Author Topic: Alabama just passed a near-total abortion ban; No exceptions for rape/incest  (Read 8160 times)

Castanza

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
We take comparatively no risk during pregnancy therefore should not have equal say in the matter.

Men do have to pay child support though. If they don't agree with the birth, shouldn't they be off the hook?
Condoms are a lot cheaper than child support.

Do you not see the hypocrisy in that statement? You think abortion should be allowed because "accidents happen." But only women can choose to not be involved if they are subjected to an "oops" pregnancy. If a man takes precaution and uses a condom, but it breaks and the female gets pregnant, he is on the hook for child support. For 18 years. So long story shot, only women don't have to deal with their "mistakes."

In fact, they can use them to their advantage. Get knocked up, leave the guy and collect child support. Find another BF to live with all while claiming to be a single mother to get that sweet sweet government assistance. And if you don't think this happens you would be very very wrong.


longinvestor

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1727
  • Never interrupt compounding unnecessarily -Munger
While we ban abortion outright we should bring back castrations for the guy who raped.

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2826
While we ban abortion outright we should bring back castrations for the guy who raped.

I agree with that. I would also think it would be appropriate alternative if a father can't/won't pay child support. I bet most would have no problem coming up with the money then.
Paul

wachtwoord

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1363
Quote
I never understand bans on abortion and suicide exist while countries maintain to uphold their constitution above all else. Isn't the right for self-determination in there? Banning abortion and suicide is in direct conflict with that.

How is the discussion here longer than what I just wrote? Oh yeah people are irrational, emotional and inconsistent. Carry on I guess .... :(

Suicide is self harm, where abortion is taking the life of another being. I don't see them on the same playing field. The argument is that "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" should be guaranteed to that unborn child whom was forced into the world.

Abortion is not taking a life. It's removing an unwanted, parasitic and harmful organism from your body. The consequence of this removal may be death sure, but that is not the goal in itself.

Self-determination includes the right to remove things from your body, since the inside of ones body is part of the self.
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master"

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2826
Quote
I never understand bans on abortion and suicide exist while countries maintain to uphold their constitution above all else. Isn't the right for self-determination in there? Banning abortion and suicide is in direct conflict with that.

How is the discussion here longer than what I just wrote? Oh yeah people are irrational, emotional and inconsistent. Carry on I guess .... :(

Suicide is self harm, where abortion is taking the life of another being. I don't see them on the same playing field. The argument is that "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" should be guaranteed to that unborn child whom was forced into the world.

Abortion is not taking a life. It's removing an unwanted, parasitic and harmful organism from your body. The consequence of this removal may be death sure, but that is not the goal in itself.

Self-determination includes the right to remove things from your body, since the inside of ones body is part of the self.


It's a separate human. It has its own feet, hands, toes and unique dna. You can count the arms on it. Does that mean the woman has 4 arms?  And two unique DNAs???  ::)

If someone eats a worm (or anything else living) does that mean that the worm is no longer its own being just because its location changed? Now eventually the worm would become part of the body as the body digests it...but I don't think it works that way with a baby. By your reasoning, it certainly seems so.

By the way, we're all organisms.  ;)
Paul

Gregmal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1618
Quote
I never understand bans on abortion and suicide exist while countries maintain to uphold their constitution above all else. Isn't the right for self-determination in there? Banning abortion and suicide is in direct conflict with that.

How is the discussion here longer than what I just wrote? Oh yeah people are irrational, emotional and inconsistent. Carry on I guess .... :(

Suicide is self harm, where abortion is taking the life of another being. I don't see them on the same playing field. The argument is that "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" should be guaranteed to that unborn child whom was forced into the world.

Abortion is not taking a life. It's removing an unwanted, parasitic and harmful organism from your body. The consequence of this removal may be death sure, but that is not the goal in itself.

Self-determination includes the right to remove things from your body, since the inside of ones body is part of the self.

I think this problem would greatly diminish if some of these heathens exercised even a little concern/control removing "things" from their body...

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2826
Quote
I never understand bans on abortion and suicide exist while countries maintain to uphold their constitution above all else. Isn't the right for self-determination in there? Banning abortion and suicide is in direct conflict with that.

How is the discussion here longer than what I just wrote? Oh yeah people are irrational, emotional and inconsistent. Carry on I guess .... :(

Suicide is self harm, where abortion is taking the life of another being. I don't see them on the same playing field. The argument is that "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" should be guaranteed to that unborn child whom was forced into the world.

Abortion is not taking a life. It's removing an unwanted, parasitic and harmful organism from your body. The consequence of this removal may be death sure, but that is not the goal in itself.

Self-determination includes the right to remove things from your body, since the inside of ones body is part of the self.

I think this problem would greatly diminish if some of these heathens exercised even a little concern/control removing "things" from their body...

Pretty sure the men are more responsible for  "things" being in the other body.
Paul

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3248
Quote
Do you not see the hypocrisy in that statement? You think abortion should be allowed because "accidents happen." But only women can choose to not be involved if they are subjected to an "oops" pregnancy. If a man takes precaution and uses a condom, but it breaks and the female gets pregnant, he is on the hook for child support. For 18 years. So long story shot, only women don't have to deal with their "mistakes."
Yes, women make the choices when it comes to their bodies (as do men). 

You say women don't have to deal with their "mistakes"? And to put it in quotes too? How arrogant!

Women have to make the very difficult decision to abort the life growing inside them - but you casually dismiss this. You've illustrated the essence of Sanjeev's 2nd post in this topic.

Quote
It's a separate human. It has its own feet, hands, toes and unique dna
This is not the best argument to make to support the pro-life position. Take it to its conclusion: if a fetus is a separate human, it has zero right to be growing inside another human being and should be removed at once.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | irm | mo | nlsn | pm | tap | v | vz | wm

Parsad

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8518
Sanj,


Thanks for the answer. For the parent question, in the beginning of the thread you seemed to express displeasure by saying how abortion is "always decided by men."

By this reasoning, should the way parents treat their children only be decided by parents? Obviously, if men shouldn't have moral opinions about abortions, I don't see why it's fair for non-parents to have moral opinions about what parents do.

Hi StahleyP,

You've answered your own question. 

The vast majority of decision makers (legislators, social service authorities, etc) over the welfare of children ARE parents, grandparents, uncles, aunts, etc, and ALL were children once.

From what I understand about human biology, a nearly unanimous majority of the male decision makers (legislators, authorities, etc) making decisions for women, ARE NOT women who can carry a child to term and NEVER were girls.  And that doesn't change even if Catelynn Jenner becomes a Congresswoman or Senator!  :)  Cheers!
No man is a failure who has friends!

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2826
Sanj,


Thanks for the answer. For the parent question, in the beginning of the thread you seemed to express displeasure by saying how abortion is "always decided by men."

By this reasoning, should the way parents treat their children only be decided by parents? Obviously, if men shouldn't have moral opinions about abortions, I don't see why it's fair for non-parents to have moral opinions about what parents do.

Hi StahleyP,

You've answered your own question. 

The vast majority of decision makers (legislators, social service authorities, etc) over the welfare of children ARE parents, grandparents, uncles, aunts, etc, and ALL were children once.

From what I understand about human biology, a nearly unanimous majority of the male decision makers (legislators, authorities, etc) making decisions for women, ARE NOT women who can carry a child to term and NEVER were girls.  And that doesn't change even if Catelynn Jenner becomes a Congresswoman or Senator!  :)  Cheers!

I believe we were all fetuses though, so that should allow us to have an opinion about what happens to other fetuses. Keep in mind the argument isn't being made to what the woman does to her body (her body isn't being aborted). The abortion process is happening to another human.

I don't see how this isn't a human rights violation. A human is being terminated involuntary.
Paul