Author Topic: Alabama just passed a near-total abortion ban; No exceptions for rape/incest  (Read 9931 times)

SafetyinNumbers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Presumably the anti-abortion side of this debate also wants in vitro fertilization made illegal?

Why are you presuming that?

Just to be consistent with the argument of life at conception. They knowingly fertilize (conception) a significant amount of embryos when only trying to get one to take. So they are often killing multiple humans with every procedure. Once the woman is pregnant they might discard the unused embryos or freeze them as long as the parents can afford to pay the storage costs. Either way, this seems inhumane if your premise that human life begins at conception is correct.

Are they actively killing them though? It seems to me that they are created knowing that that some will die but are not actually terminating them. People have kids knowing that those kids will eventually die.

They are actively killing them, yes. Definitely when they “discard” unwanted embryos. Even freezing them would seem immoral based on your position. Also, when too many take, i.e. when the parents were hoping for one to take and five take instead, they will actively go in and abort up to four of those embryos so the others have a better chance of living and the mother has a better chance of living. Unfortunately, the ones who are aborted don’t have a say in the matter which seems contrary to your interpretation of the Constitution.

Also, creating a bunch of humans, knowing certainly most of them will die to hopefully have one live seems immoral on the basis of your position.

Perhaps, this is especially true when there are already so many unwanted babies being born and potentially many more on the way.


Top 5 positions: ELF GCM.NT/GCM.WT.B PIF EFR.DB TII.V


stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2923
Presumably the anti-abortion side of this debate also wants in vitro fertilization made illegal?

Why are you presuming that?

Just to be consistent with the argument of life at conception. They knowingly fertilize (conception) a significant amount of embryos when only trying to get one to take. So they are often killing multiple humans with every procedure. Once the woman is pregnant they might discard the unused embryos or freeze them as long as the parents can afford to pay the storage costs. Either way, this seems inhumane if your premise that human life begins at conception is correct.

Are they actively killing them though? It seems to me that they are created knowing that that some will die but are not actually terminating them. People have kids knowing that those kids will eventually die.

They are actively killing them, yes. Definitely when they “discard” unwanted embryos. Even freezing them would seem immoral based on your position. Also, when too many take, i.e. when the parents were hoping for one to take and five take instead, they will actively go in and abort up to four of those embryos so the others have a better chance of living and the mother has a better chance of living. Unfortunately, the ones who are aborted don’t have a say in the matter which seems contrary to your interpretation of the Constitution.

Also, creating a bunch of humans, knowing certainly most of them will die to hopefully have one live seems immoral on the basis of your position.

Perhaps, this is especially true when there are already so many unwanted babies being born and potentially many more on the way.

I'll have to think more about this. But perhaps you're right in this regard.
Paul

cwericb

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
You believe that you should have the ability to put someone in jail if they do something that goes against your personal beliefs - beliefs on which many disagree.

You believe that women have no right to decide what goes on within their own body. And Alabama wants any doctor that intervenes and preforms an abortion should be sent to prison for life.

Those views are very similar to the followers of Islam who believe that anyone insulting the Prophet Muhammad should be stoned and/or put to death.

They are both extremist views.
Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason. - Mark Twain

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2923
You believe that you should have the ability to put someone in jail if they do something that goes against your personal beliefs - beliefs on which many disagree.

You believe that women have no right to decide what goes on within their own body. And Alabama wants any doctor that intervenes and preforms an abortion should be sent to prison for life.

Those views are very similar to the followers of Islam who believe that anyone insulting the Prophet Muhammad should be stoned and/or put to death.

They are both extremist views.

Is rape against your personal beliefs? Do you believe people should go to jail if they violate your personal belief? Many people disagree that rape is wrong. They may say "She never said no, she's my wife, I just know she wanted it. We were both drunk so I'm not sure what happened."

I believe a woman can do anything she wants to her body - as long as she's not harming another human. Do you think another human is being harmed during an abortion? What do you think happens?

See here's the difference:

Like I said, no one is forcing a woman to have the baby. Her body is doing that herself. They are simply trying to stop her from killing another human.

I don't want to minimize the harm or importance of rape but I do want to make sure we are understanding things the same way. Rape in some ways is similar to abortion. You have an victim (fetus, woman) being forced to do something that harms them (abortion, rape) - through no fault or control of their own.

Making abortion illegal is similar to making rape illegal. It is simply stopping someone from doing something that harms another human.

It's not taking away a "right" anymore than it's taking away a man's "right" to do what he wants to do to a woman.

There is a big difference in forcing someone vs not allowing it to happen. Am I looking at this the wrong way?
Paul

cwericb

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
As I said earlier...

"This all comes down to the definition of life.
You believe it to be one way others believe it to be another.
The difference is that anti-abortionists believe they have the right to impose their views on others."

You believe that "life" begins at conception, many do not agree.
Forcing women to have an unwanted child can have serious consequences for all concerned.

Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason. - Mark Twain

Tim Eriksen

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 766
This all comes down to the definition of life.
Correct.

You believe it to be one way others believe it to be another.
Yes, but not all opinions are equally valid.  You may choose to disregard what religion says, but that doesn't make you correct.  Science has proven that the unborn is a separate being. 

The difference is that anti-abortionists believe they have the right to impose their views on others.
This is not the difference at all.  Your logic has broken down.  We all believe we have the right to impose certain views on others.  That is why rape, murder, theft and drunk driving are illegal.  That is what laws do.  Even municipal codes do that in non-moral areas.  If the unborn is a separate life from the mother, and scientifically it is, then it is also true that the abortionist is imposing their views on the unborn as well.

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3457
I made the point earlier but I'll make it again because I think it addresses a lot of what you are saying:

There is no perfect solution, this isn't a math problem. It's not as easy as saying, "at the point of conception we have a sovereign human life".

If the fetus is a product of rape, is it OK to abort?
If the fetus is putting the mother's life in jeopardy, is it OK to abort?
If the fetus is severely disabled, misformed, etc., is it OK to abort?

With such a cut-and-dry perspective, you must respond No to all these things. I don't know how you can live with yourself if you really believe that.

So what do we do? We have some partial solution that gets us 90% of the way there. We define a somewhat arbitrary timeframe, have some caveats for cases like the ones I mentioned above, and we leave it up to the mother to make the final decision. It's a pretty good solution to a very complicated issue.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | irm | mo | nlsn | pm | tap | v | vz | wm

Castanza

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 386
I made the point earlier but I'll make it again because I think it addresses a lot of what you are saying:

There is no perfect solution, this isn't a math problem. It's not as easy as saying, "at the point of conception we have a sovereign human life".

If the fetus is a product of rape, is it OK to abort?
If the fetus is putting the mother's life in jeopardy, is it OK to abort?
If the fetus is severely disabled, misformed, etc., is it OK to abort?

With such a cut-and-dry perspective, you must respond No to all these things. I don't know how you can live with yourself if you really believe that.

So what do we do? We have some partial solution that gets us 90% of the way there. We define a somewhat arbitrary timeframe, have some caveats for cases like the ones I mentioned above, and we leave it up to the mother to make the final decision. It's a pretty good solution to a very complicated issue.

Quote
If the fetus is a product of rape, is it OK to abort?
If the fetus is putting the mother's life in jeopardy, is it OK to abort?
If the fetus is severely disabled, misformed, etc., is it OK to abort?

If you believe abortion is necessary in these situations (not saying I disagree),  I'm not understanding how you go leaps and bounds beyond that to say abortion can be done for any reason whatsoever. You're taking extreme examples and using it as a blanket statement to justify other "reasons" for having an abortion.

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3457
I am only using these extreme examples to illustrate that the logic "a fetus is a human life at t=0" is incorrect.

Therefore we need to come up with a different framework to address this issue.

Currently, the implemented framework is to (generally) provide legal and safe abortions during the first trimester, and institute stipulations on the second and third trimesters.

That seems pretty fair to me.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | irm | mo | nlsn | pm | tap | v | vz | wm

Tim Eriksen

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 766
I am only using these extreme examples to illustrate that the logic "a fetus is a human life at t=0" is incorrect.

Therefore we need to come up with a different framework to address this issue.

Currently, the implemented framework is to (generally) provide legal and safe abortions during the first trimester, and institute stipulations on the second and third trimesters.

That seems pretty fair to me.

that is because you are not the one being killed