Political Crossfire Forums

The Anarchist

I'm pro-choice, and I believe that abortion is an amoral act. From talking to people on here I've started to believe that most people either pro-choice and think abortion is not evil, or are pro-life and think that abortion is killing. Are there any other views?

Here are the possibilities that I think exist:

1) I'm "Pro-Life" and believe that abortion is fundamentally wrong.
2) I'm "Pro-Life" and believe that abortion is amoral but I am a misantrope and don't want people to have choices.
3) I'm Pro-Choice and believe that abortion is wrong, but that we can't force our beliefs on others and we don't have enough evidence.
4) I'm Pro-Choice and believe that abortion is an amoral act.

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.

The Anarchist · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:58 am Post subject:

AllAmericanMan wrote: I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.

I'm similar. I think that all life has value. I think sex is a choice, but I also think that abortion is a choice.

TheGirlNextDoor · Joined: 08 Jul 2004 Posts: 22608

The Anarchist wrote:

3) I'm Pro-Choice and believe that abortion is wrong, but that we can't force our beliefs on others [and we don't have enough evidence.]

This would be my opinion - minus the brackets.

The Grandmaster · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:15 am Post subject:

I am staunch pro-choice, and I believe that abortion is an amoral act, and this not wrong whatsoever.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

"amoral" is a bit vague as to its meaning.

I am pro-choice and see all of this solely as a medical decision between a woman and her physician, no different than any other medical procedure.

I am not sure where that fits in the poll?

Korimyr the Rat · Joined: 11 Jan 2006 Posts: 983 Location: Wyoming

I'm pro-choice, and I have no moral objection to abortion.

Is #3 specifically for moral objections to inhibiting freedom, or would it also include practical objections related to the inability (or undesirability) of enforcing a prohibition? This question format might be useful for other "moral issue" debates.

greeneye · Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:58 pm Post subject:

I am pro life. I champion a woman's right to make decisions in her life and her body. When a woman gets pregnant the equation changes. There's a new life.

"To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous." - Dr. Richard V. Jaynes

The Grandmaster · Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:21 am Post subject:

Dr. Richard V. Jaynes is simply delusional, and oblivious to obvious fact. This is no problem of ours.

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2327 Location: Edinburgh

TheGrandmaster1 wrote: greeneye wrote:
"To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous." - Dr. Richard V. Jaynes
Dr. Richard V. Jaynes is simply delusional, and oblivious to obvious fact. This is no problem of ours.
Nonsense, TGM1. Human (homo sapien) life began about 300,000 years ago. We have strong archeological evidence to support his claim, and little reason to believe that the scientific origin of "man" is significantly inaccurate.

Of course, as far as life in the womb, I do agree with you.

The Anarchist · Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 1:30 pm Post subject:

Prole wrote: TheGrandmaster1 wrote: greeneye wrote:
"To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous." - Dr. Richard V. Jaynes
Dr. Richard V. Jaynes is simply delusional, and oblivious to obvious fact. This is no problem of ours.
Nonsense, TGM1. Human (homo sapien) life began about 300,000 years ago. We have strong archeological evidence to support his claim, and little reason to believe that the scientific origin of "man" is significantly inaccurate.

Of course, as far as life in the womb, I do agree with you.

Agreed.

greeneye · Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 3:45 pm Post subject:

The Anarchist wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.

I'm similar. I think that all life has value.

When do you think that life has value?

The Grandmaster · Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:00 pm Post subject:

Prole wrote: TheGrandmaster1 wrote: greeneye wrote:
"To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous." - Dr. Richard V. Jaynes
Dr. Richard V. Jaynes is simply delusional, and oblivious to obvious fact. This is no problem of ours.
Nonsense, TGM1. Human (homo sapien) life began about 300,000 years ago. We have strong archeological evidence to support his claim, and little reason to believe that the scientific origin of "man" is significantly inaccurate.

Of course, as far as life in the womb, I do agree with you.

Indeed, I was referring to life in the womb, as I am almost certain Dr. Rishard was as well.

The Anarchist · Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:56 pm Post subject:

greeneye wrote: The Anarchist wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.

I'm similar. I think that all life has value.

When do you think that life has value?

I think that all life has value all of the time. A prokaryote has value. It has great value.

galba · Joined: 23 Nov 2005 Posts: 675 Location: Texas

AllAmericanMan wrote: I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.
ditto. Except I'm mainly for life of humans. (and intellegent animals)

The Grandmaster · Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 9:52 am Post subject:

galba wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.
ditto. Except I'm mainly for life of humans. (and intellegent animals)

I suppose I could be called pro-life as well.

The life of the mother.

The only life in question in early abortions.

galba · Joined: 23 Nov 2005 Posts: 675 Location: Texas

TheGrandmaster1 wrote: galba wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.
ditto. Except I'm mainly for life of humans. (and intellegent animals)

I suppose I could be called pro-life as well.

The life of the mother.

The only life in question in early abortions.

So at least least late term abortions, you are against?

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2327 Location: Edinburgh

galba wrote: TheGrandmaster1 wrote: galba wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.
ditto. Except I'm mainly for life of humans. (and intellegent animals)

I suppose I could be called pro-life as well.

The life of the mother.

The only life in question in early abortions.

So at least least late term abortions, you are against?
TGM1 and I share quite similar views on this matter, and though I can't speak for him, I feel that whether late-term abortions should be allowed is ultimately a conflict of rights; does the fetus' right to life outweigh the mother's right to bodily autonomy? And even if so (and I believe that it does, in most cases, albeit I am not far from the fence), should this be enshrined in law?

I'm really rather ambiguous. I would lean towards late-term abortions being wrong, but am still agnostic as to whether they should be illegal.

The Grandmaster · Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 9:57 am Post subject:

Prole wrote: galba wrote: TheGrandmaster1 wrote: galba wrote: AllAmericanMan wrote: I am pro life, I believe all life has value. I am pro choice, the choice is sex.
ditto. Except I'm mainly for life of humans. (and intellegent animals)

I suppose I could be called pro-life as well.

The life of the mother.

The only life in question in early abortions.

So at least least late term abortions, you are against?
TGM1 and I share quite similar views on this matter, and though I can't speak for him, I feel that whether late-term abortions should be allowed is ultimately a conflict of rights; does the fetus' right to life outweigh the mother's right to bodily autonomy? And even if so (and I believe that it does, in most cases, albeit I am not far from the fence), should this be enshrined in law?

I'm really rather ambiguous. I would lean towards late-term abortions being wrong, but am still agnostic as to whether they should be illegal.

Prole is right here as well. I have never argued for very late term abortions. I do believe there is time before it reaches that point to make a decision. As far as whether very late term should be legal, very difficult to say.

steen · Joined: 14 Jan 2006 Posts: 1430 Location: Upper Midwest

The question, of course, is what exactly is meant by "late term." In many cases, it means after 12 weeks.

But for some pro-lifers, it means the D&X procedure which they have mis-labeled as "partial birth" abortion, and then falsely claim occurs up until term when it actually is a 2nd trimester procedure. As for 3rd trimester abortions, these are incredibly rare and the medical decision going into doing these rather risky procedures is based on medical concerns. Pregnancy kills up to about 500 women in the US yearly. Another couple thousand deaths from 3rd trimester complications are avoided through abortions. Such a decision regarding an abortion is medical and should be left to women and physicians, as indeed should all decisions regarding medical procedures. Medical procedures are decided on a medical basis, and politics should be left out of it.