Abortion

CoolKidX wrote:

Liche wrote:

They don't make as much of a deal when you kill a grown man during war.

maybe because the baby is innocent, and not corrupt by life.

Hmm yea what about the thousands of inocent civialns that are killed in an war?

There is a whole deal about it actually. Didn't you know? If this claim was true it would be relevant but it isn't so it's not. Abortion is the topic here.

I'm just saying u guys are all bissy about killing a baby that dosnt even know what's happning, if there are civilans being killed.
So in my eyes killing a baby that dosnt know something is not that big a deal if you see all those ppl die.

CoolKidX wrote:

I'm just saying u guys are all bissy about killing a baby that dosnt even know what's happning, if there are civilans being killed.

Actually we point at both crimes.

CoolKidX wrote:

So in my eyes killing a baby that dosnt know something is not that big a deal if you see all those ppl die.

Ok, that's your view but guess what? Both phenomena have attention. No one is disregarding civilian casualties in war or genocides because of abortion. Specially us. So that's why that topic is irrelevant here.

If there are civilian casualties or not in a war, that's completely unlinked to wether abortion is correct or not since the 1st is not being disregarded by the later.

Well its good we handle both problems.

CoolKidX wrote:

Well its good we handle both problems.

Yes, and this thread is place for one of them only.

Liche wrote:

They don't make as much of a deal when you kill a grown man during war.

RIP Carlin.

As for abortion, I support it being the choice of the women, and a way to generally let women escape from traditional class roles, and the aim should be to reduce abortion through society in socialism. However, in capitalism, banning abortion is frankly rather idiotic. The rich will still get abortions, it is the workers that will suffer, having to rely on unsafe abortion techniques and coat hangers.
I've been for legal abortion for ages, but I'll sum it up with a quote from the SLP, "Only when working-class men and women join in a classconscious movement to destroy capitalism and to establish a socialist society that will improve education and family planning, develop better and safer methods of contraception, eliminate poverty, ignorance and repressive sexual moralities, and provide adequate day care facilities will the choice to have or not to have children become a truly free human decision, uncompromised by economic considerations or legal restrictions."
Basically, leave the abortion debate until successful socialist revolution. Perhaps by then there will be better education in terms of contraception, perhaps even more reliable contraception, and basically abortion rates should go down. Contraception doesn't work 100% of the time, so what are you going to do to women who got pregnant during safe sex? Ask for the condom used as evidence? Sex is a human instinct.

In capatalism you can get a abortion to Stos.

You know in China you got very much abortions cause you can only have 1 child there and they mostly prefer having boys cause they got soemthing with better jobs or somethin O.o

And in capatalist countries abortion isnt idotic, maybe in 1 country but not in most.

Of course you can get an abortion in capitalism, I'm just opposing those that wish to keep capitalism and also ban abortion. It makes no sense.

Also, the abortion debate is fairly boring. That's why I'm bringing capitalism into it, it's at least different from the general abortion debate, which is basically a game of 'abortion is murder' 'no it's not'.

Stos wrote:

which is basically a game of 'abortion is murder' 'no it's not'.

Chirsitans against femnists

Pro-Choice here.

Could not resist XP

Stos wrote:

As for abortion, I support it being the choice of the women, and a way to generally let women escape from traditional class roles, and the aim should be to reduce abortion through society in socialism.

I agree that the aim should be to counter abortion through social development, yet are you implying that a positive point of abortion is that women can "escape their traditional roles"? Like it lets women "revolt from opression"?

Stos wrote:

However, in capitalism, banning abortion is frankly rather idiotic. The rich will still get abortions, it is the workers that will suffer, having to rely on unsafe abortion techniques and coat hangers.

I agree that banning abortion in capitalism is idiotic, in my view as idiotic as trying to apply any moral code since capital can invalidate any. However, the discussion on wether it is murder or not is in my view important because, after all, it demonstrates the moral values of those supporting and opposing it.

Why would socialists debate about abortion? Well, will we accept abortion into a socialist society if we get to the consensus it is murder and it is unjustified within a socialist framework? In my view it is understandable in the capitalist framework yet not acceptable. I've known to many cases of very poor workers which inspite of being provided safe abortion have chosen to keep their undesired children and raise them accepting the implications of their actions. I have to put them as my moral standard to follow in socioeconomic cases. People must always be responsible.

I understand capitalism doesn't provide sufficient information, disemination and facilities to acquire or put into practice safe contraceptive methods, but, in my view, the existance of capitalism does not justify what I consider the murder of an innocent human being.

Stos wrote:

Basically, leave the abortion debate until successful socialist revolution.

I've made my point above.

Stos wrote:

Perhaps by then there will be better education in terms of contraception, perhaps even more reliable contraception, and basically abortion rates should go down.

Not "perhaps", but it should be so, otherwise there's no socialist success. Else, within a socialist framework I'm utterely convinced that there is absolutely no excuse for abortion.

Stos wrote:

Contraception doesn't work 100% of the time, so what are you going to do to women who got pregnant during safe sex? Ask for the condom used as evidence? Sex is a human instinct.

This is a prime importance issue. If I have the knowledge that no matter which contraceptive method I use there is at least 1 in a million posibilities that my couple gets pregnant and she knows that too. I have to know pregnancy is a possible implication of sex. No matter what. If no contraceptive method is 100% effective (and none is except celibacy or avoiding vaginal sex) then Pregancy is an implication and if it happens it is FULLY the responsability of those practicing the sexual intercourse. You practiced safe sex and got pregnant? Bad luck then, you knew it could happen regardless of all contraceptive measures.

Should society provide in that case abortion? In my personal view, since abortion is objectively a murder and society provides with all the facilities to have a child and raise him properly, there is no reason to allow it.

Pregnancy is a possible implication of sex, people know it, do it at your own risk of getting pregnant and don't expect me to agree with you killing a child out of mere caprice.

Hutin wrote:

A kid under 3 months isn't born nor awake . He don't talk, he don't volunteerly interact...he is on his way to be human, but he is not yet a person. It's not immoral to stop his development , it's not a murder.

i must confess, i agree with hutin on this one.

Alek4A wrote:

Hutin wrote:

A kid under 3 months isn't born nor awake . He don't talk, he don't volunteerly interact...he is on his way to be human, but he is not yet a person. It's not immoral to stop his development , it's not a murder.

i must confess, i agree with hutin on this one.

It is a human in development still. The same conditions can be applied at 4.5 months yet there are babies that have been born healthy at such an early phase of development. Life starts at conception from any possible point of view.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Alek4A wrote:

Hutin wrote:

A kid under 3 months isn't born nor awake . He don't talk, he don't volunteerly interact...he is on his way to be human, but he is not yet a person. It's not immoral to stop his development , it's not a murder.

i must confess, i agree with hutin on this one.

It is a human in development still. The same conditions can be applied at 4.5 months yet there are babies that have been born healthy at such an early phase of development. Life starts at conception from any possible point of view.

rape isn't casual sex either, but either way both persons have an orgasm.

Liche wrote:

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Alek4A wrote:

Hutin wrote:

A kid under 3 months isn't born nor awake . He don't talk, he don't volunteerly interact...he is on his way to be human, but he is not yet a person. It's not immoral to stop his development , it's not a murder.

i must confess, i agree with hutin on this one.

It is a human in development still. The same conditions can be applied at 4.5 months yet there are babies that have been born healthy at such an early phase of development. Life starts at conception from any possible point of view.

rape isn't casual sex either, but either way both persons have an orgasm.

if you have ever tried to pleasure a girl, you know that is not true.

only 1 in 4 girls report being able to reach orgasm during the physical act of intercourse. i severely doubt that rape victims are among that minority

many ware, its a big world

Alek4A wrote:

only 1 in 4 girls report being able to reach orgasm during the physical act of intercourse. i severely doubt that rape victims are among that minority

I have to agree with this, but this is going off-topic so lets shut it.

Liche, no more off-topic please.

1 in for girls getting raped will have an orgasm, how about that?

wow

I feel like an ass

don't even remember typing that....


will you guts for give me

I changed my mind, abortion should be accessible for everyone, but legal only when the phoetus is younger than 3 months...also, we must make sure that the mother can find affordable psychological help.

Hutin wrote:

I changed my mind, abortion should be accessible for everyone, but legal only when the phoetus is younger than 3 months...also, we must make sure that the mother can find affordable psychological help.

Psychological help for what? For the trauma of not being able to handle te consequences of her actions?

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Hutin wrote:

I changed my mind, abortion should be accessible for everyone, but legal only when the phoetus is younger than 3 months...also, we must make sure that the mother can find affordable psychological help.

Psychological help for what? For the trauma of not being able to handle te consequences of her actions?

If i get raped(and if i was a girl) i would like to forgot being raped -.-

And it also could be an accident.

CoolKidX wrote:

If i get raped(and if i was a girl) i would like to forgot being raped -.-

And it also could be an accident.

Yet, Hutin is not adressing rape but abortion, at least from what he says in his post.