Why I am no longer pro-choice no longer.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-10-2013, 04:08 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 03:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-10-2013 03:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I am against arbitrarily forcing ones opinions onto others.
Creating laws is a way of giving police permission (obligation) to use extreme force against members of society.
A person has an opinion that gay sex is immoral. Does this justify police forcibly stopping gay people, restraining them, locking them up?
Gay relationships are not a threat to society so how can we justify interfering in the lives of gay people?
Same thing goes for abortions, they are no threat to society, so how can we justify interfering in the decisions of the parents?

The late term abortion of a viable fetus is murder. Is murder not a threat to society?

This is one of the very few concessions I will make on this issue. Partial birth abortions are an abomination and truly sick stuff. I will however withhold a single caveat "Life of the Mother" that is the only instance where late term abortions should even be an option.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
12-10-2013, 05:00 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 04:08 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(12-10-2013 03:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  The late term abortion of a viable fetus is murder. Is murder not a threat to society?

This is one of the very few concessions I will make on this issue. Partial birth abortions are an abomination and truly sick stuff. I will however withhold a single caveat "Life of the Mother" that is the only instance where late term abortions should even be an option.

Late term abortions differ in that the foetus has become progressively more viable and subject to pain. There is also an approach towards infanticide and an inherent social callousness.
We can regress in terms of actual "beginning" materially and more controversially in terms of intentionality; the "progressing" relevant to infanticide creates further ethical issues.
It can be argued that early abortions are far preferable to late or full term and that decisions should be made early rather than later.
Every case is different and legalistic determinations very difficult. This does not mean that society should not provide far better adoption choices, along with other incentives, for mothers, rather than utilizing termination as the over riding option.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2013, 05:07 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 03:26 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(12-10-2013 03:20 PM)Chas Wrote:  What actual point are you trying to make?
I am against arbitrarily forcing ones opinions onto others.
Creating laws is a way of giving police permission (obligation) to use extreme force against members of society.
A person has an opinion that gay sex is immoral. Does this justify police forcibly stopping gay people, restraining them, locking them up?
Gay relationships are not a threat to society so how can we justify interfering in the lives of gay people?
Same thing goes for abortions, they are no threat to society, so how can we justify interfering in the decisions of the parents?

While the law is often an ass I do not see a self serving anarchy, devoid of any consideration for others views, a might is right, survival of the toughest, as a very positive way to go....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2013, 05:09 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 05:00 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(12-10-2013 04:08 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  This is one of the very few concessions I will make on this issue. Partial birth abortions are an abomination and truly sick stuff. I will however withhold a single caveat "Life of the Mother" that is the only instance where late term abortions should even be an option.

Late term abortions differ in that the foetus has become progressively more viable and subject to pain. There is also an approach towards infanticide and an inherent social callousness.
We can regress in terms of actual "beginning" materially and more controversially in terms of intentionality; the "progressing" relevant to infanticide creates further ethical issues.
It can be argued that early abortions are far preferable to late or full term and that decisions should be made early rather than later.
Every case is different and legalistic determinations very difficult. This does not mean that society should not provide far better adoption choices, along with other incentives, for mothers, rather than utilizing termination as the over riding option.

It is apparent you have never been anywhere near someone actually making this decision if you think it is easy. An unwanted pregnancy is traumatic no matter what the option selected is. Legally attempting to limit the options available only lead to black market abortions or blotched self abortion jobs. In countries where it is illegal and completely inaccessible (Ireland does not fall into this category since most women wanting an abortion will hop over to england to have it done) the death rate skyrockets. There is no moral ground to stand on here as all options are bad. In a perfect world yes adoption would be a good alternative but as has been shown earlier it is not ideal and can cause much harm. There is no blanket solution which is why I favor leaving it to a case by case basis and not making criminals out of women and doctors.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
12-10-2013, 05:23 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 12:45 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(12-10-2013 12:05 AM)Mr Woof Wrote:  That line of reasoning can be carried to ridiculous extremes.

Potential humanity surely needs something more that a blanket determining decree.
The issue relating to any obligation on those propagating the human species, by plan or chance, surely requires some degree of reasoned consideration.....................
Quick fix solutions have a tendency to impact poorly on social/ ethical issues.

If the ablation will inflict pain on the foetus and/or the foetus has a mature neurology such that it can be deemed a person then abortion becomes problematic. Both of these situations will arise only in late-term abortions.

The main problem of argumenta from potential--which appears to be what you are proposing--is that they conflate the notion of potential personhood with personhood itself. A potential person is not a type of person hence it cannot attract moral rights or be conceived of as having personal interests. The potential person is an abstraction; treating it as an actual person is reification. The ingredients of beer do not have the same properties as beer by virtue of their potential beerness; potential beer is an abstraction. There is clearly a qualitative distinction between the ingredients of beer and beer itself. So too is there a qualitative distinction between the conglomeration of cells that comprise a zygote/blastocyte/embryo and the person of the mature foetus.

Contemplation relevant to the potential person may not be as abstract as you suggest as the whole of our being is intimately related to our beginning.....not really small beer.
If we do not look at controversial issues adequately, as a race we surely risk becoming very self centred, materialistic to the extreme, and highly intent on achieving the highest pleasures for our selves, while, in doing so, creating a very dangerous and suspect society.
I do not see man made logic as an absolute panacea; also it can be used very effectively to argue causes, the values for which, may be quite evil and simply justified by clever word play.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2013, 06:45 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 03:33 PM)Dom Wrote:  You're saying that government should not micro manage our lives. I agree with that.
I m not trying to be controversial for the sake of it.

I have my view on the purpose of government and law. I think enforcing moral belief can be dangerous and oppressive, it is also vague and hands the government a blank cheque, they can write whatever law tickles their fancy and suggest a moral basis.

When really, I don't want to be controlled. I want an inclusive and diverse society. I want government to step in only when society is at risk of becoming unstable. Thus we need laws against murder and theft, we need those laws, society would be chaotic and dangerous without.
But it seems society is just fine with abortion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2013, 06:51 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 03:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  The late term abortion of a viable fetus is murder. Is murder not a threat to society?
Murder is a legal definition, we could make any abortion "murder" if we put those rules into law.

But with regards to when do we draw the line, we need to assess, at what point does society start to care about the life of the unborn?
When I say care, I mean, at what point does an objective third party deem that they will put their life at risk to violently intervene on behalf of the unborn? At this stage society becomes unstable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2013, 07:28 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 06:51 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(12-10-2013 03:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  The late term abortion of a viable fetus is murder. Is murder not a threat to society?
Murder is a legal definition, we could make any abortion "murder" if we put those rules into law.

But with regards to when do we draw the line, we need to assess, at what point does society start to care about the life of the unborn?
When I say care, I mean, at what point does an objective third party deem that they will put their life at risk to violently intervene on behalf of the unborn? At this stage society becomes unstable.

When it's viable. Or, when it has a central nervous system and experiences pain.

But that is exactly what people do not agree on - when does it become a person.

When it develops a central nervous system, it becomes something more than a lump of tissue. It becomes a being that feels pain, and deserves human empathy.

When it is possibly viable outside the womb we definitely have a human life.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2013, 07:44 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
The concept of "viability" is also somewhat arbitrary. Put simply, a baby can be born after going full term but if the mother can not or does not care for it it dies.

So let's lose this bullshit argument about making the woman carry it to term. You are also sentencing her to care for it for any number of years. Once again, I do not see where it is any business of the "pro-life" crowd.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2013, 08:03 PM
RE: Why I am no longer pro-choice.
(12-10-2013 07:44 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  The concept of "viability" is also somewhat arbitrary. Put simply, a baby can be born after going full term but if the mother can not or does not care for it it dies.

So let's lose this bullshit argument about making the woman carry it to term. You are also sentencing her to care for it for any number of years. Once again, I do not see where it is any business of the "pro-life" crowd.

This is not a bullshit argument. We are talking about very late term, month 7, 8, or 9.

Did the woman just now notice she was pregnant? "Oops! I better do something, oh dear."

There now exists a sentient being that she's had a good 6 month's notice of.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: