Pro- Choice or Pro-Life?

Originally posted by Ovidius I think the only nations where a ban on abortion work is Ireland and Andorra - both fairly religious nations, with a high standard of living and small population.

Edited by Aelfgifu - 03-May-2007 at 06:44

Well, as a woman, I do believe I am the boss of my own body. And I do not want children. For a variety of reasons, one of them being that I consider myself totally incapable of raising a kid. In a time where people are massively complaining about parents not raising their kids properly and any idiot just popping them out, I consider myself wise in this.

Originally posted by Knights Originally posted by pinguin That's a fallacy.   Human life start at conception. Both sperms and eggs does not even have a complete chromosomic set. Pinguin, are you aiming your "that's a fallacy" at my comment/opinion, or at the original question stated (is using a condom considered murder)?

Morticia do you believe that men should be involved in a women's pregnancy or that they should be excluded from it on the basis that a woman's body is her own?

Wow, I can't believe I didn't see this thread before, I guess I should get in touch with my feminine side more often.

I've decided I'll retroactively join this conversation...by going to the beginning, and answering morticia's questions.

Does a fetus have a �right� to be inside a woman who chooses to have sex with a man and becomes pregnant?

I think it's similar to does a baby have the right to live in the country of it's birth?

Does a fetus have a �right� to be inside a woman who has been raped by a man and becomes pregnant?

See above.

Unlike a fetus, a newborn child is a �separate physical entity� who would, as an actual human being, have rights, but does a fetus have any �rights�?

A fetus has the right to the respect, honor and dignity of life.

Do parents own their children as they would own a house?

No they own their children as the government owns military personell.

------------------------------------
And now in response to everyone else.

In a world when 7 people die every second from a poverty related issues, such as disease, starvation, unclean water. It takes a seriously delusional kind of freak to get so upset over abortion.

One could argue that abortion is a poverty related issue.

However, it has been my experience that most "pro-life" people are white, mostly religious and racist. The way I see it, their premise does not lie in the inhumanity of destroying a fetus, but in increasing the number of whites...I really have not seen a case where pro-life people being obsessed with fetuses of black women.

Wow..........really your turning abortion into racism....I have not known any pro-life activists to deny their support to anyone of any race.....wow.

If it were meant to be, We would have an automatic eject button, don't you think?

Technically we do, miscarriages are just natural abortions, of course there is hardly any moral or ethical problems with a miscarriage.

Human life start at conception.

That's true the life processes that lead to becoming human starts at conception, but abortion is only morally (not ethically per se) wrong if that human has a soul (or spirit or consciousness). Christians are not told when God has ordained a human to be ensouled. This is the reason that the Vatican has decreed human life to begin at conception, since it is when a full human organism is made, it is better to 'play it safe' morally and just assume that it's a human being so you do not go into error.

-----------------------------------

Now to my point.

As a man, I only have second-hand information of the workings of your "lady parts" and frankly having three sisters myself I really don't want to know. However it is my belief that God has ordained women to be the preservers of life in all it's forms. And that it is up to women to make the moral decisions about the creation and destruction of life.

I don't believe that it is ever a good thing to have an abortion, since doing so destroys a living human. However sometimes women must make the least bad choice, rather than the good choice. Take for instance a rape victim or a survivor of incest. Other people put that woman in that position, but she is still in that position. I think that one of the problems in society is teaching that abortion just makes the "problem" go away. We think that by eliminating the pregnancy it will eliminate the other issues, while abortions must be provided for these women psychiatric care is not, which in my opinion is more of an affront to the respect of women than anything else.

Then there is the case where a women puts herself in the position to get pregnant. I.e. having sex. As preservers of life women must be prepared to do so, delaying pregnancy isn't as wrong as terminating a pregnancy, and if a woman feels that she would be tempted to do the latter she should definitely practice the former, if she chooses to be intimate with someone.

For men there are few things more evil than putting a woman in a position to kill her child. It takes two people to have sex and men must not lead women into a situation where abortion is an option.

Worse than what I just listed is when a woman without any input from the father of her child decides to get an abortion. Terminating a pregnancy should be a rare life-altering event, and both parties involved should come to an agreement on what should be done. Women having the role of preservers of life ultimately get to make the decision of whether to allow the child to live, however there are men that are willing to do anything for their unborn children and their wishes should not be discarded on a whim.

The only thing I can think of as always wrong is when a woman in a long-term committed and loving relationship decides to use abortion as a form of birth control. The entire point of forming committed relationships with other people is to start a family and to just get rid of a member of that family is such an insult to the institution, that it is nearly unforgivable.

Women's rights and children's rights do not end at each other's umbilicus. They are interwoven by the design of nature. And by nature's design women are endowed with the ability to make the choice for two human beings, not one. I think if more people understood that respect for life doesn't exist just for the woman or just for the child but for both together then there would be less blind fanaticism and more understanding on this issue.

Very interesting thought. I would say no in terms of the strict definition of genocide, but 'murder' possibly. Although, because fertilisation has not yet occurred, and no zygote (what some may regard as the first stage as a 'real human') has been formed, I do not believe you can call using a condom 'genocide' or even 'murder'. I am open for opinions.

To be honest this isn't a arguement I heard for support of abortion. But I heard some Catholics refuse to use contraceptives because it kills potential human beings.

That's a fallacy.

Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy Does using a condom during sex count as genocide?

Well, this thread has taken an interesting turn! Then, does a woman's monthly menstruation count as genocide as well, for not allowing fertilization of her monthly egg/possible human?    

I don't agree. A retarded person or a person that has lost concience during years is as human as a person that is full functional; it is possible that your kitty is more intelligent that both, but you cat is a cat, unlike those that are human beings. I don't see why fetous could be classify as non-human at all. Except that way is easy to get rid of them.

Originally posted by Reginmund ... You can call abortion murder if you will, ....

Edited by pinguin - 30-Apr-2007 at 00:30