something like miscarriage, infertility, or a premature baby. And I know it brings up the whole "potential life" argument - I agree with you here tore, potential life is not the same as an actual child - but you can see why many parents or individuals who have been through these difficult and confronting experiences have these beliefs.

For the record, I am not "pro-life." I guess my opinion is largely "pro-choice" but I just hope that individuals who are making those difficult choices are making an informed choice, rather than a "quick fix" for what they perceive as consequences of their sexual activity.

__________________

John Wilkes Booth

Take a close look at the criteria you're listing here. None of it really differentiates a fetus from other humans in all of their various (illegal to kill) forms and stages, other than the 'dependent on the connection to the mother' one. Of course, you still have to explain why the fetus not being independent makes it ok to kill.

As an aside, I think that the tendency to use terms like "lump of cells" points to an attempt at emotional detachment from the pro-choice angle. It's not a rational argument, just an attempt to dehumanize the thing we'd like to kill.

Astronomer

Really, aren't we all just a lump of cells?!

__________________

misspoptart

And you're the expert on killing, right John?