Abortion debate (1 Viewer)

[erawamai]

But the point of Bolt's article is not to debate the merits of early- versus late- term abortion, but to consider the rights of the human life that is being terminated.

I believe there is one line on that which you highlighted. The remainder of the article is concerned with the travesty of very late term abortions. Which, I believe, most people do not support unless serious harm will be caused to the potential human life or the mother.

Again a foetus is not a legal human life. It is a potential human life which exists in a interdependent relationship with the mother.

 

[Phanatical]

Who are you to say where life begins? Does it magically happen on day X of pregnancy? Oh no, we were just about to terminate your baby, but it's become a human life today.

And there are plenty of "real" humans in an interdependent relationship with machinery in hospitals - without which they could not survive. Should we therefore support their termination on the basis that while they Might become independent, they're a burden to society while they're there?

 

[erawamai]

Who are you to say where life begins? Does it magically happen on day X of pregnancy? Oh no, we were just about to terminate your baby, but it's become a human life today.

Well that is the big question. Most logically a foetus becomes a life when it is born. Hence the term 'born'. The child is not born at the moment of conception.

Metaphysically a child exists even before it is concieved as every female and male that come into contact have the potential to create life. Everytime a person has sex with another there is the chance of creating potential life. However we don't stop these people from wearing condoms or using the pill because the potential for a birth at the time is low.

Every foetus has the potential to be born. Just because a foetus has the potential to be born doesn't mean the mothers right to choose should be trumped. Until the child is born the life in being has the greater right. This right becomes less so powerful the closer the foetus comes to birth, reflecting the higher potential for birth and the greater rights of the foetus. This continuum is generally recongised by the community through the general acceptance of early term abortions and the lack of community support for late term abortions.

And there are plenty of "real" humans in an interdependent relationship with machinery in hospitals - without which they could not survive. Should we therefore support their termination on the basis that while they Might become independent, they're a burden to society while they're there?

The foetus is dependent on another human being. The human being in your example is NOT dependent on another person, but on a machine. I just hope the more radical feminists don't see that part of your post. A pregnant mother is not anologous to a machine that was made for the only purpose of keeping a human alive.

Also the last bit in bold. The rationale for abortion has never had anything to do with potential children becoming a burden on society. The fact that you brought that as a conjunct to abortion suggests you kind of don't get the rationale behind abortions.

 

[katie_tully]

My god Phanatical, do us all a favour and stop clutching at straws.
Nobody is for late term abortions. I don't support late term abortions. Not too many people I do know are for late term abortions.

How many abortions are performed a year worldwide, and how many go wrong? An abortion, like most surgical procedures have risks that both the doctor AND the patient are aware of. Women who seek abortions are informed of all possible side effects and any dangers of an abortion.

Then again, we could always legalise medical abortions to make the process safer and more accesible to people...but nah.

 

[Gomer]

Who are you to say where life begins? Does it magically happen on day X of pregnancy? Oh no, we were just about to terminate your baby, but it's become a human life today.

And there are plenty of "real" humans in an interdependent relationship with machinery in hospitals - without which they could not survive. Should we therefore support their termination on the basis that while they Might become independent, they're a burden to society while they're there?

I am not sure if anyone knows when a fetus in the womb developes a conscience and self-knowledge. But you can be pretty sure of the grey area of when it starts by understanding the development of the brain in fetuses. That is why they have a cut-off for abortions.

I am pretty satisfied for abortions. I don't agree with the conservatory view of the government and trying to ban abortions all together. An unplanned baby can ruin a person's life. But if a person takes responsibility for a mistake, it can also be a beautiful thing. That is why it is good to have the choice of aborting.

-- Gomer

 

[MoonlightSonata]

I am not sure if anyone knows when a fetus in the womb developes a conscience and self-knowledge. But you can be pretty sure of the grey area of when it starts by understanding the development of the brain in fetuses. That is why they have a cut-off for abortions.

I am pretty satisfied for abortions. I don't agree with the conservatory view of the government and trying to ban abortions all together. An unplanned baby can ruin a person's life. But if a person takes responsibility for a mistake, it can also be a beautiful thing. That is why it is good to have the choice of aborting.

-- Gomer

I generally agree with you but for the record, unless Tony Abbott becomes PM, the "conservatory" government is not out to ban abortions.

 

[malkin86]

Tony Abbott has approved a 500-woman trial of the RU486 pill. It's testing as to whether it has any side effects, it seems.

http://smh.com.au/news/national/abbott-approved-abortion-pill-tests/2005/12/07/1133829664187.html

 

[erawamai]

Tony Abbott has approved a 500-woman trial of the RU486 pill. It's testing as to whether it has any side effects, it seems.

http://smh.com.au/news/national/abbott-approved-abortion-pill-tests/2005/12/07/1133829664187.html

I believe such a clinical trial was also conducted in the mid 90s.

 

[malkin86]

I wonder if Abbott had any quibbles with the accuracy of the last one?

 

[M-turkey]

Abortion needs to be upto the individual carrying the baby.

Make it legal, so that those who believe its ok can have an abortion.
Those who believe it is unethical just avoid it.

 

[ur_inner_child]

well well, majority of my questions put forward to phanatical have been left unanswered. i suppose im so dimwitted to him im not even worth his time.

anyway, as a personal issue, if i were raped and got pregnant, i would certainly terminate the baby as soon as I knew. I would've checked over and over like a traumatised rape victim would, and terminate before you start counting trimesters and talk about human life.

it would be a collection of cells when it dies, for i simply, if you had a good look at me, cannot emotionally nor financially, nor physically support the child.

and the motherfuckers can keep their mouth shut. i can see it now: then yelling at how immoral i am and i'll go "have YOU been raped? HAVE YOU BEEN RAPED?!"

and so forth

 

[ogmzergrush]

I'm ultimately hopeful that there exists a limit for human stupidity ur_inner_child. Let's hope that we've reached it already, I'd like to think nobody here is stupid enough to argue that an abortion is inappropriate under those circumstances, that early.

 

[ur_inner_child]

I'm ultimately hopeful that there exists a limit for human stupidity ur_inner_child. Let's hope that we've reached it already, I'd like to think nobody here is stupid enough to argue that an abortion is inappropriate under those circumstances, that early.

phanatical does

 

[ogmzergrush]

Where do you draw the line on when does a human become a foetus?

I say the day it can flip you the bird for even thinking about killing it.

 

[Phanatical]

phanatical does

Phanatical does not. My concern for the sanctity of human life is not religious in nature (ie, all life is precious). Rather, I believe in the Quality of life. And I could not support bringing somebody into the world with the stigma of being the product of rape. I do not believe a child can have quality of life with the knowledge that he or she is the product of rape, and more specifically if the mother does not feel she can give the child quality of life.

But where a child is conceived through acts that are mutually consentual between the father and the mother, the parents have a responsibility to provide the best quality of life as possible. And if a prospective parent does not feel he or she can provide quality of life to any children they bear, they should not commit acts that could result in the creation of life. If they do, and they kill this life, then they are no better than murderers.

 

[ediisjoz]

abortion

It should be anyones decision whether they get an abortion or not. If women don't want to have a baby, or are too young to take care of it, they should be allowed to decide whether or not THEY want to keep the baby, it's no one elses decision but theirs.

 

[erawamai]

Phanatical does not. My concern for the sanctity of human life is not religious in nature (ie, all life is precious). Rather, I believe in the Quality of life. And I could not support bringing somebody into the world with the stigma of being the product of rape. I do not believe a child can have quality of life with the knowledge that he or she is the product of rape, and more specifically if the mother does not feel she can give the child quality of life.

But where a child is conceived through acts that are mutually consentual between the father and the mother, the parents have a responsibility to provide the best quality of life as possible. And if a prospective parent does not feel he or she can provide quality of life to any children they bear, they should not commit acts that could result in the creation of life. If they do, and they kill this life, then they are no better than murderers.

1. How can you suggest that it is ok for an abortion if the child is a product of a rape on the assumption that the child's life will be so drastically lessened due to stigma? Stigma is what snobs use to degrade people. It only matters to do people who care. I would submit that having to raise a child in an environment where the mother and father are not psychologically ready for birth is more dangerous to the mother and childs HEALTH than having to be subject to stigma.

We all know that the birth of a child that was the result of rape is likely to cause mental problems for the child and mother. This is why many victims of rape, if they fall pregnant, terminate. However who is to say that this is any worse than a mother is not psychologically ready for child birth? Surely you cannot justify your position based on a value judgment. In either case you are making exceptions to life which is very odd for an ardent pro lifer as yourself.

Which comes back to the reason WHY you believe there should be an exception to rape and why you harp on about adults being consenting and responsible about sex. It is because you really do not care about the life of the child. You are concerned about responsibilities between adults. Not about whether the child is killed or 'murdered'. If you did care you would be against the termination of a child, regardless of how, when or where it was conceived. Becasue regradless of how, when or where the child was conceived life, in the view of pro lifers as yourself, has been created and to kill such a life would be murder.

2. How, when and where the child is conceived should not concern ardent pro lifers as yourself. Your main concern is that there has been conception and that if life has been created it is murder if this life is terminated. No ifs no buts. No exceptions. If you suggest that it is ok for a fetus, that has been produce as a result of a rape, to be terminated then you are a murderer according to your own standards. A life has been created and it has been terminated.

AGAIN

The method in which the child was conceived is irrelevant. In the view of a pro lifer as yourself LIFE HAS BEEN CREATED. From the Pro lifer perspective the life of the child is being killed off or murdered to use your own words.

 

[ogmzergrush]

1. How can you suggest that it is ok for an abortion if the child is a product of a rape on the assumption that the child's life will be so drastically lessened due to stigma? Stigma is what snobs use to degrade people. It only matters to do people who care. I would submit that having to raise a child in an environment where the mother and father are not psychologically ready for birth is more dangerous to the mother and childs HEALTH than having to be subject to stigma.

We all know that the birth of a child that was the result of rape is likely to cause mental problems for the child and mother. This is why many victims of rape, if they fall pregnant, terminate. However who is to say that this is any worse than a mother is not psychologically ready for child birth? Surely you cannot justify your position based on a value judgment. In either case you are making exceptions to life which is very odd for an ardent pro lifer as yourself.

Which comes back to the reason WHY you believe there should be an exception to rape and why you harp on about adults being consenting and responsible about sex. It is because you really do not care about the life of the child. You are concerned about responsibilities between adults. Not about whether the child is killed or 'murdered'. If you did care you would be against the termination of a child, regardless of how, when or where it was conceived. Becasue regradless of how, when or where the child was conceived life, in the view of pro lifers as yourself, has been created and to kill such a life would be murder.

2. How, when and where the child is conceived should not concern ardent pro lifers as yourself. Your main concern is that there has been conception and that if life has been created it is murder if this life is terminated. No ifs no buts. No exceptions. If you suggest that it is ok for a fetus, that has been produce as a result of a rape, to be terminated then you are a murderer according to your own standards. A life has been created and it has been terminated.

AGAIN

The method in which the child was conceived is irrelevant. In the view of a pro lifer as yourself LIFE HAS BEEN CREATED. From the Pro lifer perspective the life of the child is being killed off or murdered to use your own words.

Is it just me or are you trying to tell Phanatical his opinion?

 

[erawamai]

Is it just me or are you trying to tell Phanatical his opinion?

I'm telling him its hypocrtical to hold one view than contradicts with the other.

You can't be an ardent pro lifer and attack abortions for other reasons but then say it's acceptable for abortions in other cases. If you are a pro lifer where, when or how the child is conceived is irrelevant. Real pro lifers are only concerned with the fact that a life has been conceived. A real pro lifer that is wholly concerned about saving life and would see the termination of any fetus as murder as life has been created and then killed.

 

[ogmzergrush]

haha, the ads are for student loans, it's a sign! abortions for all!