The "Bad Kind" of Abortion

Last I heard stem cell research using zygotes/fetuses is kinda outdated now, they can get stem cells from skin or other organs.

I suppose if you believe that all (human) lives are equal, then there is no net loss if you kill one to prevent another from dying.

I have no intention to create more orphans and foster children. Somehow I think that's even more irresponsible than abortion.

edited 15th Jan '11 11:31:45 PM by melloncollie

Giving birth has quite a few physical problems for the mother though. Her figure suffers. Injuries are often involved. The medical bill can be even more expensive than the abortion depending on where you live.

Lots of changes happens to a woman during and after giving birth. And giving a child up for adoption has a whole lot of obstacles too.

Granted there are risks associated with abortion too. But the problems are less than giving birth to an unwanted being.

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Wouldn't make me feel better to know that if I wasn't born, maybe someone could have saved old man from cancer =P

And thanks Signed, that mental image would make me feel even worse.

edited 15th Jan '11 11:34:08 PM by SpookyMask

And there's the crux of the problem.

There are too many toasters in my chimney!

The life that was saved was a 6 year old boy suffering from an uncurable genetic disorder...

^^ I give a lot of images....which one? The woman losing her figure from giving birth?

edited 15th Jan '11 11:35:48 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Don't try to pull the Littlest Cancer Patient stuff on me. It's so Narmy it's ridiculous.

edited 15th Jan '11 11:35:27 PM by Chagen46

"Who wants to hear about good stuff when the bottom of the abyss of human failure that you know doesn't exist is so much greater?"-Wraith

I'm just correcting him that it isn't an old man dying from cancer...in fact, cancer isn't even involved.

All I'm trying to point out is that there is something to gain from Abortion, whereas giving birth and dumping it in the adoption agency has nothing to offer but another burden for society.

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

And I am indifferent towards the idea, so my feelings cancel out yours!

There are more permanent results to giving birth than just the child. It does a hell of a lot to a woman's body, too - and that's not including cases where surgery is required.

As for the supporters of abortion being born: Well naturally. And many of them were wanted children, for whom the legality or lack thereof of abortion is irrelevant. If a parents wants to keep a child, they can still keep it. And a parent who wants a child is more likely to be a good one than one who doesn't (or is unable to cope with a child; as is commonly pointed out, the best way to lower abortion rates is to improve access and info about contraceptives, and improve support services for parents)

The owner of this account is temporarily unavailable. Please leave your number and call again later.

I apparently have slight ADHD =P(to be honest, while I do have quirky habits, I have started to think that most of behavior disorder things are just some jackasses giving name to people who happens to be naturally weird in some way) I don't like the idea that if you could somehow(I don't think it is possible, but hey! Its a disorder, if you replace it with some other disorder I wouldn't really change my mind)detect that when you are still fetus... Yeah, I don't think my parents are kind of people to abort(or even get accidentally pregnant), but thought is nightmarish to me =/

This is one of the absolute stupidest arguments against those who support abortion and should have absolutely no merit, and yet I frequently hear it touted.

"I can't imagine what Hell will have in store, but I know when I'm there, I won't wander anymore."

Yet you have not explained why in any concise manner.

"Who wants to hear about good stuff when the bottom of the abyss of human failure that you know doesn't exist is so much greater?"-Wraith

Not quite. Stupid maternal instinct. When a woman sees her child, for quite a lot of them something simply overrides their brain. Sure, they might have intended to give the baby away from the beginning, and in a months or so they are going to deeply and bitterly regret their decision, but for a time being there is that damn reflex. For example, there were numerous cases when surrogate mothers refused to give the baby (that they were 1) Agreed in advance to give up, that was pretty much the point of pregnancy 2) That is not even biologically theirs) to the parents.

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

I'm seeing a lot of emphasis put on the mother's health.

So let's assume for a moment that the fetus's life is equal to that of the mother's.

Now we can debate on morality properly, such as with the trolley problem.

Though pro-choice folks might find the concept of debating on this premise distasteful, as it is essentially Powered by a Forsaken Child.

Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! ~ GOD

Indeed; it's not all that simple.

But it's still possible.

There are too many toasters in my chimney!

What needs to happen is we need to find a common ground so we can talk about more than philosophical stuff about whether or not the unborn child counts as a human life.

Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! ~ GOD

But why should it be equal value to the mother's life? It's a being that lives off the mother, it requires the mother to survive.

And unlike the mother, the fetus has no benefit to society until 18 years after it's birth. And if the fetus is born and dumped in an orphanage, that's just a burden on everyone else. Whereas a living functional adult woman can do plenty of things to help society. And if she wants, she could also produce another fetus(assuming theres no health complications) when she feels like she wants a child.

Or if I put it in a much shorter way...

The fetus is replaceable. The mother isn't. If you abort the kid, the woman can always get a new one. If the mother dies trying to carry the baby to terms  ^*

? They both go. The replaceable fetus, as well as the irreplaceable mother.

edited 15th Jan '11 11:55:17 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

@Chagen: Saying that I'm pro-choice doesn't mean that I think every woman should abort all their babies, which is what that phrase seems to imply. It doesn't mean that I think women should abort only for reasons I think are good. It means that women should be able to abort their fetuses if they desire to. I may not agree with their reasons for doing so, but it's still, ultimately, up to them.

I also do not at all think that a fetus is a human life, considering there is very little "human" about a fetus. They cannot survive outside the womb. They are no where near developed. They cannot think. Hell, until a certain point, they don't even have brains.

Also, considering how cruel the adoption system is supposed to be, I don't think that putting kids up for adoption is really a nice alternative to being aborted.

Let's see, a kid could have a great life or a rotten life, and never know because it was aborted before it had a chance to know. Alternatively, a kid could be "not cute enough" or whatever to get adopted, live in an orphanage all their life, wanting someone to love them, and maybe ultimately kill themself, because their mother decided she didn't want the kid and thus put them up for adoption.

Obviously, that's not the only scenario, but should you even want to risk such a possibility?

Anyway, I should duck out of this thread.

edited 15th Jan '11 11:59:36 PM by LuckyRevenant

"I can't imagine what Hell will have in store, but I know when I'm there, I won't wander anymore."

Under this assumption, yes. But that is not an assumption I share.

To me, fetus is, of course, alive, but only in the same sense as cat is alive, worm is alive or grass is alive. It is not a person yet. It does not have personality, hones, dreams, thoughts, have nothing in this world to miss, nothing to aspire to. So it is not anywhere as important as mother, who is a real person instead of possibility of becoming one.

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

@Signed: WHY is that so? You think that every single fetus would lead to same people? If you had been aborted, but your mother had another pregnancy, you think you would have born? What if the baby had died after being born, you think it would be replaceable by having another baby?

I don't say you can't abort if you are going to die, I'm asking you the rationalization for it being replaceable =P

And yeah, I should keep out of this thread too.

edited 16th Jan '11 12:03:45 AM by SpookyMask

Because pro-choise doesn't mean "Abort all babies". Mean while, isn't it ironic that so many pro-lifers are men who won't ever get pregnant?

---

I'm pro-choise. I'm more pro-birth control, but hey, mistakes happen, so that option needs to be available. A fetus is not a baby, not until it can survive outside the body, but even aborting at the late stage has to remain an option, because if you have to abort at that stage, it's usually for something serious.

And before changen goes all "that's so horribly cold and utilitarian you commie nazi", I say it again, pro-choise doesn't mean abort all/any babies. It just means that the option needs to be available when needed, and it won't be needed if people just took better care of birth control, and were more often in the position at life where they can afford to have a child. The main reasons for abortion tend to be that it's too early for the mother; they want to advance in liife, or don't make enough money. If women had the option of advancing at their carreers and getting paid as welll as men, they wouldn't have to worry about sich things that much.

---

[ed.] @spooky: Yes, and what if another sperm had fertiled the egg, or had fertilized the other egg, o it had been any of the fathers previous billions of sperm or any of the dozens of of the mother's pprevious eggs lost in menstrual cycles. All of them could have been individual humans.

edited 16th Jan '11 12:06:21 AM by JethroQWalrustitty

the statement above is false

If I wouldn't have born, it would not be a loss to me. If I die right now, it would be a loss.

Fetuses are not exactly replaceable - different genetics and all that - but they are much less valuable than woman. Somewhat stupid analogy, but what is more drastic- to destroy a foundation upon which a house is going to be built or an already built house in which people live?

If we disagree, that much, at least, we have in common

^Like I said, I didn't comment on the abortion itself(I find it acceptable to abort if you yourself are in danger), but the fact that Signed called fetuses replaceable =P

Now, I try to keep away from this thread =/

Looking at all the circumstances for unwanted pregnancies, and all the effects that come from pregnancy, to restrict the rights of everyone, just so you don't have to deal with the unfortunate implications of the ones who "abuse" the system, seems rather lazy by comparison.

Here's a poorly thought-out analogy that I like to use when asked this...

Compare accidentally deleting a save file that you are 80% complete in(in a really long game) with deleting a fresly made save file that you didn't even get through the tutorial with.

The one that you worked hard on developing and making up to 80% would be much more painful. It will be painful to play the game all over again to get to THAT point again. Yet that newly made save file can easily be made again, and nothing was lost.

Also, if we went with your argument, men should NEVER fap.

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."