Abortion.

Ghost_x1000 · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Ghost_x1000** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:26 am

In a different thread, Barack Obama: the baby killing lifesaver, the discussion had drifted away from the topic of obama, and on to the merits and demerits of abortion. The last few posts when I started writing up this thread, especially, have been way off topic. So, to keep that topic from being overrun by this problem, I'm starting this thread.

This topic is for the discussion of abortion. What do you think? Is it right? Is it wrong? Is it about a mother's choice to do whatever she wants to her own body? Or is it about the merciless slaughter of hundreds of of little babies? Go ahead, say what you want.

BUT...

Keep this in mind: this is not in discussion and debate, not flame wars. No flaming, name calling, saying someone is stupid just because of what they believe, or any of those other childish things that you should know not to do.

The floor is now open.

Edit: fixed link
Edit: added the the text in bold

Cloaked_Schemer · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Cloaked_Schemer** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:32 am

As I've stated in the other thread, I don't believe in abortion. I think it's wrong and very selfish of women, just because they can't be arsed to go into labor. It doesn't matter what the circumstances are, it doesn't matter if she was raped or artificially inseminated in her sleep, there's really no excuse for abortion. You can put the thing up for adoption and never have to look at it again, and guess what? You're not killing an innocent baby in the process =3

Whether I think it should be legal or illegal doesn't matter as it already is legal anyway.

St.Jimmy · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **St.Jimmy** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:54 am

I don't think abortion is something as easy as "right" or "wrong". Lots of people state adoption as a possible solution, but I can see why it might be painful to go through the struggle of childbirth only to give that child up, knowing that one day he or she might hate you for it.

It's also not so simple as just not wanting to go through labour. There can be lots of reasons for abortion. A woman might live in terrible conditions and know that it would be cruel to bring up a child in such a place. She might not have enough money to even take care of herself, never mind the baby. She might be very ill, and having the child might be enough to kill her. Then the child would never know his/her mother. There're also some diseases that can be past onto the child, like STDs etc. If you're infected with one of those, would you really want to pass it on to a child?

I think it's very complex if you've been raped. I can't imagine having to bring up the child of the man who had done that to you, seeing him every time you look at your baby. It could be enough to instigate child cruelty, or hatred of the child, or extreme depression.

At the same time, I don't think I, personally, would ever have an abortion. My parents had me when they were nineteen years old and they managed. They're both successful and working and we have our own house and car and pay taxes etc. It wasn't easy, but they did it.

However, I don't think it can be one rule for everyone. Just because I don't think I would ever have an abortion doesn't mean that I'm going to try and ban it for everyone else. And I don't know; I've never been in that position yet. I think that until you've been in a truly desperate situation like that, you can't really decide.

Cloaked_Schemer · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Cloaked_Schemer** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:01 am

St.Jimmy wrote:It's also not so simple as just not wanting to go through labour. There can be lots of reasons for abortion. A woman might live in terrible conditions and know that it would be cruel to bring up a child in such a place. She might not have enough money to even take care of herself, never mind the baby. She might be very ill, and having the child might be enough to kill her. Then the child would never know his/her mother. There're also some diseases that can be past onto the child, like STDs etc. If you're infected with one of those, would you really want to pass it on to a child?

I apologize, but this paragraph really bothered me. If the conditions are bad, put it up for adoption, or just leave it at the local Police Station, no questions asked. Same with the finance situation.

Regarding the being very ill/STDs/etc, that's why they have a little thing called a C Section, to protect the mother if she cannot actually go into labor, and to protect the child if the mother has an STD.

Ghost_x1000 · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Ghost_x1000** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:06 am

Cloaked_Schemer, I have to say that I personally hold the same position. I don't agree with everything you said, but I do agree with you that abortion is wrong and that making abortion illegal wouldn't really solve anything important.

Since I know I'm going to get asked this I'll just refer back to what I said in the other topic.

Ghost_x1000 wrote:So when a person going around says: "Stop being so religious, there's nothing wrong with abortion, you hater", it makes me rather irritated. I didn't want to bring this up, but it might be appropriate now. My dislike of abortion has nothing to do with religion. I don't like abortion because I was almost aborted. It's a story that I don't like to tell, but needless to say, it has given me a strong dislike of abortion. When I think of the fact that I almost never had a chance to experience all the things I have in my life, just because of some doctor who wanted a bigger paycheck... well, it kinda pisses me off, you know?

St.Jimmy · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **St.Jimmy** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:09 am

Okay, sorry; I didn't know about the C section preventing the STDs. I just thought it was because the baby shares fluids etc with the mother. I thought it could be passed on like that.

But as for the illness, it isn't actually just the process of giving birth. Women with heart defects can be massively at risk because the pregnancy puts strain on the heart and can endanger the woman's life.

As I said before about adoption, for some people this process can be too painful. I know it seems selfish but it's true. My friend was fourteen when she found out she was pregnant. I know she shouldn't have got herself into that position in the first place, but by then it was too late. She had no qualifications yet, not having sat her GCSEs. She wanted to go to university and have a family when she was ready. It took her a long time to make up her mind, but in the end she had an abortion. The father didn't want to know, and her mother wouldn't speak to her. She was pretty much alone. The thought of giving the baby up for adoption was far too painful for her, and trying to pass GCSEs that we had to take early would have been impossible whilst in a pregnant condition. So she had the abortion.

I think whatever you decide when a baby is unplanned and you aren't prepared is difficult, and I think it just depends on the individual.

Alacer Phasmatis · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Alacer Phasmatis** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:14 am

This sounds like fun. I'll jump in!

Okay, I personally wouldn't have an abortion, but I think mothers deserve the choice. Males don't have to bother about a menstrual cycle or the accompanying pains. The cramps reeaally hurt; I'm a fairly athletic person who has suffered a severe concussion from being thrown off a horse and into a fencepost, dislocating my elbow joint, cracking a shin on ice, etc. While the pain of these things lasted for a couple of days, they're nothing compared to the cramps I get at a certain point of the month. A particularly empathetic guy might get it, but the majority I've met don't really seem to understand. Likewise, being pregnant is a whole new ball game that men have ignored for the greater part of many centuries until this modern age (applause for the dudes who're trying to get it).

When a woman has a child, she suffers of morning sickness on a daily basis-- dizziness, cramping, sometimes vomiting, and so on. This alone isn't fun, but that's only the beginning of the nine-month ordeal. Her pelvis has to expand to accommodate the growing creature within her, which was particularly stressful for my mother-- she's missing a vertebrate at the top of her spinal column, and she was carrying twins. Backaches will ensue, as well as swollen ankles from carrying the child. You'll have to use the bathroom far more often, of course, and if you have allergies, they may manifest themselves in your worst bout of reactions yet. Don't forget either that children kick, and that really hurts, particularly when they're whacking the insides of your belly (although at this point, abortion really and truly is the murder of a human with complete emotions, and completely barbaric.)

That said, I also think abortion should be done only before the nervous system sets in. During the first ten weeks of pregnancy, your child is an embryo without any ability to feel emotions or sensations such as pain. Abortion, if it must happen, should be done at that point. It will have been long enough for a woman to know beyond a doubt that she's pregnant and her child won't have to undergo the completely inhumane methods used to rid mothers of fetuses (like chopping them up and 'vacuuming' them out-- that's just sick!). The amniotic fluid could even be used to further sciences centering around such things, like stem cell research.

Ryand-Smith · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Ryand-Smith** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:45 am

Wow. First of all, Partial Birth Abortion has been banned for a while now (Please use Google people), so that is a non topic. I feel that this issue is sad and nonsensical, as a student in a major University, I know women who have undergone Abortions, I have seen the process (nasty looking process, ) and I feel, as a man, it is not my place to condemn another. HOWEVER! I feel that Abortion before the fetus has grown a central nervous system, (a brain, ability to understand pain), is a non crime, as it would be like killing cancer, Cancer can't feel pain, fetuses before, I believe 20-30 weeks [This should be right, my books aren't at uni with me yet, prove me wrong if you must]. This is the sort of thing that I feel, is key. Keep abortion, Safe, legal, and RARE. I know that banning it would produce economic hells on lower class women, and it would promote a rate of "abortion tourism" (not my term, a writer who's name escapes me made it up) to places such as Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, and other Islands nearby would rise dramatically. This is how I feel, based on research, ethics, my own Humanism, and a vast amount of discussion and research.

Navidia · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Navidia** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:49 am

In most states you only have 12 weeks to get an abortion unless for whatever reason later on the pregnancy threatens your health. And then you can get one later on. I think women should have the choice, plain and simple.

I refuse to carry anything to term knowing that I'd have no intention of keeping it.

I love sex, rubbers aren't 100& and neither is birth control. (I used both and still ended up pregnant.)

I'm still in college, no longer with Mr. Super Sperm, and I don't have a place of my own, actually, I hate where I live. Not a great environment to raise a child in, let alone the fact that I just started a new job.

Abortion comes down to the circumstance. But regardless, the option should still be there.

Ponats · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Ponats** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:39 pm

I read an interesting book called Freakonomics that touched about abortions. They showed a correlation between crime rates and the abortions, also had a lot of other cases too. I liked the book.

Personally, I am more pro choice. Abortions WILL happen whether it is outlawed or not. Less abortions will probably ensue, but they would be 'safer' for the person who is getting it. I guess not safer for the child tho, eh?

DCLXVI · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **DCLXVI** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:45 pm

I don't think the question of abortion should ever come up. If you know you cannot raise a child, don't go sleeping around. If you're a dude, and you know that your girlfriend (or whatever) cannot raise a child, don't sleep with her.
Also, the question of a woman getting pregnant from rape should never come up. Why is this guy raping some girl in the first place? Why isn't he locked up?
Hmmmm....
That makes me think. Rape is illegal. But it happens anyway. So if abortion was illegal, it would happen anyway. Poor women would seek out alternatives, which could prove dangerous to their own health, and rich women would go on living the way they do now, just more stealthily. It would end up like the Prohibition movement.
I believe that killing a fetus that can think for itself (that is, measurable independent brain activity is occurring in the womb) is just as wrong as killing a newborn baby, but before that checkpoint is reached, the baby is more of an unthinking vegetable. Alive, but brain dead. Or, more appropriately, brain unborn. So you're not really killing it, more preventing it from being brain born. So if it was never alive, is it murder to terminate it?

Going back to my original statement, I am not saying we should outlaw sex. I just think that we should look at it not just as something that will only impact said person and their partner in a positive manner. Such a practice should not be taken lightly, and the risks should be understood. If these risks are understood, a woman has no right to abort a baby she knew darn well had a chance of existing, no matter what stage it is in.
Looking at this from society's point of view, however, I would prefer that the child did not exist. Because what will become of him or her? Do you think she'll get a good education? Will he grow up in a nurturing environment? There's a chance, but a slim one. She'll probably grow up in a poor neighborhood, perhaps overexposed to drugs, gangs, and violence. He probably won't go to college, and he might not even finish high school. And if he lives on welfare, who's tax dollars are paying for that? Mom's? Dad's? No, Mom and Dad are long gone. Your and my tax dollars are keeping this ne'er do well out of trouble. Or are they? He could be mugging people to get drug money, then paying for food and housing with welfare.
Seeing a problem?

As I've stated in the other thread, I don't believe in abortion. I think it's wrong and very selfish of women, just because they can't be arsed to go into labor. It doesn't matter what the circumstances are, it doesn't matter if she was raped or artificially inseminated in her sleep, there's really no excuse for abortion.

You're a man, aren't you? Any woman who finds herself pregnant and immediately thinks "Oh, well, better get an abortion!" should be put in an asylum. Women are not simply taking the "easy way out." I've never been pregnant (at 15, thank heaven) but my mom has (of course) three times. The first time, the baby aborted itself. This happens a lot in nature. (I read once that 35 to 50 percent of fetuses are aborted by the mother's body naturally, and without the mother's conscious intervention. I've heard that figure fluctuate wildly, but nowhere have I heard that it never happens.) My mother was pretty disgruntled and unhappy about the natural abortion, even though she hadn't really planned on getting pregnant. She was married at the time, and had a steady income, so the thought of not having or raising the child hadn't really occurred to her. After that, she had two successful pregnancies (me and my sister) and that's all.

Heck, I felt bad about trying to force a Dragcave egg to hatch prematurely and killed it by mistake. Abortion is not an easy thing to do for any woman with morals. I can't imagine anyone who knows anybody who's ever been pregnant (who isn't a bigot, but I didn't have you pegged as a bigot) to think of abortion like that.
Either you're naive, or I'm naive. I can't tell.

BreathesSalty · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **BreathesSalty** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:50 pm

I ask you all to please actually read, analyze, and understand all of what I'm saying.
I am very much pro-choice. I don't think anyone else has the right to slight someone because they chose to have an abortion (unless, of course, they use it as a form of birth control. Even I must admit, that pisses me off.) It would be same as if I decided you were a terrible person for dying your hair or not going to college.
As an eighteen year old, I would like to think I have a firm grasp on the reality that despite the fact the embryo may not be able to understand pain, I sure as Hell do. And as a young woman who has experience a miscarriage, I can tell you first hand that from the very moment that slimy little egg attaches itself to your wall, you are connected to it. It's your baby. In all retrospect, it's you.
My ehem cycle was always a bit willy-nilly, so when I was late, I didn't think much of it. But when the days turned into weeks, I kind of got the hint. But by then, I never had the chance to take a pregnancy test. I lost my bun in the oven about three weeks after it was inseminated. And I'll admit outright that I take full responsibility for the loss. I was drinking and doing otherwise hazardous things. It was the most horrific thing I've ever experienced, and believe you me, I have my fair share of stories to tell.
The depression I went through... I can't even begin to describe.
So my choice is to not ever have an abortion if the situation arises again. But that's my choice. I can't tell you what to choose as much as I can't tell some psychopath not to kill his next victim. You can try polite and civil discussion, you curse and scream, you can even use brute force. But the fact is, nobody cares about what you believe. The only thing that matters is what they think is right decision. Why the Hell do you think it's been such a hot topic for debate for so many years?

DCLXVI · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **DCLXVI** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:02 pm

Wow. I edited my post right before she posted that.

*goes off to make a poll about this*

Cloaked_Schemer · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Cloaked_Schemer** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:12 pm

DCLXVI wrote:You're a man, aren't you? Any woman who finds herself pregnant and immediately thinks "Oh, well, better get an abortion!" should be put in an asylum. Women are not simply taking the "easy way out." I've never been pregnant (at 15, thank heaven) but my mom has (of course) three times. The first time, the baby aborted itself. This happens a lot in nature. (I read once that 35 to 50 percent of fetuses are aborted by the mother's body naturally, and without the mother's conscious intervention. I've heard that figure fluctuate wildly, but nowhere have I heard that it never happens.) My mother was pretty disgruntled and unhappy about the natural abortion, even though she hadn't really planned on getting pregnant. She was married at the time, and had a steady income, so the thought of not having or raising the child hadn't really occurred to her. After that, she had two successful pregnancies (me and my sister) and that's all.

Heck, I felt bad about trying to force a Dragcave egg to hatch prematurely and killed it by mistake. Abortion is not an easy thing to do for any woman with morals. I can't imagine anyone who knows anybody who's ever been pregnant (who isn't a bigot, but I didn't have you pegged as a bigot) to think of abortion like that.
Either you're naive, or I'm naive. I can't tell.

Heh, my gender really has nothing to do with this. There are plenty of men who, and I'm probably going to be stabbed for this, can empathize with women without going through it all.

Anywho, back to the topic at hand. I never said that women don't feel badly about doing it, and I never said that they were heartless baby killing machines. I just think that whether or not you're ready for a child, YOU made the choice to have sex and now you must take care of your responsibilities. I'm not saying that an unfit parent should raise the child; again, I'm going to say, GIVE IT UP FOR ADOPTION. It really isn't that hard. Just drop it off at a hospital or police station, no questions asked.

As for women who did NOT choose to have sex, I'm a bit more empathetic and I can understand why they would consider abortion. But I'm also a firm believer that the child should not be denied life for another man's cruelty. That child could grow to become something fantastic, but we'd never know it because it'd be slaughtered. As I've said, if it is ABSOLUTELY necessary, a woman should have the choice. Maybe a victim of such an unfortunate twist of fate could be interviewed by a psychologist, to determine if they would be able to handle at least carrying the child. *shrug* But if some crack whore gets pregnant and doesn't want the kid, abortion just should not be an option. It's unfair.

It isn't naivity, it's an opinion, my dear. ^^; Oh, and before you say anything, I am aware that my thoughts are scrambled and I probably rambled on. I do suck at verbalizing my thoughts ^^

St.Jimmy · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **St.Jimmy** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:25 pm

To be honest, I just think it comes down to the individual and the circumstance. I think that that's the only way to measure it.

BreathesSalty · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **BreathesSalty** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:48 pm

For the sake of sharing opinions, Cloaked_Schemer, I completely disagree.
How is "putting the thing up for adoption" or "dropping it off, no questions asked" any less selfish? The woman in question is still taking zero responsibility, and possibly throwing her child headfirst into the most miserable life. Granted, there is room for chance that the child will grow and prosper in a happy, healthy environment. But leaving it up to chance seems a bit reckless, does it not? It seems to me like playing Russian roulette with someone else's life.
I do, however, concur with your idea that if you made the conscious decision to engage in sex, you should be prepared to deal with the possible result of becoming pregnant.
... Actually, that just made me think of something else. If you made the conscious decision to have sex and end up with an STD, should seeking treatment be out of the question? After all, you made that choice. Deal with it, right? That is taking into consideration, of course, that either the condom was faulty or your partner wasn't aware/didn't share the information that they had an STD. And I specifically point those reasons out because I can't help but feel you're ignoring the fact that most females take careful measurements to prevent having to ever consider abortion, such as condoms, birth control pills, the ring, the shot, and what have you.
It's not like we're running around throwing our eggs out for everyone to try and fertilize. Shouldn't those who took the protective measures have a choice if their so-called protection failed?

Cloaked_Schemer · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Cloaked_Schemer** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:00 pm

BreathesSalty wrote:For the sake of sharing opinions, Cloaked_Schemer, I completely disagree.
How is "putting the thing up for adoption" or "dropping it off, no questions asked" any less selfish? The woman in question is still taking zero responsibility, and possibly throwing her child headfirst into the most miserable life. Granted, there is room for chance that the child will grow and prosper in a happy, healthy environment. But leaving it up to chance seems a bit reckless, does it not? It seems to me like playing Russian roulette with someone else's life.

A weak argument at best. Adoption agencies do ridiculously thorough background checks, make personal visits to meet the potential family and check out the neighborhood, and give surprise visits to make sure everything is all right. They make a clear effort to make sure the child ends up in a safe environment.

Actually, that just made me think of something else. If you made the conscious decision to have sex and end up with an STD, should seeking treatment be out of the question? After all, you made that choice. Deal with it, right? That is taking into consideration, of course, that either the condom was faulty or your partner wasn't aware/didn't share the information that they had an STD.

Uhm, last time I checked, a fetus isn't a harmful disease o.O An STD is unhealthy and damages your body and could be fatal. If there are safe ways to rid yourself of them, why not? Getting rid of a child is different than getting rid of an STD because you're denying that child its right to live, to become a working, productive member of society; rather than protecting yourself and others from being infected by gross diseases.

And I specifically point those reasons out because I can't help but feel you're ignoring the fact that most females take careful measurements to prevent having to ever consider abortion, such as condoms, birth control pills, the ring, the shot, and what have you.
It's not like we're running around throwing our eggs out for everyone to try and fertilize. Shouldn't those who took the protective measures have a choice if their so-called protection failed?

I know that most women take the proper precautions, and sometimes they don't work out. But honestly, what real harm can come out of delivering the baby and giving it up, assuming it goes to a safe home (which it most likely will)? Wouldn't you rather have the child and send it off to live a happy life, rather than terminating the pregnancy and feeling that guilt for the rest of your life? As I've said, abortions are fine if they are an absolute LAST RESORT. As in, if the woman in question couldn't psychologically bear to even carry the child for nine months, let alone give birth to it, etc.

St.Jimmy · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **St.Jimmy** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:12 pm

A weak argument at best. Adoption agencies do ridiculously thorough background checks, make personal visits to meet the potential family and check out the neighborhood, and give surprise visits to make sure everything is all right. They make a clear effort to make sure the child ends up in a safe environment.

I'm sorry, but can you imagine how messed up that child could end up being? Seeing the mother who didn't want it dropping by occasionally to see if its still safe? That's completely denying it the chance of a normal life, knowing that its mother does care but she doesn't want anything to do with it? It would be constantly upsetting.

Cloaked_Schemer · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Cloaked_Schemer** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:16 pm

St.Jimmy wrote:
A weak argument at best. Adoption agencies do ridiculously thorough background checks, make personal visits to meet the potential family and check out the neighborhood, and give surprise visits to make sure everything is all right. They make a clear effort to make sure the child ends up in a safe environment.

I'm sorry, but can you imagine how messed up that child could end up being? Seeing the mother who didn't want it dropping by occasionally to see if its still safe? That's completely denying it the chance of a normal life, knowing that its mother does care but she doesn't want anything to do with it? It would be constantly upsetting.

Oh no, the mother doesn't visit to make sure the child is safe, the Adoption Agency people do. ^^;

However, the mother (assuming she went through the paperwork of putting it up for adoption, rather than leaving it at the hospital) has a choice of whether or not she wants to be in the child's life. She can either choose an Open Adoption, where she can get the information of where the child is staying and contact he/she, or a Closed Adoption, in which she'd basically never hear from said child.

BreathesSalty · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **BreathesSalty** on Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:21 pm

It's true, for the most part, what you say about adoption agencies (they rarely do "surprise checks," and usually only when they're weary of the family. One of my cafateria ladies' husbands works at an adoption agency.) And perhaps I should have been more clear. When I get all riled up, I tend to focus more on tiny details rather than the over all picture.
Out of all of the adopted children I've met, I can name only one who grew into a sensible human being. For whatever reason, adoption leaves an imprint on the child. Every statistic will show that an adopted child will be more susceptible to mental and social issues. True, I'm not a scientist, and I haven't conducted any experiments to prove this. It's just what I've gathered from research and personal experiences.
Not all STDs are fatal. The majority of them are just nuisances, such as herpes, gonorrhea, or warts. Again, I should have specified.
The harm I've mentioned with the psychiatric problems.
Howeverrrr... you did not answer my question, sir. :X

Abortion.

a topic in Discussion & Debate, a part of the RPG forum.

Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Re: Abortion.

Post a reply

Make a Donation

Who is online