Why I am no longer pro-choice no longer.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-10-2013, 12:50 PM
Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(11-10-2013 05:27 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(08-10-2013 01:18 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Besides rape and health reasons, there should be any reason a women can't bring that fetus/baby to term.
If I kill someone I don't get to simply opt out of jail say to the judge "nah 20 years in jail doesn't sound good to me, I'm just gonna go home instead". There are consequences. Just as pregnancy should be a potential consequence of having sex, you shouldn't have that option to simply "opt out". Not in todays society anyway.

That's a question begging argument, i.e. you are assuming to be true that which you need to demonstrate to be true.

The entire matter of the morality of abortion turns on the notion of personhood as it relates to the zygote and foetus. You've simply assumed that a zygote is a person ("If I kill someone..") and proceeded from that point to beg the question. For your position to have any merit you need to demonstrate how a zygote and an early term foetus possess personhood. You haven't done so.

If zygote and early foetus lack personhood then an abortion has no more moral ramifications than any other procedure that involves the removal of any unwanted tissue from the body. Thus without demonstrating that abortion necessarily terminates the life of a person you really have nothing.

Well said. I agree with this. A zygote is not more of a person than an oak tree.People project their feelings and desires on these clumps of cells, but it is what it is. A Zygote can grow into a baby. As such it has value. This is not a reason to ban
abortions, because there is no shortage of egg cells and sperm. There is no shortage of fertile men and women. So
there is no reason why we have to force some woman to carry baby, when it is easy to impregnate other women.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like black_squirrel's post
11-10-2013, 01:05 PM (This post was last modified: 11-10-2013 01:19 PM by Ohio Sky.)
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
In a world where one's oranges could suddenly sprout legs and a free will, your argument may make sense. In such a scenario, how do you determine whether your oranges ran away or were stolen by a neighbor to be used in an ill-gotten marmalade? Only if you find it can you answer these questions.

And yes, our healthcare system sucks and needs much improvement. Contraceptive coverage just became mandatory and hopefully that will help with the number of unplanned pregnancies. But as far as maternity leave goes, this is a luxery in our country. Only if you work full time at a position that offers these benefits is this available, and many employers are cutting hours and refusing to hire extra full time workers to avoid the insurance mandate. Part time workers don't have paid maternity leave. Even if they do, this doesn't address any time taken off work during pregnancy. A woman who has a particularly difficult pregnancy can quickly exhaust any available sick leave. Unemoyment or disability will only help some of these women recover some of their lost income. In my case, my health issues weren't diagnosed until late in my pregnancy, months after I had quit my job. I didn't qualify for unemployment because I was too sick to work, and I didn't qualify for disability because I had no diagnosed condition that proved I was physically unable to do so. By the time I did have a diagnosis, I had been off work too long to qualify for disability. Even if I had qualified, I would have only been compensated for about half of my regular pay. Not sufficient, for someone already struggling financially. There are holes all over these programs.

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who has said it- not even if I have said it- unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense. - Buddha
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 01:41 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(11-10-2013 12:50 PM)black_squirrel Wrote:  There is no shortage of fertile men and women. So
there is no reason why we have to force some woman to carry baby, when it is easy to impregnate other women.
Well, going by this logic,

There is no shortage people, there is no reason to stop people from murder when it is easy to make more people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 03:06 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(11-10-2013 01:41 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(11-10-2013 12:50 PM)black_squirrel Wrote:  There is no shortage of fertile men and women. So
there is no reason why we have to force some woman to carry baby, when it is easy to impregnate other women.
Well, going by this logic,

There is no shortage people, there is no reason to stop people from murder when it is easy to make more people.

A blastocyte is not a person. There is no person until at least the start of the third trimester.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 03:11 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
Women *have* this choice, legal or illegal. Women have ALWAYS had this choice, legal or illegal. Any novelty surrounding this choice concerns advances in safety, thanks to medical science.

Access is not novel. Access relates only to legal (or, i suppose, taboo) status. Access has always been, and remains, the only question. Once that's decided, the best, safest methods available are used, and better, safer ones are used the more access is available. If the best method for an individual woman is getting her sister to hit her in the belly with a 2x4, so be it. Throwing herself down the stairs? So be it. Questionable herbs from some wise-woman? So be it. Spending three days in near-scalding baths? So be it. Going to a trained doctor in a sterile environment for the best in modern medical care? So be it.

Muffs, if some magical wizard were to grant you decision making power over how much access to reproductive freedom women (and ONLY women) have, what would you do?

Would you limit women's access to medical care, or allow women access to medical care, to the extent of technical feasibility?

No other definitions, opinions, biological watermarks, etc. matter. They don't matter because, regardless of any of those, women STILL have the choice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes I Am's post
11-10-2013, 04:56 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 04:58 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(11-10-2013 03:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-10-2013 01:41 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Well, going by this logic,

There is no shortage people, there is no reason to stop people from murder when it is easy to make more people.

A blastocyte is not a person. There is no person until at least the start of the third trimester.

Can a person exist without first being a blastocyte?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2013, 05:10 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(11-10-2013 04:58 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(11-10-2013 03:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  A blastocyte is not a person. There is no person until at least the start of the third trimester.

Can a person exist without first being a blastocyte?

Can a blastocyte exist without first being an egg?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
11-10-2013, 05:46 PM
Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(11-10-2013 01:41 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(11-10-2013 12:50 PM)black_squirrel Wrote:  There is no shortage of fertile men and women. So
there is no reason why we have to force some woman to carry baby, when it is easy to impregnate other women.
Well, going by this logic,

There is no shortage people, there is no reason to stop people from murder when it is easy to make more people.
No the same logic does not apply to people, because people are unique individuals that can feel pain
and zygotes are not.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes black_squirrel's post
11-10-2013, 06:49 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(11-10-2013 03:11 PM)I Am Wrote:  Women *have* this choice, legal or illegal. Women have ALWAYS had this choice, legal or illegal. ...No other definitions, opinions, biological watermarks, etc. matter. They don't matter because, regardless of any of those, women STILL have the choice.

Whether women have or have always had the choice to abort a pregnancy is irrelevant to the morality of the act of aborting a pregnancy. Analogously, humans have always had the choice of using capital punishment and they continue to do so but that is entirely irrelevant to whether capital punishment is morally justifiable. There is nothing special about certain categories of temporal modality. You seem to think that P is somehow privileged if we can say of P: It is always the case that P. How so? Many things other than abortion can be put in place of P: enslavement, mass murder, cruelty to animals, etc. Can we say nothing more about P merely because we have stated that it is always the case that P? If so then how so?

The central matter in the morality of abortion is the personhood of the zygote, blastocyte, embryo and foetus. If we don't have a person then an abortion has no more moral significance than the mechanical or chemical removal of unwanted tissue. Merely because women have the choice to abort a preganacy doesn't negate this. How could it?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: