Your opinions of Abortion page 36

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

She shouldn’t be able to have an abortion.

When I ask you why she shouldn’t have an abortion, you simply state she shouldn’t. Why shouldn’t see? What’s the reason? Why is it bad?

If she didn’t want the baby, don’t have sex.

A condom will protect you in most of the cases. Why punish the unlucky?

Because they took the chance.

Because they took the chance.

So, answer me then, if you take the chance by getting into the car, then some drunkard basically crashes both of your cars and severing your leg. You’re bleeding to death. An ambulance drops by, the driver laughs in your face and says “you shouldn’t have taken the chance!”, then drives off. Is that good?

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

Because they took the chance.

So, answer me then, if you take the chance by getting into the car, then some drunkard basically crashes both of your cars and severing your leg. You’re bleeding to death. An ambulance drops by, the driver laughs in your face and says “you shouldn’t have taken the chance!”, then drives off. Is that good?

No

Because they took the chance.

By that logic we should also get rid of paramedics. You take a chance every time you get in a car, and sometimes you get unlucky – Should there not be a system in place to help you when mistakes occur?

Also, abstinence-only, which is what you are advocating, is an abject failure – Statistically, kids subjected to it start having sex at the same age, and are less likely to use protection.

Edit: Holy crap Darkruler get out of my brain! We used the same example :O

No

Why not? It’s the same principle.

No

Then I see no reason not to allow abortion. Bring me one good reason not to allow abortion. You cannot name any of these two:

1. Because they took the chance. Why? Because you’re taking chances everywhere.
2. Because they shouldn’t have an abortion. That’s just ridiculous. Answering the question with the question.

Edit: Holy crap Darkruler get out of my brain! We used the same example :O

Ninja’d, Fuzzy. ;)

Originally posted by FuzzyBacon:

Because they took the chance.

By that logic we should also get rid of paramedics. You take a chance every time you get in a car, and sometimes you get unlucky – Should there not be a system in place to help you when mistakes occur?

Also, abstinence-only, which is what you are advocating, is an abject failure – Statistically, kids subjected to it start having sex at the same age, and are less likely to use protection.

Edit: Holy crap Darkruler get out of my brain! We used the same example :O

No

Why not? It’s the same principle.

No, its not really…

Originally posted by SethT:

Originally posted by FuzzyBacon:

Because they took the chance.

By that logic we should also get rid of paramedics. You take a chance every time you get in a car, and sometimes you get unlucky – Should there not be a system in place to help you when mistakes occur?

Also, abstinence-only, which is what you are advocating, is an abject failure – Statistically, kids subjected to it start having sex at the same age, and are less likely to use protection.

Edit: Holy crap Darkruler get out of my brain! We used the same example :O

No

Why not? It’s the same principle.

No, its not really. Well came principle, but not what i’m talking about…

Yes it is.

If you want to argue that it’s not a valid analogy, you’re going to have to come up with some reasoning as to why it’s not.

No, its not really…

Explain how it is not?

Premise: You are taking a chance by having sex/driving.

Premise: Accidents occur

Conclusion: After enough instances, you are statistically likely to get in a wreck or have condom break.

From this, however, we see YOUR differentiation. From the exact same premises we can reach nearly identical conclusions, with the exception being that there should be paramedics to protect against car wrecks but not abortion clinics to safeguard broken condoms.

From where I sit, it seems as though the distinction is entirely arbitrary and based only on your prejudice.

All I’m saying is abortion should be illegal unless in the case of rape. If the condom breaks, that’s a chance you took, and you got unlucky. I’m off the subject of abortion. So don’t try to get me to argue with you. I might never come back here again because of all the idiots.

All I’m saying is abortion should be illegal unless in the case of rape.

And what we’re saying is that you haven’t justified that opinion at all.

If you’re in Serious Discussion, you should expect to have your opinions challenged, and should be able to support them.

I might never come back here again because of all the idiots.

Better that way. This conversation was a pure “abortion should be illegal” for you, then us asking why, and you simply saying “abortion should be illegal” again.

I beleive if you don’t want the baby, instead of killing it, just put it up for adoption.

But one exception, if the woman was raped, I think she should be able to have an abortion.

A woman shouldn’t have to give birth to a baby she doesn’t want.

Just in the case of rape.

A woman sould have to go through the pain, guilt, and horror of giving birth to a baby she doesn’t love.

A woman does not have the right to abortion is what I’m trying to say.

But women have the rape exception.

Right. So abortion is not a right. However abortion can be allowed in cases of rape. The only reason you give is because she might not want the baby. This logic, however, applies to most every abortion. What is so special about rape here? Why is it ok in cases of rape, but not ok in other cases?

Are we allowed to post abortion pictures and video? I suspect they would change opinions very quickly.

If your entire argument is “HAY APPEAL TO EMOTION” (which, if you need to post pictures of what an abortion looks like, is probably the case), then no.

Originally posted by Jabor:

If your entire argument is “HAY APPEAL TO EMOTION” (which, if you need to post pictures of what an abortion looks like, is probably the case), then no.

I wanted to post a video of a late term fetus wiggling around on the metal pan. It looks alive, I wanted peoples opinions on that.

In other words, a needless appeal to emotion. If it’s a valid argument, it would still be valid without the video.

Originally posted by Jabor:

In other words, a needless appeal to emotion. If it’s a valid argument, it would still be valid without the video.

It’s not about abortion. It’s about asking people if biologically do they think the fetus is alive, after the abortion?

It is purely a biological question. I don’t care if the fetus is in pain or suffering, or is not, if it’s a baby, or not, etc.

It’s quite feasible to ask the question without the video.

Of course, you’d have to state what definition of “alive” you’re using, because it’s a very finicky subject. As an example, it’s quite possible to argue that a fetus is not alive because it does not have it’s own circulatory system.

Originally posted by Jabor:

It’s quite feasible to ask the question without the video.

Of course, you’d have to state what definition of “alive” you’re using, because it’s a very finicky subject. As an example, it’s quite possible to argue that a fetus is not alive because it does not have it’s own circulatory system.

Well, it’s moving it’s ‘glove hands’ and shaking a little. It could be the tray, but it’s zoomed so close I cant tell if the abortion person is shaking it for effect to the cam.

And how is that relevant to the question?

Honestly, the fact that you so arduously pursue being able to post the video makes me think you have some other motive for posting it – and the only one I can see is, again, the baseless emotional appeal.

Originally posted by Jabor:

And how is that relevant to the question?

Honestly, the fact that you so arduously pursue being able to post the video makes me think you have some other motive for posting it – and the only one I can see is, again, the baseless emotional appeal.

You need not be paranoid.

Just a quick mention for a new and interesting resource I found:

Abortion Worldwide: A Decade of Uneven Progress [PDF]

A large amount of new and very relevant information can be found inside.

Abortion should be legal because having a kid is a huge commitment that will last for a lot of your life. If a woman isn’t ready for that responsibility, I think they should have a choice to stop the pregnancy. Also, if a woman gets raped, then it makes sense for her to be able to stop the pregnancy because she will most likely not want the baby in her life at that time.

Ok this post is kind of old and I know it might have been answered before but I’ve been wondering this question for a while… if abortion is justified, then why do criminals get double murder charges when they kill pregnant people?