Abortion

Ryom wrote:

it is the womens choice whether or not she wants the baby, note the states or goverment

Like Zealot_Kommunizma said, if it's a living being, you have no right to decide, whether it lives or dies.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Diogritor wrote:

I honestly think its the womans choice. Who am I, A man who does not have to push an 8 Pound thing out of my peehole, to decide what to do with it.

It's not out of a peehole. It's out of an organ conceived for that task.

mattabesta wrote:

exacly it's inhumane and athorityve to force someone to have a baby

Just as I could argue that it's inhumane to kill a human out of a couple's caprice. I have few tolerance to such disregard for life.

im well aware of where it comes from..but where would it come out of a man?

The government has no more right to force a person have a baby than it does to end a the life of a person.

Diogritor wrote:

im well aware of where it comes from..but where would it come out of a man?

Nowehere my friend! We men are not acconditioned for that. (I know Arnold Schwartzenager would like to disagree but...)

oligarch wrote:

The government has no more right to force a person have a baby than it does to end a the life of a person.

However the government may have the obligation to defend a human being's life.

If the embryo is declared a living human being in development (which it actually is) its right to live has a higher priority than the woman's right to decide wether to have it or not.

If there are mechanical and chemical contraceptives, if there is oral and manual sex and if there is celibacy, if a couple counts with all these methods to avoid conception, the only possible reasons for which a woman would get unwillingly pregnant is either:

1. By plain irresponsability: In this case the pregnant woman should assume her responsability and bear "the burden" of a pregnancy, who knows, in the end some of these women may acquire some consciousness and have a little more respect for life.

2. By rape: In my view, while I'm totally against abortion, in this case the pregnant woman has had no fault and can't be obligued to deliver that baby. However, as State, I would greatly try to encourage her to deliver the baby, if she did so, to me she would be examplar and heroic. If after all my attempts to disuade her she still didn't, I would have to accept her will since she can't be obligued to carry the consequences of an act she didn't consent.

3. By failure of a mechanical/chemical contraceptive procedure. For this to be proven a great forensic study would be needed making this reason hard to be taken into account as a valid enough reason. On those basis people planning or wishing to have sex should know that, inspite of being low, having sexual intercourse has probabilities of serious implications.

In a nutshell: For me an embryo/fetus is a human being in development. Not fully developed, not born, but still a human being. It's a living being product of the sexual intercourse of a male and female humans or the mixture of their genetic materials. And it has right to live. Taking its life is a murder which, in my view, can only be justified in the cases I mentioned before:

1. When threattening the life of his/her mother and when none can be saved except by abortion in which the sacrifice of the baby would save the mother's life. If an election has to be made, the mother or father may choose whom to save. If the election depended upon a 3rd party (like the State for example) the situation of that family should be taken into account.

2. In the case of rape after all disuasion of the rape victim has failed.

3. In case of impossible-to-correct-fetal deformations which may imply further complications in the existance of that human being... Though I'm not so convinced about this. (A paralytic man still can have a wonderful mind).

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

oligarch wrote:

The government has no more right to force a person have a baby than it does to end a the life of a person.

However the government may have the obligation to defend a human being's life.

If the embryo is declared a living human being in development (which it actually is) its right to live has a higher priority than the woman's right to decide wether to have it or not.

If there are mechanical and chemical contraceptives, if there is oral and manual sex and if there is celibacy, if a couple counts with all these methods to avoid conception, the only possible reasons for which a woman would get unwillingly pregnant is either:

1. By plain irresponsability: In this case the pregnant woman should assume her responsability and bear "the burden" of a pregnancy, who knows, in the end some of these women may acquire some consciousness and have a little more respect for life.

2. By rape: In my view, while I'm totally against abortion, in this case the pregnant woman has had no fault and can't be obligued to deliver that baby. However, as State, I would greatly try to encourage her to deliver the baby, if she did so, to me she would be examplar and heroic. If after all my attempts to disuade her she still didn't, I would have to accept her will since she can't be obligued to carry the consequences of an act she didn't consent.

3. By failure of a mechanical/chemical contraceptive procedure. For this to be proven a great forensic study would be needed making this reason hard to be taken into account as a valid enough reason. On those basis people planning or wishing to have sex should know that, inspite of being low, having sexual intercourse has probabilities of serious implications.

In a nutshell: For me an embryo/fetus is a human being in development. Not fully developed, not born, but still a human being. It's a living being product of the sexual intercourse of a male and female humans or the mixture of their genetic materials. And it has right to live. Taking its life is a murder which, in my view, can only be justified in the cases I mentioned before:

1. When threattening the life of his/her mother and when none can be saved except by abortion in which the sacrifice of the baby would save the mother's life. If an election has to be made, the mother or father may choose whom to save. If the election depended upon a 3rd party (like the State for example) the situation of that family should be taken into account.

2. In the case of rape after all disuasion of the rape victim has failed.

3. In case of impossible-to-correct-fetal deformations which may imply further complications in the existance of that human being... Though I'm not so convinced about this. (A paralytic man still can have a wonderful mind).

If a fetus can't even think for itself, how can it have the will to live?
And why would you want a person who you say is irresponsible to become a parent against their will.
Also, if you dissuade, someone, you should only encourage them to give the baby to foster parents and if someone is dead set against having a baby, they'll just go to a back ally abortionist or do themselves.

i still think it is up to the mother to decide wether or not she wants the baby, and Zealot_Kommunizma even if she dosent bear the ¨Burden¨ of pregnancy she must now bear the burden if not having her own child

Ryom wrote:

i still think it is up to the mother to decide wether or not she wants the baby, and Zealot_Kommunizma even if she dosent bear the ¨Burden¨ of pregnancy she must now bear the burden if not having her own child

You can't force someone to bear a baby anyway, they'll just get unsafe abortions; thats why minors don't need their guardian's permission or knowledge to get abortion hear in California.

yeah if they get a unsafe abortion that will most likely render them unable to ever have a child again

Ryom wrote:

yeah if they get a unsafe abortion that will most likely render them unable to ever have a child again

Or kill them.

i have never heard of anyone being killed by a unsafe abortion, but i wouldnt be suprised

Ryom wrote:

i have never heard of anyone being killed by a unsafe abortion, but i wouldnt be suprised

It's happened quite a few times actually, people get infections, etc.

that just clearly shows that if someone wants a abortion they will get it, no matter the price.

oligarch wrote:

[
If a fetus can't even think for itself, how can it have the will to live?

I never said it had the will to live, I said it had the right to live. However I'm sure we could argue that if that being, under somewhat hostile conditions, struggled for life, has a will to live.

oligarch wrote:

And why would you want a person who you say is irresponsible to become a parent against their will.

I won't force parenthood upon that couple, I'll simply force that irresponsible woman to have a baby and give that baby to a sterile couple who wants to have one.

oligarch wrote:

Also, if you dissuade, someone, you should only encourage them to give the baby to foster parents and if someone is dead set against having a baby, they'll just go to a back ally abortionist or do themselves.

That's why a fanatically communist secret police is needed. To control such kind of beings as much as possible. And if they're able to cross the barriers of security and attempt to go to a back ally abortionist and succed or attempt it themselves and put their lives at risk, well, that's partially their punishment, I personally don't value such people. Else I would create a gynecological comission that could effectively determine wether a woman has commited some kind of abortion.

And I would execute every back alley abortionist, with as much regard to their lives as I regard the lives of crockoaches.

There are ENOUGH contraceptive measures. If you don't want a baby don't risk to have it.

I myself love sex, I could say that if I have an addiction it would be sex. And I hate condoms, not only are they anti-romantic for me, they do mitigate pleasure. And I also hate yet another contraceptive measure: I wouldn't allow my girl to take any kind of contraceptive pill. Of course if I want to penetrate my girl I will use the damned condoms, I have no choice. It's in great part my responsability (plus it's healthier and safer since it diminishes STD transmission). And yet sometimes, for example, when taking a shower with my girl, there's no damned condom at hand, and I know it's pretty hard to resist the desire to have sex in such a condition. But it's matter of determination, and, anyway there's another kind of sex: oral sex. For those who don't like or enjoy oral sex: First of all don't tell me that "condom isn't romantic" crap because people unable to have oral sex are even more anti-romantic. Then, grow the fuck up, mature. Have sex well or don't have it at all, and don't have sex just for fun. It's a serious matter.

So in conclusion to this matter: Irresponsible sex doesn't deserve any consideration given the fact that there are too many contraceptive methods. In fact I think there even is available some sort of reversile vasectomy... With such contraceptive measures.... there's simply no excuse for an unwanted pregnancy except mere irresponsability or rape.

Ryom wrote:

i still think it is up to the mother to decide wether or not she wants the baby, and Zealot_Kommunizma even if she dosent bear the ¨Burden¨ of pregnancy she must now bear the burden if not having her own child

In my view she loses the right for that decision by omitting contraception.

oligarch wrote:

You can't force someone to bear a baby anyway, they'll just get unsafe abortions; thats why minors don't need their guardian's permission or knowledge to get abortion hear in California.

That's why education is unexpendable and in case of failing secret fanatic polices are unexpendable, in my view.
Some people simply are not responsible enough.

But as I said, if they don't want a baby and have sex and they have omitted contraception (mistake number 1), and consider abortion (mistake number 2), and for being unable to get a "safe abortion" recurr to an unsafe abortion (mistake number 3) they should attain to the consequences of their actions. If they become sterile, be that their punishment, if they die or get another health complication may that be their punishment.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

That's why education is unexpendable and in case of failing secret fanatic polices are unexpendable, in my view.
Some people simply are not responsible enough.

But as I said, if they don't want a baby and have sex and they have omitted contraception (mistake number 1), and consider abortion (mistake number 2), and for being unable to get a "safe abortion" recurr to an unsafe abortion (mistake number 3) they should attain to the consequences of their actions. If they become sterile, be that their punishment, if they die or get another health complication may that be their punishment.

you speak alot about punishment, but shit happends, and everyone deserves a second chance

Ryom wrote:

you speak alot about punishment, but shit happends, and everyone deserves a second chance

In the particular case you quoted I talked even about self-punishment. People which their mistakes lead them directly to a punishment.

And as I said earlier, I wouldn't punish immediately a woman who managed to abort, though I would really call her attention, I would mainly punish those who reincide. As for abortionists 1st time last time, no second chance for them.

I wouldn't have thought there would be a topic I would nearly a hundred percent agree with Zealot, but it's about time. If the mother's life is at risk an abortion may se allowed, also in case of rape, if necessary. But killing an unborn just because you're not ready for it, is a crime and a sin.
If you say consciousness defines a humn being I have to tell you, that according to Freud a baby starts developing consciousness at eightteen months. So according to you, Oligarch, it's okay to kill one year old babies.
I wouldn't go so far as to install a "secret communist police", but doctors with the knowledge of how to perform abortions should be under government watch.

Voice of Reason wrote:

I wouldn't have thought there would be a topic I would nearly a hundred percent agree with Zealot, but it's about time. If the mother's life is at risk an abortion may se allowed, also in case of rape, if necessary. But killing an unborn just because you're not ready for it, is a crime and a sin.
If you say consciousness defines a humn being I have to tell you, that according to Freud a baby starts developing consciousness at eightteen months. So according to you, Oligarch, it's okay to kill one year old babies.
I wouldn't go so far as to install a "secret communist police", but doctors with the knowledge of how to perform abortions should be under government watch.

I object. Let's face it ALL we are is a group of cells working together for common benifit, kinda like communism. a ninetine year old who gets pregnant and is still in colleg has a lot debt to pay off and dosen't have money for a baby dosn't want her baby to grow up poor or in bad conditions. All I´m saying is that most pepole how have an abortion want the best for theyr chldren but arn´t ready et

Voice of Reason wrote:

I wouldn't have thought there would be a topic I would nearly a hundred percent agree with Zealot, but it's about time. If the mother's life is at risk an abortion may se allowed, also in case of rape, if necessary. But killing an unborn just because you're not ready for it, is a crime and a sin.

That is something I have to acknowledge to many catholics and christians in general. Their respect for the lives of unborn humans and the intolerance towards "capricious abortion".

Voice of Reason wrote:

If you say consciousness defines a humn being I have to tell you, that according to Freud a baby starts developing consciousness at eightteen months. So according to you, Oligarch, it's okay to kill one year old babies.

I'm not such a supporter of Freud, but, if we talk about self-awareness and consiousness I do think that is developed indeed after a person is born, and not imediately. Actually not only Freud but many scholars argue that consiousness and self-awareness are acquired precisely through interaction with the environment.

Voice of Reason wrote:

I wouldn't go so far as to install a "secret communist police", but doctors with the knowledge of how to perform abortions should be under government watch.

Well, I don't know the details on how the Obstetrics career is imparted but I think any obstetrician has the knowledge or the way to acquire knowledge on how to perform an abortion. So practically any obstetrician should have to be watched. Anyway I'm more radical than you so I'm really in favour of a zealously communist secret police that would prevent as many of these crimes as possible.

mattabesta wrote:

I object. Let's face it ALL we are is a group of cells working together for common benifit, kinda like communism.

So you're completely a materialist that argues that life is nothing than a series of chemical reactions, right? Well, I personally disagree with you. I believe that a soul exists and that there's something above science in existance, otherwise in my view, we don't exist per se, at least not what we call "I" or "me". But that is another topic and if you want to argue about it, I have opened a thread on the Patheon about that.

mattabesta wrote:

a ninetine year old who gets pregnant and is still in colleg has a lot debt to pay off and dosen't have money for a baby dosn't want her baby to grow up poor or in bad conditions. All I´m saying is that most pepole how have an abortion want the best for theyr chldren but arn´t ready et

First of all, you're talking about a capitalist framework. Indeed, if she gets pregnant and doesn't have enough money and has to finish college and a career and doesn't want to condemn herself and her child to a life of poverty or privation, SHE SHOULDN'T get pregnant.

There are enough contraceptive methods for her not to be pregnant. If already commited the mistake, then, may the implications be her punisment and give the child to a couple that will give that child protection and raise him.

let me tell you guys a little secret, i am adopted, my biological mother was 26 and my dad 26 as well but in the middle of their study, they could just as easliy have chosen a abortion, but they didnt, i wouldnt not have been mad at them because i wouldnt have been alive, of course i am happy to be alive who isnt ? i dont think about it much because their is no reason to my biological mother chose to adopt me, and just like the abortion it is her chose NOT the sates NOT the family NOT the government NOT Zealot_Kommunizmas NOT Voice of Reasons, HERS and no others, and what the hell gives you the right to chose for her ? what almighty power have chosen you to control that ? i bet getting a abortion is hard enough on the mother do you guys really think she needs people like you looking down her neck calling her ¨killer¨ ?

Ryom wrote:

let me tell you guys a little secret, i am adopted, my biological mother was 26 and my dad 26 as well but in the middle of their study, they could just as easliy have chosen a abortion, but they didnt, i wouldnt not have been mad at them because i wouldnt have been alive, of course i am happy to be alive who isnt ? i dont think about it much because their is no reason to my biological mother chose to adopt me, and just like the abortion it is her chose NOT the sates NOT the family NOT the government NOT Zealot_Kommunizmas NOT Voice of Reasons, HERS and no others, and what the hell gives you the right to chose for her ? what almighty power have chosen you to control that ? i bet getting a abortion is hard enough on the mother do you guys really think she needs people like you looking down her neck calling her ¨killer¨ ?

She could have as easily avoided getting pregnant. Once again there is contraception. Simple as that. But well your biological mother did the right choice: SHE GAVE YOU IN ADOPTION. That woman who gave you life is a real human, instead of killing you for acknowledging that she wouldn't be able to sustain you, she decided to give you in adoption. See what a human she is, she bore pregnancy instead of just going to a clinic an get an abortion. I'm very glad for her decision, admirable. That is acknowledging her mistake given her economical and academic conditions and respecting your life.

Many girls in US and unfortunately my Russia go fucking without condom as many times as they wish and they undergo as many abortions as their bodies can handle. People so irresponsible have no right to decide over their baby's life.

What gives me the right to decide for such people? Hmmm.. REASON. If I can prevent a murder I will, and specially if it's a capricous murder.

Killing me ? even if i was ¨killed¨ what difference would it make ? my life havent done much change in this world its a fact, if was ¨killed¨ i dont think the world would have looked much different except some where a poor girl would have been called ¨Mudere¨ and ¨killer¨ by people like you