Pro Life Or Pro Choice, what are you? Options

[Sarah the Spider]

I know I have posted before on here, but I feel a need to speak again.

I have said I am Pro-Life. I personally think abortion is a form of murder. BUT LET ME CLARIFY EXACTLY WHAT THIS MEANS:

What I personally believe only has to do with one person: me.

I could never judge a person by what they choose to do in situations like this. I could never NOT accept a person for it. I myself would mourn for the baby, and also the mother, who goes through her own type of hell after an abortion in most cases.

As long as people do what they feel is right for THEM, and them alone, then it's all groovy in the end.

Abortion is a heartbreakingly hard topic to discuss. There will never be agreements on it. All we can do is love each other, no matter what.

[MoonlightSavings...]

1. i might not be able to have children, shes a murderer any way around it, its a fetus it doesnt have eelings, neither does a person on heavy sedatives but its not right to kill them. there is no reason for her to kill the baby. she has parents they can help. he has parent they can help. so far there are 6 people easily availible to help with this child.

It might seem like that on the surface, but perhaps none of these people are really financially ready to acquire yet another child. Or they may have any number of other reasons for being unable to care for a child. Just because they're there doesn't mean that they're able to take on the responsibility for another person's life.

The way I see it, it's irresponsible to bring a child into the world if you don't have anyone available to take care of the child. There are already many unwanted children without enough homes to provide for them, so why exacerbate the problem when there's a preventive solution? Especially in the case of people who took precautions anyway, such as condoms and other birth control. I don't think that everyone who has sex with the proper precautions should be expected to give birth to the baby that results by accident.

[Sarah the Spider]

And I quote, from the Issues Forum description:

"Let's keep it lighthearted and non-flaming..."

*cough*

[oobunnie]

because its still murder. thers alot of people in the world but 6 people and they could affor to spend a couple of dollars to help. there is also brothers sister aunts uncles grand parents freinds cousins. you can always find somone and she could give it to adoption. its not the best life but it is a life.

okay you said there are 6 people correct. now lets say the father wants nothing to do with it. well that takes out 3 people. And lets say the parents decide not to help the child as some do. And the parents wish for the kid to have an abortion. Well that brings it back down to that one person. The situation you talking about is idealistic and yes it does happen. but there are other situations. thus i dont like to generlize things into thinking everything in the world is perfect

[Sir Psycho Sexy]

I guess i'm pro abortion, i mean that to force a child on someone is not a nice thing, abortion is murder i guess, but if the child is unwanted in the first place then the parent may become resentful toward the child, ignore or abuse it and leave it's upbrining to fate, the difference between children bought up by good parents the children bought up by bad parents and a child which has not been bought up at all. my mum works for social services i hear it all the time.

an example was a couple of days ago i this girl ran across a road, it was clear and is never that busy, the father, who was pushing a pram and had another girl in tow flew off the handle at her and was effing and blinding and shouting at her down the road, not only was that the wrong way to talk to her and educate her in whats she was doing wrong, it didn't dawn on me for the a while but the girl was taking it in her stride, i remember when i my dad get angry i scared the bejubus outta me....thats a little off topic, but if a bad parent has a child, bad things will happen...so pro-choice

[Phyllis]

And I quote, from the Issues Forum description:

"Let's keep it lighthearted and non-flaming..."

*cough*

lol i was thinking the same thing, sarah.

[oobunnie]

i'm sorry if i offended anyone. I wasnt taking this that seriously and if you truelly were I am sorry that my posts may have ofended. I thought this was a debate, and thus didnt think it was being takin to seriously

[leopold]

No worries oob. I dun think you were offensive or anythin... it's very hard tryin to have a rational argument when some points are made irrationally.

I'm keepin a close eye on this thread. If it descends any further I'm gonna close it...

[Righteous]

A lot of Narth's and Sarah's points are valid. I believe that abortion is murder, even if the girl is raped. I feel very strongly against any form of abortion (and I too took biology and even anatomy/physiology). However, I feel that the woman is the one who chooses and I admire Sarah's fortitude and acceptance.

[racingaway13]

damn, i got in here late.... oh well
my opinion is a woman has the right to do with her body as she pleases. because until very late in the pregnancy the baby has no motor skills, no real brain activity (due to the fact that there is almos no stimulus, thus giving the baby no personality or ability to form a descision) and these factors make the baby not so much a seperate being but rather a portion of the mother. and if the mother can bear to kill part of herself then by all means she should be allowed to. also some argue that anything that can develop into a human should be viewed as one, well i think that if your gonna say that then why not make it illegal for guys to ejaculate other than so as to form a baby? because people should be allowed to do with their body as they please!

[o0fish]

ok, everyone has a right to make a choice.. but personally. if i had a little parasitic clump of cells in body and i knew i couldn't or wouldn't be able to take care of the child, or myself or i just didn't want a child.. then i have everyright to do what is in my best intrests... no one else has that right to decide. it's my body, my life, and i'm not going to ruin it because some ppl think it's murder to abort a fetus ( notice the term fetus... it's not a baby yet ppl.. a tiny clump of cells)

[frogbutterflyfre...]

i really dont think i could ahve anyone poking about in my uterus and tearing hunks of flesh out. it may not be my flesh, but it's attached! better to let it come out when it's supposed to and give it up for adoption or something.

[The.Wheezing.Gho...]

I'm...Pro Choice

[frogbutterflyfre...]

oh yeah, i forgot to mention that i'm more pro choice but i wouldnt do it personally.

[wolfbane]

Pro-choice. I do not want children at all, and I've been emphatically against kids since I was old enough to be given them to babysit (gah). I can put up with my neice and nephew for a few hours, but kids just scare me. I don't want them now, I feel that I'm too young to have them now, and if I did get pregnant then it would seriously screw up my life for the next few years, which isn't something that I want. I think that it is a woman's right to choose whether she has a child or not, and it being the will of god or anything else has nothing to do with it. The father's feelings should be taken into account if, for example, he is happy to have the child and raise it himself, but at the end of the day it is the woman who has to go through the nine months and labour. Having said that I don't think abortion should be used as a contraceptive - everyone knows about the alternatives so there isn't any excuse for not having safe sex.

On a personal note a friend of mine has recently had an abortion, and it was a hard thing for her to go through. I think that now she feels she made the right decision, but it has affected her in more ways than one. I don't think it's an easy decision to make, and it must be hard to live with for a while, but then having a child is also a difficult thing.

[kidvicious2punk]

i agree with chese...

there is like a shot tho that u get within 24 hours so you dont have to get the aortion..and the baby is just a cell still...

[Pikasyuu]

I've gotta say, and if anyone else has made this point, very sorry - the term 'Pro Life' is ridiculous. It implies that anyone who disagrees with it is some baby-murdering, foaming at the mouth child hater instead of a person who accepts abortion as a necessary evil and understands what a heavy decision it can be. Yet another typical strategy from the conservatives to villainize anyone who doesn't totally adhere to their strict 'morals'.

[CrazyFooIAintGet...]

Yeah pro-x vs pro-y makes it seems like one of the sides got lost on the way to the debate.

But pro-valuing-the-life-of-a-fetus-more-than-its-mother is a bit of a mouthful.

[Yannick]

Pro Choice. A fetus is a parasite, and its continuous existence requires the mother's consent entirely. If she is forced to continue the pregnancy unwillingly, her rights and bodily integrity are violated. Potential human ≠ human. Until born, the fetus is about as meaningful as a few skin or hair cells. Both contain the necessary information for life, neither are a human. If anyone argues that killing something non-human is wrong too, they better be hardcore vegan or something, though plants are also alive..

[Hobbes]

Pro Choice. A fetus is a parasite, and its continuous existence requires the mother's consent entirely. If she is forced to continue the pregnancy unwillingly, her rights and bodily integrity are violated. Potential human ≠ human. Until born, the fetus is about as meaningful as a few skin or hair cells. Both contain the necessary information for life, neither are a human. If anyone argues that killing something non-human is wrong too, they better be hardcore vegan or something, though plants are also alive..

Hmm. I think this is the first time I've ever heard a foetus being described as a parasite.

Until born, the fetus is about as meaningful as a few skin or hair cells. Both contain the necessary information for life, neither are a human.

I'd have to argue against that - mainly with the "Until born" aspect. Sure, for the first three weeks or so, you could say the embryo is just 'data'. But from then on every day is an obvious step towards the (if you'll pardon the term) finished product. From 24 weeks, the baby has a chance of survival if born and is also when abortion is no longer legally allowed.

I know this is all common knowledge, but I'd take issue with the idea of a foetus being 'nothing' until birth. In terms of the brain and nervous system, there's an awful lot going on even before 24 weeks.

I do, however, see what it is you are trying to say... I just think that it might be taking it to the extreme, perhaps?

---

From a personal perspective, I was always adamantly pro-life. I remember being the only person in a Religious Studies class (a required subject in most UK schools) to be anti-abortion in pretty much all situations, and I was fairly self-assured in that. I was okay with the morning-after pill and other possibilities prior to the embryo becoming implanted (~3 weeks), but after that it was "no" all the way.

Whilst I was in (what I thought was) a long-term stable relationship, there was a moment when my partner thought she might be pregnant and had to take a test. I was pretty sure that, if it was positive, she wouldn't want to have the child. I, on the other hand, felt that I would fight like hell to keep it. As it turned out, the test was negative. This was probably for the best as, a couple of months later, I had to end the relationship.

More recently, in an "open relationship" I was involved with, there was a pregnancy 'scare'. I knew the girl in question would probably not want to keep the child, but I also knew she'd had an abortion several years before and had regretted it ever since, so she might change her mind.

As for me? My whole perspective changed. I didn't feel as though I was capable in any way (financially, emotionally, physically, etc) to take care of a child, and I had every digit crossed that the test was negative. Most surprising of all was that, against all my previous morals and ethics, abortion had suddenly become a very real possibility. Again, the test was negative.

So now, I sit on the fence a little and would no longer put myself firmly in the "Pro Life" camp anymore. If I ever am required to stand on one side or t'other, I hope I do so educated by the situation.

[Yannick]

Pro Choice. A fetus is a parasite, and its continuous existence requires the mother's consent entirely. If she is forced to continue the pregnancy unwillingly, her rights and bodily integrity are violated. Potential human ≠ human. Until born, the fetus is about as meaningful as a few skin or hair cells. Both contain the necessary information for life, neither are a human. If anyone argues that killing something non-human is wrong too, they better be hardcore vegan or something, though plants are also alive..

Hmm. I think this is the first time I've ever heard a foetus being described as a parasite.

Well.. by definition, it sort of is. It lives in another organism and derives nutrients at the host's expense. I think I'd consider the fetus "alive" when we'd be able to take it out of the body, and it'd be able to survive without feeding off of the mother. It's.. sort of different, because if it's out of the body, anyone can take care of it, but until this point (24 weeksish?), only the mother has that ability, and it should be her choice what she wants to do with it.

Until born, the fetus is about as meaningful as a few skin or hair cells. Both contain the necessary information for life, neither are a human.

I'd have to argue against that - mainly with the "Until born" aspect. Sure, for the first three weeks or so, you could say the embryo is just 'data'. But from then on every day is an obvious step towards the (if you'll pardon the term) finished product. From 24 weeks, the baby has a chance of survival if born and is also when abortion is no longer legally allowed.

I know this is all common knowledge, but I'd take issue with the idea of a foetus being 'nothing' until birth. In terms of the brain and nervous system, there's an awful lot going on even before 24 weeks.

I do, however, see what it is you are trying to say... I just think that it might be taking it to the extreme, perhaps?

Well, not until born, but until it can survive outside of the body (with the help of others, obviously). But no, a bunch of human cells aren't a human.

..I don't really know enough about what's going on in the brain and CNS so can't really argue in terms of that. =/

[Daria]

Well.. by definition, it sort of is. It lives in another organism and derives nutrients at the host's expense. I think I'd consider the fetus "alive" when we'd be able to take it out of the body, and it'd be able to survive without feeding off of the mother.

Yeah but endo-parasites can survive outwith the host. The word you're looking for is "parasitic".
/ironicallypatronisingpedantry

Some foetuses have been kept alive on life-support machines from 21 weeks. However- and this is true with all premature babies, regardless of the extent of prematurity- they have HUGE chances of developing serious medical conditions later in life, be that starting in childhood or in their twenties. Allergies are also hugely common, as are food intolerances and lifelong lactose intolerance.

I think the problem with discussions about foetuses and their "living being" status comes from the fact that when they are in the womb, they aren't adult humans. It sounds silly, and seemingly very obvious, but many people seem to treat them as though they are just that. Yeah, there may be neural development in a foetus, but there is neural development in a flatworm. (And actually, a parasitic flatworm is more able to fend for itself than a foetus- even in larval form.)

It gets very strange when discussing pro-life or pro-choice because there are so many things it could be compared with and that starts making people uncomfortable. Like: if you know that your foetus will be disabled and won't be expected to live longer than 6 years, would you terminate the pregnancy?

Lastly: discussions of pro-life/ pro-choice never seem to consider those who aren't just Pregnant By Accident I Don't Want A Baby Just Now, Let's Get An Abortion. There are so SO many reasons why a woman would feel the want and/or need to get an abortion that I think anyone saying outright "abortions are wrong" is a bit wrong in the head.

[Witless]

I'd say whether or not a pregnant woman is harbouring a parasite or not, (that is a fun phrase to say out loud) is more complex than it's coming across in this thread. Assuming you have read the selfish gene by Richard Dawkins, (I am going to go ahead and assume Izzy has) then we are only here because our genes goal in existence is to be copied and they have managed to do it all the way since life started here.

A woman getting pregnant is the the sucessful continuation of that process. I know the human mind very often overrides our genetic behavioural programming, but it still holds true that genetically speaking the reason the human race is here is to make more human beings.

Now considering that, the definition of a parasite is as follows, "Biology An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host." I think that being pregnant certainly counts towards the survival of the mother and father's genetic heritage, and that is certainly not really the spirit of what is meant by being a parasite; especially one grown from the genetic template of ourself and another that will go on to continue the process until we all blow ourselves up with wars or burn when the sun swells up and eats us.

Ok.. four paragraphs in and way off the topic of this necro post.

*reads the topic and original post*

Urgh... more black or white choices. This is almost as bad as my thinker or feeler thread.

See my problem with this life or death type discussion is that it's always boiling down to "is it murder or not". A very odd discussion indeed when I live in a country where there is no death penalty for murder (yay), but if you happen to be in the army of a country that has a lot of oil and are just following orders then "watch out!"

We already have vague feelings on killing people that are human and wandering around. We also have vague feelings on what constitutes murder too.

I heard recently that a parrot has the same level of emotional intelligence as a 2 year old. We don't particular feel bad about that kind of death, but not many people would believe killing that parrot should hold the same level of punishment as a 1 year olds murder.

With that all in mind it starts becoming hard for me to say with any kind of sureness and exact moment of when we count things as being "precious" and alive or just a cluster of cells or otherwise ok to kill. Statements like "they're human when they can survive outside the mother" are pretty meaningless often when considering that many areas of the brain aren't even interconnected yet after birth for babies born on their due dates. They aren't even concious in the way they will be given some more months.

I know I certainly can't say when the magical date between the moments a baby is a ball of cells and messy, smell, noise maker that it is suddenly "human", any more sure when you can put a date on when someone is considered mature. It's just arbitrary numbers because people like black and white situations to make decision making easier.


My personal feelings are pro-choice. We're in a world where we're killing ourselves with too many people, very few want to adopt because "I want them to be part of me!". Limiting people's decision on whether to become parents when they decide they don't want to be (for whatever reason,) just because we're struggling to put labels on when a ball of cells is not a ball of cells any more and gets the human label seems to lack foresight in my opinion.

I am not going to put a time frame on when I personally think you shouldn't be aborting, because if it isn't clear by now from my ramble above, I think there are very many vague issues surrounding it. Not being allowed to abort after 24 weeks sounds like as good a time frame as any, but I can think of a dozen other arguable solutions that are just as good and just as flawed as that one to be frank.

[CrazyFooIAintGet...]

With that all in mind it starts becoming hard for me to say with any kind of sureness and exact moment of when we count things as being "precious" and alive or just a cluster of cells or otherwise ok to kill. Statements like "they're human when they can survive outside the mother" are pretty meaningless often when considering that many areas of the brain aren't even interconnected yet after birth for babies born on their due dates. They aren't even concious in the way they will be given some more months.

I know I certainly can't say when the magical date between the moments a baby is a ball of cells and messy, smell, noise maker that it is suddenly "human", any more sure when you can put a date on when someone is considered mature. It's just arbitrary numbers because people like black and white situations to make decision making easier.

It is impossible for anyone* to put a decisive age on when humans gain their "preciousness", because the idea is inherently vague. Whatever age you come up with you can always say something slightly younger also meets that quality (Sorites paradox). There is no way round this unless you are willing to allow for varying levels of preciousness instead of it being a simple yes/no thing.

My personal feelings are pro-choice. We're in a world where we're killing ourselves with too many people, very few want to adopt because "I want them to be part of me!". Limiting people's decision on whether to become parents when they decide they don't want to be (for whatever reason,) just because we're struggling to put labels on when a ball of cells is not a ball of cells any more and gets the human label seems to lack foresight in my opinion.

Ah, a true anti-life advocate!

[Yannick]

I'd say whether or not a pregnant woman is harbouring a parasite or not, (that is a fun phrase to say out loud) is more complex than it's coming across in this thread. Assuming you have read the selfish gene by Richard Dawkins, (I am going to go ahead and assume Izzy has) then we are only here because our genes goal in existence is to be copied and they have managed to do it all the way since life started here.

A woman getting pregnant is the the sucessful continuation of that process. I know the human mind very often overrides our genetic behavioural programming, but it still holds true that genetically speaking the reason the human race is here is to make more human beings.

Now considering that, the definition of a parasite is as follows, "Biology An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host." I think that being pregnant certainly counts towards the survival of the mother and father's genetic heritage, and that is certainly not really the spirit of what is meant by being a parasite; especially one grown from the genetic template of ourself and another that will go on to continue the process until we all blow ourselves up with wars or burn when the sun swells up and eats us.

(I haven't read it. I tried getting through The Ancestor's Tale, but I don't like biology enough to even consider giving The Selfish Gene a shot. ;P)

Anyway, parasites and hosts often has mutually beneficial relationships. I don't know whether or not it's technically symbiosis, but tapeworms benefit off the host while the host is using the tapeworm as a weight loss technique (yeah, I know that's bad for you, but tapeworms can make the host happy much like babies can). Also, this parasite helps its host survive in salt water. Apparently, there's also some research to suggest that parasites can evolve to be helpful.