Poll: “Pro-Choice” - Yes or No?
-
No woman should be told what to do with her body and until we get to a point where natural born men can give birth to children, this is not an issue where men should have much of a say. Women have the right to bring a child into this world if they want. They also have a right not to bring one into this world. It's sad that even today we still do not want women to hold any iota of power, not even when it comes to their own bodies.
The reality, of course, is that we do live in a society where everybody is told what they can and cannot do with their own body. Leaving aside the problematic idea of 'the body' as separate from but intimate private property of the self, nobody has unrestricted sovereignty over their own flesh. I understand that this issue is made emotional because of the long history of male control over reproduction in Western societies, but it is a nonsense to say that women should have total control over their own bodies even if you deny the claim (made, I assume, by most opponents of abortion) that it is what abortion does to somebody else's body that matters. If we could all agree that there was only one body involved (and one person to whom that body belongs), I suspect abortion would not even be an issue.
I'm also dubious about the idea that men are not entitled to an opinion on abortion because they can't bear children. This seems like a really arbitrary limitation: should infertile women or women past the age of menopause be entitled to an opinion on abortion? Should those who are not of military age have an opinion on foreign policy? Should only the dying (or only doctors) have an opinion on euthanasia? Should only African American men be able to express an opinion on the Black Lives Matter movement? The reality of course is that abortion is an issue that affects all of us to varying degrees, and nobody's opinion is intrinsically better than anyone else's because of the group to which they happen to belong. Rather than trying to shut down the voices of half the population, I'd suggest that it would be better to foster debate which is respectful and compassionate. One can, after all, try to understand the perspective of a prospective mother without thinking that her decisions are necessarily the best or right ones. Unfortunately, the battle-lines are so firmly-drawn at present that it is very difficult to see much space for respect or compassion on either side towards people with whom we disagree.
I like what you have to say.
-
I bet the pro abortion people are also against "parental abortion" for men.
-
I'm also dubious about the idea that men are not entitled to an opinion on abortion because they can't bear children. This seems like a really arbitrary limitation: should infertile women or women past the age of menopause be entitled to an opinion on abortion? Should those who are not of military age have an opinion on foreign policy? Should only the dying (or only doctors) have an opinion on euthanasia? Should only African American men be able to express an opinion on the Black Lives Matter movement? The reality of course is that abortion is an issue that affects all of us to varying degrees, and nobody's opinion is intrinsically better than anyone else's because of the group to which they happen to belong. Rather than trying to shut down the voices of half the population, I'd suggest that it would be better to foster debate which is respectful and compassionate. One can, after all, try to understand the perspective of a prospective mother without thinking that her decisions are necessarily the best or right ones. Unfortunately, the battle-lines are so firmly-drawn at present that it is very difficult to see much space for respect or compassion on either side towards people with whom we disagree.
Stop conflating an issue with other issues that are not connected with it in order to confuse things.
The question here is not about opinion- everyone can have an opinion about anything. It's part of the freedom of expression. But that's neither here not there.The point of discussion is who should have the right to decide on aborting an unborn embryo- and the answer, plain and simple, has to be the person DIRECTLY, PHYSICALLY involved- the one who is forced to spend nine months (if ever) to carry it to term- and that is the mother. Men do NOT get that right because their body is not directly involved. Their health will NOT be affected- neither will their ability to work, earn a living, or function normally.
ONLY the woman is physically impacted and that's why it's her right to decide.As to your other comment- obviously the fetus can only be aborted up to a certain stage- after which it will NOT be viable for abortion legally. What is the exact stage? 21 weeks if I'm not mistaken. Here, this is what science says -I did some research: http://blogs.plos.org/dnascience/2013/10/03/when-does-a-human-life-begins-17-timepoints/
-
I'm also dubious about the idea that men are not entitled to an opinion on abortion because they can't bear children. This seems like a really arbitrary limitation: should infertile women or women past the age of menopause be entitled to an opinion on abortion? Should those who are not of military age have an opinion on foreign policy? Should only the dying (or only doctors) have an opinion on euthanasia? Should only African American men be able to express an opinion on the Black Lives Matter movement? The reality of course is that abortion is an issue that affects all of us to varying degrees, and nobody's opinion is intrinsically better than anyone else's because of the group to which they happen to belong. Rather than trying to shut down the voices of half the population, I'd suggest that it would be better to foster debate which is respectful and compassionate. One can, after all, try to understand the perspective of a prospective mother without thinking that her decisions are necessarily the best or right ones. Unfortunately, the battle-lines are so firmly-drawn at present that it is very difficult to see much space for respect or compassion on either side towards people with whom we disagree.
Stop conflating an issue with other issues that are not connected with it in order to confuse things.
The question here is not about opinion- everyone can have an opinion about anything. It's part of the freedom of expression. But that's neither here not there.The point of discussion is who should have the right to decide on aborting an unborn embryo- and the answer, plain and simple, has to be the person DIRECTLY, PHYSICALLY involved- the one who is forced to spend nine months (if ever) to carry it to term- and that is the mother. Men do NOT get that right because their body is not directly involved. Their health will NOT be affected- neither will their ability to work, earn a living, or function normally.
ONLY the woman is physically impacted and that's why it's her right to decide.As to your other comment- obviously the fetus can only be aborted up to a certain stage- after which it will NOT be viable for abortion legally. What is the exact stage? 21 weeks if I'm not mistaken. Here, this is what science says -I did some research: http://blogs.plos.org/dnascience/2013/10/03/when-does-a-human-life-begins-17-timepoints/
I stopped reading after you said garbage about freedom of expression and that anyone who disagrees with you is just opinion. Sorry, but that aint flyin.
-
I stopped reading after you said garbage about freedom of expression and that anyone who disagrees with you is just opinion. Sorry, but that aint flyin.
Oh, seriously. I said no such thing. Learn how to read mhorndisk. :laugh:
Here is what I said: The question here is not about opinion- everyone can have an opinion about anything.
If you aren't going to read the whole statement, then don't comment because you'll wind up looking like a fool to everyone else who takes the time to read and comment properly. ::) ::) -
It's not an "EMBRYO" after FIVE WEEKS when the BRAIN develops ELECTRICAL CURRENTS. What is your definition of EMBRYO anyway???
-
It's not an "EMBRYO" after FIVE WEEKS when the BRAIN develops ELECTRICAL CURRENTS. What is your definition of EMBRYO anyway???
You can't even GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT. The fetus us after the EIGHTH WEEK. Hahaha! Here, I'll give you what you asked. You do your own research next time: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/embryo
embryo [em´bre-o]
a new organism in the earliest stage of development. In humans this is defined as the developing organism from the fourth day after fertilization to the end of the eighth week. After that the unborn baby is usually referred to as the fetus. adj., adj em´bryonal, embryon´ic. -
The brain starts developing after 5 weeks.
-
The point of discussion is who should have the right to decide on aborting an unborn embryo- and the answer, plain and simple, has to be the person DIRECTLY, PHYSICALLY involved- the one who is forced to spend nine months (if ever) to carry it to term- and that is the mother. Men do NOT get that right because their body is not directly involved. Their health will NOT be affected- neither will their ability to work, earn a living, or function normally.
ONLY the woman is physically impacted and that's why it's her right to decide.I am familiar with this logic. The problem is that it is obviously going to fail to persuade those who do not think that the woman is the only person involved, or the only person who has a stake in what happens to a foetus. Even leaving the foetus itself out of the matter (and I think the claim that the foetus has interests which deserve protection is a powerful one), other people are also affected by a woman's decision to have an abortion: most immediately the father, the two families, and so on, and ultimately everyone who belongs to a 'moral community' that is responsible for the care and welfare of unborn children. I am personally averse to the rather individualistic view that sees pregnancy as simply one person's problem. I rather think that unborn children belong to their communities as much as anyone else does, and their fate is not to be left in the hands of one person (whose choices, in turn, are not to be borne alone).
I do take your point that carrying a child is a uniquely physical imposition upon a woman, and it is one that has implications on her life for at least forty weeks, and maybe much longer. So requiring that woman to carry her child to term is certainly no small imposition and not to be required lightly. The physical and emotional demands childbirth makes on the mother must be a very serious consideration in any discussion about the morality of abortion. But I do not think this means that the woman concerned is therefore the only person who has a stake in the future of the child, and the only person whose decisions about the child should matter.
-
for having this kind of old 20th century discussion, does it mean abortion is still illegal in your country or what??…
-
The brain starts developing after 5 weeks.
While that is true, about 50% of people's brains never fully develop. Those people are called "Liberals".
-
There is a never ending debate about abortion.
One problem with that debate is defining the parameters of abortion.Some people consider any type of birth control to be a mortal sin, against god's will.
Some people are OK with contraception, but are against "day AFTER pills"
Some people are OK with abortion up until a certain time after conception.
But then there is Hillary Clinton, who ENTHUSIASTICALLY and vigorously fights for
tax-payer subsidized, guilt-free, on demand abortions.. up until the very day of DELIVERY!
Hillary supports partial birth abortions, in which the arms and legs and body are removed
from the mother.. but the head is INTENTIONALLY left inside. Then they reach in with very
long scissors, penetrate the base of the neck, and snip the brain stem - killing the baby, then
removing the head. If they removed the head from the mother before killing the baby, it
would be considered murder, and forbidden. Anybody who supports what Hillary does, is
a monster. It is not possible that most of the people that voted for Hillary are aware of
what she supports - even though she confirmed her position on abortion in the 3rd and
final debate.
I bet there is not one person in this forum who would support partial birth abortions. -
Then they reach in with very long scissors, penetrate the base of the neck, and snip the brain stem - killing the baby, then
removing the head.I'm pro-choice. And I'm fully aware of the fact that abortion is, at its core, murder (thank you for reminding us that). And fellow pro-choice people, no matter how you put it, it's murder. So shush.
-
If they removed the head from the mother before killing the baby, it would be considered murder, and forbidden.
I believe that the reason for using scissors to puncture the child is to suck out its organs (since the fetus' head can't be removed easily, they have to 'deflate' it).
-
The brain starts developing after 5 weeks.
While that is true, about 50% of people's brains never fully develop. Those people are called "Liberals".
Yes, and isn't it something that still even with that brain, "Liberals" seem to be the ones advancing and keeping up with the changing times, moving forward–you know evolving.
"Conservatives" on the other hand–having a "big brain" doesn't mean anything if it's not being used. Although what is pretty amazing are those "Conservatives" who continue to go on in spite of seemingly to be born without any brains at all! >:D
-
I am only for abortion when a woman has been raped, or been the victim of incest, or her life is in danger if she has a child.
I'm not for people using abortion as birth control. If you don't want a child, use birth control that works like having the man use a condom correctly, and having the woman use any number of birth control options there are for women like the pill, nuva ring, implant/injection birth control, etc.
If a woman does wind up pregnant and does not want the child she can always give the child up for adoption. That's what a friend of mine that's gay did with a woman he dated since they had sex as teenagers and neither believe in abortion, and they were not going to get married obviously.
-
I'm also dubious about the idea that men are not entitled to an opinion on abortion because they can't bear children.
Maybe I should clarify because you've obviously derailed into something else. Men can have all the opinion we want. I'm saying no man should be able to FORCE a woman to have a child through legislation or subject her to criminal charges because he's conservative and doesn't believe in science and therefore doesn't believe in spontaneous abortions aka miscarriages. This is actually pretty direct. What evidence do you have that conservatives believe in science enough to the point that they won't subject women to prison sentences or even death for having spontaneous abortions aka miscarriages? It is a known fact that American conservatives are dismissive to science, especially medical and climate science. Me and millions of others are not willing to sacrifice women's lives to find out. It's not even worth taking the risk.
-
The brain starts developing after 5 weeks.
While that is true, about 50% of people's brains never fully develop. Those people are called "Liberals".
Fred.. not everyone who has a different opinion to you is stupid or brain damaged.. state your opinion but don't be like this..
-
I am only for abortion when a woman has been raped, or been the victim of incest, or her life is in danger if she has a child.
I would accept that abortion might be permissible if it is medically necessary to save the life of the mother. But if you think that the foetus is a person (with rights and interests that need to be protected in law) then I don't think it is coherent to say that abortion should be permitted in cases of rape or incest. Why does it matter how the child was conceived? The fact that the father might be culpable does not reduce in any way our obligation to protect the child. (If you accept that we have such an obligation - if you don't, it won't be an issue for you).
For me, this is not primarily about the mother at all. I'm not anti-women or anti-women-who-have-sex. I don't think that women who get pregnant need to be punished or made to take personal responsibility for what they have done. And it's not primarily about politics either: it's not about whether I trust "conservatives" or who might be anti-science or backward or misogynistic. It is, for me, a straightforward but very difficult question about how much of a moral duty we have as a society to care for our unborn children.
-
BUT I DON'T! Not until born…. Sorry! That's kinda the whole point, ya know?! :haha:
I would accept that abortion might be permissible if it is medically necessary to save the life of the mother. But if you think that the foetus is a person (with rights and interests that need to be protected in law)
