Political Crossfire Forums

[RichardPol]

obviously (underlined three times, circled, and bolded) people are going to have their differences on this issue.
Their are truths to both sides. Abortion has killed(or prevented from living, depending on what side you are on) millions of potential babies.

Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).

The reason abortion is considered wrong (in most cases), is because the little ball of cells that is formed when the sperm fertilizes the egg is considered to be life. The argument here is that since it is its own entity, the mother is not allowed to choose whether or not it dies.

On the flip side, it is considered to be right, becuase life does not begin when the sperm fertilizes the egg. In most cases, people only count it as alive if it has a heartbeat.

But who is correct? Well both are (actually this isn't true, I'm just trying to give the illusuon of a balanced argument so I can insert my own agenda.)

So I guess the real question is who is more correct?

Let me give an example story:
A man and a woman, in the heat of the moment, have sex(boy I just get right to the point don't I?) They don't use protection of any kind. The mother becomes pregnant before she is able to use the Morning after Pill(Oh Goodness, another FUN topic) , and wants to get an abortion. The father however, wants to have the baby.

1. Who is more correct?
2. Who's fault is the pregnancy?
3. What is (or was) the best course of action?

ready? GO!

[Mycroft147]

RichardPol wrote: obviously (underlined three times, circled, and bolded) people are going to have their differences on this issue.
Their are truths to both sides. Abortion has killed(or prevented from living, depending on what side you are on) millions of potential babies.

Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).

The reason abortion is considered wrong (in most cases), is because the little ball of cells that is formed when the sperm fertilizes the egg is considered to be life. The argument here is that since it is its own entity, the mother is not allowed to choose whether or not it dies.

On the flip side, it is considered to be right, becuase life does not begin when the sperm fertilizes the egg. In most cases, people only count it as alive if it has a heartbeat.

But who is correct? Well both are (actually this isn't true, I'm just trying to give the illusuon of a balanced argument so I can insert my own agenda.)

So I guess the real question is who is more correct?

Let me give an example story:
A man and a woman, in the heat of the moment, have sex(boy I just get right to the point don't I?) They don't use protection of any kind. The mother becomes pregnant before she is able to use the Morning after Pill(Oh Goodness, another FUN topic) , and wants to get an abortion. The father however, wants to have the baby.

1. Who is more correct?
2. Who's fault is the pregnancy?
3. What is (or was) the best course of action?

ready? GO!

Well in my opinion the father is more correct because i believe abortion is wrong. But if you go by what is legal, the mothers right because she is basically just having an operation, not killing a child. Legally its the same thing as using the MAP. The pregnancy is both of their "faults"

Best course of action in my opinion would be to have the baby.

[jlrobe]

RichardPol wrote:
Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).

I agree. I snipe religious people like it is open season. My current weapon of choice is Islamic Fundamentalist. But i have used the crusades, slavery, divine right, God's will, and a whole host of other things to knock it out. This debate can be done successfully without religion in my opinion. Including religion just deadlocks both sides.



RichardPol wrote: On the flip side, it is considered to be right, becuase life does not begin when the sperm fertilizes the egg. In most cases, people only count it as alive if it has a heartbeat.
Well, people count more than that. Brain function, identifiable features, fully developed vital system including heart beat, respiration, cutting the umbilical cord, etc. This in and of itself is a heated debate.

RichardPol wrote: But who is correct? Well both are (actually this isn't true, I'm just trying to give the illusuon of a balanced argument so I can insert my own agenda.)

I love your honesty :)

RichardPol wrote: So I guess the real question is who is more correct?'

Depends on your metric. Something being more than another is based on a metric. People cant even agree on a metric (morality, civil liberty, is the fetus more alive than not, etc.). EVen if we agree on a metric to use, we still cannot lock it down.

ready? GO![/quote]

[jlrobe]

message deleted

[jlrobe]

Mycroft wrote: Well in my opinion the father is more correct because i believe abortion is wrong. But if you go by what is legal, the mothers right because she is basically just having an operation, not killing a child. Legally its the same thing as using the MAP. The pregnancy is both of their "faults"

Best course of action in my opinion would be to have the baby.

Whao. Man. I dont want to upset you or anything, but didnt you mention before that your didnt think women who were raped or would die during child birth should have an abortion.

I am just curious.

[Sailor Moon]

It is nobodys fault. Life's conception cannot be faulted, as life is a gift to more than just the baby. Its a gift to three people, at the very least. The mother, Father, and of course, Child.

The FATHER is correct, although I dont fault the woman too much.. she may not understand much about abortion, which is common.

Obviously, they should both attempt to parent the child, and if living together doesnt work, or the mother makes statements about hurting the child, then she should get mental help, and the Father should have sole custody until she is well.

BUT.

If the woman wants an abortion that badly, she can easily give herself one, without anyone else knowing, and very safely, too. And no- no coathangers would be involved.. that is just a myth. Maybe a belly flop off a high dive when she finds out shes pregnant, or numerous belly flops until she miscarries... I recognize the womans right to enjoy her life and her body, but I do not advocate abortion in the slightest. I simply dont see how a woman will ever lose total autonomy, so basically that would be her choice... a choice she can make without any medical records, or even personal knowledge of course. (if a woman doesnt know shes pregnant, she can miscarry too)

[Selfish_Meme]

RichardPol wrote: Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).
Its more usually the fundamentalist religous people using rifles. Ever heard an atheist say lets kill them because they don't believe the same as us.

RichardPol wrote: On the flip side, it is considered to be right, becuase life does not begin when the sperm fertilizes the egg. In most cases, people only count it as alive if it has a heartbeat.
If you are gonna propose a scenario at least get it right. Pro-choicers are not debating whether it is living, they are not debating whether it is human (homo sapiens sapiens), and they are not debating that it is not individual living tissue(albeit non-autonomous). They are saying that it is non-sentient (no feeling), non-reasoning (no thinking), and its right to life is less than that of the mother who is, sentient and reasoning. Therefore it is her ultimately who decides its fate. Since she has that right it cannot be illegal to have unwanted living tissue removed.

RichardPol wrote: Let me give an example story:
A man and a woman, in the heat of the moment, have sex(boy I just get right to the point don't I?) They don't use protection of any kind. The mother becomes pregnant before she is able to use the Morning after Pill(Oh Goodness, another FUN topic) , and wants to get an abortion. The father however, wants to have the baby.

1. Who is more correct?
2. Who's fault is the pregnancy?
3. What is (or was) the best course of action?

ready? GO!
Your question doesn't make any sense because she wouldn't even know she was pregnant, it may even happen later than a day after sex. She still wouldn't know until certain hormones started appearing in her urine about 5 weeks later.

1. There is no correctness here there are just positions in a debate.
2. They are equally at fault for having unprotected sex.
3. The best course of action would be for the woman to make the decision, while taking the man's opinion into consideration. In your scenario he did not offer to support her, you did not state whether she had any important goals she wanted to achieve, though I guess she has since she wants an abortion.

Basically the whole question smells fishy, like someone is trying to prove a case by determining fault. It won't work because fault is not the only determining factor in moral decisions. Otherwise we wouldn't try and cure smokers with cancer.

[Korimyr the Rat]

RichardPol wrote: Let me give an example story:
A man and a woman, in the heat of the moment, have sex(boy I just get right to the point don't I?) They don't use protection of any kind. The mother becomes pregnant before she is able to use the Morning after Pill(Oh Goodness, another FUN topic) , and wants to get an abortion. The father however, wants to have the baby.

*cracks knuckles* Here we go.

RichardPol wrote: 1. Who is more correct?

Neither. They both want different things.

RichardPol wrote: 2. Who's fault is the pregnancy?

Neither, really, or both of them, depending on how you want to look at it. Pregnancy isn't a bad thing, so it's silly to blame anyone for it... but if they didn't want it to happen, they both should have been responsible enough to take precautions.

Their whole argument could've been avoided.

RichardPol wrote: 3. What is (or was) the best course of action?

Best course of action? Assuming he's not married to someone else, she gets the abortion and he goes and has children with a woman who wants them.

If he is-- shame on him-- he and his wife persuade her to carry the child, pay her medical bills, and raise the child as their own. The biological mother stays out of the picture unless her parents want her involved. When the child's old enough, they tell her about her biological mother, so she knows what to put on medical paperwork.

[Sailor Moon]

What difference does wanting it have? They BOTH made their bed.. they really should sleep in it.. its only 9 months..

[Prole]

Welcome, RichardPol, to PCF. I like your honesty. It's refreshing. Like a cold shower, but without the brain freeze.

RichardPol wrote: Abortion has killed(or prevented from living, depending on what side you are on) millions of potential babies.

Oh, no one is denying that abortion has killed millions of potential babies, we are just in contention as to whether a "potential baby" deserves any rights or protection. Heck, a sperm is a potential baby; under certain circumstances it will become a baby. Ditto a preborn human.

RichardPol wrote:
Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).

Don't forget us agnostics! And all the other religious people who believe abortion is amoral and/or should be allowed under certain/any circumstances! Opposing abortion is not a religious position, and while the majority of people believing that abortion is immoral regard themselves as relgious, (in America, at least), the majority of people who support a woman's right to abort are religious as well.

Let me give an example story:
A man and a woman, in the heat of the moment, have sex(boy I just get right to the point don't I?) They don't use protection of any kind. The mother becomes pregnant before she is able to use the Morning after Pill(Oh Goodness, another FUN topic) , and wants to get an abortion. The father however, wants to have the baby.

RichardPol wrote:
1. Who is more correct?

Neither. They both just have different opinions; opinions aren't correct or incorrect.

RichardPol wrote:
2. Who's fault is the pregnancy?

Both of them.

RichardPol wrote:
3. What is (or was) the best course of action?

Again, this is purely a matter of opinion. I believe, though, that woman's opinion is the only what that matters. It would be nice of her to consider the man's views, but ultimately, the decision whether to abort or not lies solely with her.

[Kt]

Kill the child

[lululauren]

1. Who is more correct?

My opinions on abortion have recently changed. I used to be pro-life. I used to feel that all children should be born because there is always the option of adoption. However now that I have lived through SEEING how screwed up this country and this world can get - and how neglected and abused "unwanted" children can be, I've learned that honestly it's probably better off for there to be an abortion option. There are so many children that are available for adoption right now, including TEENAGERS who are hard to adopt out. There are babies, children and teenagers from other countries who would be wonderful for adoption (but for some... apparently skin color and such is a bigger deal than being a good parent). If the couple gets pregnant and there is a difference of opinion between the two that can not be agreed on, then *I* feel it's the woman's choice. I understand that that hurts a lot of men's feelings because they are the father of the child and they are half of the reason why the child was born - but the truth is it really isn't their decision whether or not a woman has to go through the nine months of pregnancy just so that the man COULD run away when the baby is born. If the couple is married then I personally feel that the man has a bit more of a say - but still has no ability to force the woman to go through it. If it's a couple or a one night stand, then he has no rights.

2. Who's fault is the pregnancy?

They're both at "fault".

3. What is (or was) the best course of action?

If abortion is being used as a course of birth control because the woman was too self righteous to protect herself - then the best course of action is for me to stay out of it. *I* don't agree with using abortion as birth control.

If abortion is being used because is was honestly an accident. The woman/parents can't take care of this child. They can't afford it, love it enough and/or stomach the idea of adoption - then honestly it's probably better to just go through with the abortion.

I am on the fence with this topic. It's a very touchy subject. I feel that if life would be better not happening, then don't let it happen.

[The Grandmaster]

RichardPol wrote:
Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).


Yes you’re right, we will. Every time someone pulls out the “god” card, my face lights up like a Christmas tree, and I watch in glee as their position falls apart altogether. I’m like a kid in a candy store, picking them apart. You did well to avoid the god stuff.

[jlrobe]

TheGrandmaster1 wrote: RichardPol wrote:
Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).


Yes you’re right, we will. Every time someone pulls out the “god” card, my face lights up like a Christmas tree, and I watch in glee as their position falls apart altogether. I’m like a kid in a candy store, picking them apart. You did well to avoid the god stuff.

You and me both Grandmaster. Are you religous? I am. Im just curios.

[The Grandmaster]

jlrobe wrote: TheGrandmaster1 wrote: RichardPol wrote:
Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).


Yes you’re right, we will. Every time someone pulls out the “god” card, my face lights up like a Christmas tree, and I watch in glee as their position falls apart altogether. I’m like a kid in a candy store, picking them apart. You did well to avoid the god stuff.

You and me both Grandmaster. Are you religous? I am. Im just curios.

Nope, I am not. I am also staunch Pro-Choice. Welcome to the abortion forums jlrobe, haven't seen you here before.

[jlrobe]

TheGrandmaster1 wrote: jlrobe wrote: TheGrandmaster1 wrote: RichardPol wrote:
Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).


Yes you’re right, we will. Every time someone pulls out the “god” card, my face lights up like a Christmas tree, and I watch in glee as their position falls apart altogether. I’m like a kid in a candy store, picking them apart. You did well to avoid the god stuff.

You and me both Grandmaster. Are you religous? I am. Im just curios.

Nope, I am not. I am also staunch Pro-Choice. Welcome to the abortion forums jlrobe, haven't seen you here before.

Thanks for the welcome. I used to be staunch Pro-Choice, now I am moderate Pro-Choice, if there is such a thing. I just want abortions to be done as a last resort, or at least I would like there to be fewer than 1 in 4 abortions. Maybe 1/40 would be more like it for me.

[Prole]

jlrobe wrote: TheGrandmaster1 wrote: jlrobe wrote: TheGrandmaster1 wrote: RichardPol wrote:
Now, I don't want to get all religious on everyone (becuase the athiests will be able to snipe that from 300 yards away with a high-powerd sniper rifle).


Yes you’re right, we will. Every time someone pulls out the “god” card, my face lights up like a Christmas tree, and I watch in glee as their position falls apart altogether. I’m like a kid in a candy store, picking them apart. You did well to avoid the god stuff.

You and me both Grandmaster. Are you religous? I am. Im just curios.

Nope, I am not. I am also staunch Pro-Choice. Welcome to the abortion forums jlrobe, haven't seen you here before.

Thanks for the welcome. I used to be staunch Pro-Choice, now I am moderate Pro-Choice, if there is such a thing. I just want abortions to be done as a last resort, or at least I would like there to be fewer than 1 in 4 abortions. Maybe 1/40 would be more like it for me.
I believe there is such a thing; people who support abortion up until a certain point. Lesser abortions are generally a goal of both sides, though far more for those who oppose abortions legality, in my experience anyway.

[Selfish_Meme]

Prole wrote: I believe there is such a thing; people who support abortion up until a certain point. Lesser abortions are generally a goal of both sides, though far more for those who oppose abortions legality, in my experience anyway.
Strangely that isn't true, I posted some stats in another thread, in a pro-life organisation 70% were for criminilising abortion, only 7% were interested in measures to prevent the necessity of abortions. Obviously that is a big brush and doesn't represent everybody or every organisation, but it shows where the focus is for pro-life groups.

[Sailor Moon]

Selfish_Meme wrote: Prole wrote: I believe there is such a thing; people who support abortion up until a certain point. Lesser abortions are generally a goal of both sides, though far more for those who oppose abortions legality, in my experience anyway.
Strangely that isn't true, I posted some stats in another thread, in a pro-life organisation 70% were for criminilising abortion, only 7% were interested in measures to prevent the necessity of abortions. Obviously that is a big brush and doesn't represent everybody or every organisation, but it shows where the focus is for pro-life groups.

Youre talking about one organization, and obviously anyone who belongs to either a pro choice or pro life organization is going to have very strong feelings, duh.

[Hecatomb]

Well the fact that you refer to it as a lump of cells put's your stance in clear daylight.. :roll:

Who is more correct? Nobody, if they were correct they wouldn't be in this mess..

Who's fault is the pregnancy? Both for being idiots and not thinking ahead of time..

What is the best course of action? That depends on the laws there..

You could take a morning after pill. Just hop your ass to the pharmacy..

You could have a child, I mean comeon, what's the point of being married and crap if you're not going to EVER have kids? It has to happen at some point..

Or, if I had been running the country, you could've given the child to the state after birth, and not have to worry about the responsibility..