Abortion - Are You Pro-Choice or Pro-Life?

[geminii]

Completely agree with your point on how abortion is murder. There is no dispute in my opinion for that. It is the ending of the workings of a human life.

Where I find the conflict is whether permitting the act of abortion is justifiable. I think the idea of the lesser of two evils applies here. If a circumstance presented itself whereby the mothers life was in danger then I would see abortion as the more "humane" option to choose. Another example would be if some woman accidentally got pregnant and wanted an abortion. I would see that as immoral and would deny it.

Do I think abortion should be allowed? No
Do I think abortion is murder? Yes
Do I think abortion is as bad as a terrorist? No. I think it's unfair to draw that comparison, while they're both in essence the ending of a human life one is with more malicious intent then the other and therefore considered a greater evil.

Interesting discussion ya'll

Agree with most of what you said

Agreed as well. If nothing is going to stop those wanting abortions you may as well let them do it safely and reduce the risks. It's an immoral act but doing it properly is the less evil practice imo

I don't think we should encourage it, though. Giving women more access to abortion clinics will only make it easier for them to get abortions, probably resulting in more dead babies. It should be discouraged, not encouraged.

Ok I'm going to bed now because I need to sleep but I'll be back tomorrow

If you think abortion is bad since its murder.. let me ask you a few q's
- Is killing terrorists bad?
- Is killing rapists bad?
- Should gun man who go on rampages be killed?
- Should child beaters  be killed?

I'll just add my 2 cents while I'm still here - personally, I think no, no, yes, no (they should be jailed, assuming they haven't killed the child). Thing is, terrorists, rapists, gunmen and childbeaters have done something wrong, whereas a foetus has literally done none of these things.

It hasn't murdered anyone.
It hasn't bombed a city.
It hasn't beat a child or went on a shooting rampage. Therefore this comparison doesn't really work. We should compare abortion to the killing of an absolutely innocent being, who has committed no crime. So let me ask you this:

Is it ok for a mother to kill her three year old child, if they are living in poverty and she cannot afford to care for the child? After all, what I've heard a lot of people say here is that death is better than a life in bad circumstances.

[heids]

I'll talk about your comments tomorrow, but before I sleep, I want to ask one opinion of you, geminii:

What's your opinion of the ethics of suicide?

[EEEEEEP]

I'll just add my 2 cents while I'm still here - personally, I think no, no, yes, no (they should be jailed, assuming they haven't killed the child). Thing is, terrorists, rapists, gunmen and childbeaters have done something wrong, whereas a foetus has literally done none of these things.

It hasn't murdered anyone.
It hasn't bombed a city.
It hasn't beat a child or went on a shooting rampage. Therefore this comparison doesn't really work. We should compare abortion to the killing of an absolutely innocent being, who has committed no crime. So let me ask you this:

Is it ok for a mother to kill her three year old child, if they are living in poverty and she cannot afford to care for the child? After all, what I've heard a lot of people say here is that death is better than a life in bad circumstances.

Fair answer, and fairly consistent if I say so myself.

You do propose a good question and I agree with what other say (that is that it is okay). I've seen documentaries where kids live awful lives and the babies die a slow painful death, diseases, hunger, dissentry, you name it.

[Wales]

Agree with most of what you said

I don't think we should encourage it, though. Giving women more access to abortion clinics will only make it easier for them to get abortions, probably resulting in more dead babies. It should be discouraged, not encouraged.

Ok I'm going to bed now because I need to sleep but I'll be back tomorrow

I'll just add my 2 cents while I'm still here - personally, I think no, no, yes, no (they should be jailed, assuming they haven't killed the child). Thing is, terrorists, rapists, gunmen and childbeaters have done something wrong, whereas a foetus has literally done none of these things.

It hasn't murdered anyone.
It hasn't bombed a city.
It hasn't beat a child or went on a shooting rampage. Therefore this comparison doesn't really work. We should compare abortion to the killing of an absolutely innocent being, who has committed no crime. So let me ask you this:

Is it ok for a mother to kill her three year old child, if they are living in poverty and she cannot afford to care for the child? After all, what I've heard a lot of people say here is that death is better than a life in bad circumstances.

No it is not okay. I see it as whilst death may be the easier and better option it eliminates any chance of hope. It is not okay by any means. I can understand the motive behind it but it does not make it okay. Same for abortions.

[Wales]

I'll talk about your comments tomorrow, but before I sleep, I want to ask one opinion of you, geminii:

What's your opinion of the ethics of suicide?

Not geminii but I'll answer it because I'm bored.

Against it. You're giving hope up. While you may be in a unfit state you still have the ability to impact another persons life. As long as somebody is alive they should continuously strive to make an impact. A person who is in a hospital bed will directly affect those surrounding.

Is it fair to compare voluntary euthanasia with suicide?

[elysepopplewell]

As long as somebody is alive they should continuously strive to make an impact.

I love this sentiment - but it's just not the case. Even people in a well state of mind don't always strive to make an impact, and I think it's unfair to expect people dealing with traumas and torments that are so internalised and difficult to comprehend.

[sudodds]

Saying "murder is murder" is putting women who get raped and impregnated, then choose to get an abortion, in the same category as a terrorist. Whether you want to do that or not, that is what it is.

I agree.

I'm actually dumbfounded by this comment. I'm trying so hard to be respectful here, but irrespective of whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, that statement is just so incredibly simplistic. According to this logic, a 13-year-old who is raped and aborts the result (which at that point is an unconscious cluster of cells) so that they can continue to live "normally" is morally equivalent to an individual who makes a conscious effort to, for no apparent reason other than ideology or a twisted understanding of religion, kill and torture multiple people. I just...

[Wales]

I love this sentiment - but it's just not the case. Even people in a well state of mind don't always strive to make an impact, and I think it's unfair to expect people dealing with traumas and torments that are so internalised and difficult to comprehend.

I suppose my perspective is a bit idealistic. I don't think the impact has to directly be as a result of the ill individual though. Like I mentioned, simply their presence may have in influence on those around them.

I wish to say that in my final moment I wish to cling onto life as long as I can without interference but I cannot guarantee anything as I have not experience those levels of pain.

[EEEEEEP]

Against it. You're giving hope up. While you may be in a unfit state you still have the ability to impact another persons life. As long as somebody is alive they should continuously strive to make an impact. A person who is in a hospital bed will directly affect those surrounding.

Is it fair to compare voluntary euthanasia with suicide?

Impact someone or the people around them in a negative way.

Have you ever seen someones face, when they are constantly visiting someone who is effectively mindless or in terminal pain? It isn't pretty to watch or be around. It is actually painful to see someone be on life support or w/e.

I guess I have some bias in this post as I have seen people pass away in such a manner.

[Wales]

Impact someone or the people around them in a negative way.

Have you ever seen someones face, when they are constantly visiting someone who is effectively mindless or in terminal pain? It isn't pretty to watch or be around.

I have been one of those. It is not pretty to watch. It's painful. However the persons presence has impacted me. Being in their presence allows me to reflect and discover upon myself. I would not have wanted to end it any earlier then it did.

When it comes to the discussion of these topics personal bias is always a factor. It's unavoidable really.

[jamonwindeyer]

I'm actually dumbfounded by this comment. I'm trying so hard to be respectful here, but irrespective of whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, that statement is just so incredibly simplistic. According to this logic, a 13-year-old who is raped and aborts the result (which at that point is an unconscious cluster of cells) so that they can continue to live "normally" is morally equivalent to an individual who makes a conscious effort to, for no apparent reason other than ideology or a twisted understanding of religion, kill and torture multiple people. I just...

I agree - Like again, all respect for all due etc etc. It's why we're here. But the fact that you are willing to lump those two groups of people together like that, without any sort of disclaimer or condition on the statement... I think you'd be hard pressed to find even the most passionate of pro-life advocates who would be willing to make that comparison.

[K888]

It was discussed a few pages back I think, but I would just like to jump in here and say that mifepristone (RU486) is not the same as the morning after pill/emergency contraception.
Emergency contraceptive pills basically prevent or delay the release of an egg from the ovary. If a fertilised egg has already implanted in the womb, it will not cause an abortion.
Mifepristone, or RU486, causes a medical abortion - it basically brings on a miscarriage of the foetus, I think by blocking the action of progesterone (progesterone is needed for a pregnancy to be viable).

Have no desires to get involved in a debate but would like to give my 2 cents - abortions will happen whether they are legal or not. It is our responsibility then, I think, to provide an environment in which abortions can happen safely, and in an environment where women are not judged for the choice they are making. Everyone has a universal right to healthcare access.

Someone said earlier that having an abortion can lead to fertility issues later in life, etc. - I would like very much to see you provide some evidence to back up what you said.

[Russ]

Someone said earlier that having an abortion can lead to fertility issues later in life, etc. - I would like very much to see you provide some evidence to back up what you said.

I must have missed that when checking the thread. Can you link me, because I expect appropriate evidence or retraction for a fearmongering claim like that. There is no clear evidence that termination in the abstract will lead to significant fertility problems, except in specific circumstances. The long term safety of the procedure is endorsed by the various professional bodies. I'm sure somebody will tell me it causes breast cancer as well though.

Take it from someone who has done abortion counselling professionally, you people are all banging your heads against a wall. I've never seen people that aren't indifferent to start with, reach an accord on this.

[Joseph41]

Well done all on an interesting thread regarding a morally complicated topic.

All murder is bad, if I think abortion is wrong and then meet people who have had abortions, what am I supposed to do? If I express my opinion, it's bullying according to elysepopplewell.

I think it's quite clearly the case that what you've described is not what Elyse was contending.

There's nothing stopping you from expressing your opinion; you did it in that very post. You're not bullying anybody - you're just expressing your opinion, which is perfectly legitimate and perfectly okay.

But there's clearly a difference between doing that, and expressing one's opinion in an unnecessarily provocative, mean-spirited and aggressive way. Verbally abusing those getting abortions directly outside a medical clinic during a time quite likely to already be traumatic and painful, is simply not okay.

If I don't like your hat, I can say, "I don't like your hat."
But if I wait for you at a hat store as you go about your business of buying hats, and abuse you for the hat you choose, and intentionally make you feel uncomfortable for the sake of it - well, that's just bullying.

[geminii]

I'm actually dumbfounded by this comment. I'm trying so hard to be respectful here, but irrespective of whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, that statement is just so incredibly simplistic. According to this logic, a 13-year-old who is raped and aborts the result (which at that point is an unconscious cluster of cells) so that they can continue to live "normally" is morally equivalent to an individual who makes a conscious effort to, for no apparent reason other than ideology or a twisted understanding of religion, kill and torture multiple people. I just...

All I'm hearing here are feelings, you're just saying "I just... " That's not an argument, nor is it a fact, I want a reason why abortions aren't worse than terrorist attacks. The only reason I've been given is this:

Do I think abortion is as bad as a terrorist? No. I think it's unfair to draw that comparison, while they're both in essence the ending of a human life one is with more malicious intent then the other and therefore considered a greater evil.

This is a fair point. However, it's still murder.
Let me ask you three questions:
1. Would the premeditated murder of a woman by her husband be worse than the murder of a child by his father who accidentally ran over him?
2. If a woman and a child were kidnapped, and the kidnapper gave you the chance to save the life of one of them, which one would you choose?
3. If you were given the choice of saving 2 25-year-old adults' lives, or 85,000 3-month-old babies' lives, which one would you choose?

I'll talk about your comments tomorrow, but before I sleep, I want to ask one opinion of you, geminii:

What's your opinion of the ethics of suicide?

Nice question. As someone who suffered from depression, I have considered it however I never really thought about it seriously - and boy am I glad it never came to that.

I'm undecided on elective suicide - I understand someone who may have a terminal illness and is in pain may want to end their own life, and I guess that's their choice - but I certainly wouldn't encourage someone to do it. However in my own head there's that rebuttal again of, if it's not their time, they shouldn't play God and decide to end their own life. But then again that's a religious argument which not everyone would identify with. For the atheists/agnostics out there, what I mean by this is basically close to saying, 'they should let nature take its course'.

I believe that if someone wanted to commit suicide because of depression, I would strongly advise them not to, and I would do my best to convince them otherwise, because depression is often temporary, like in my case, and it really does get better. So I guess for me it depends on the reasoning.

I'm not 'against' suicide or anything. I really dislike it, and I think it should never be an option, and I will do my best to convince someone not to go through with it, but to say I'm against suicide to someone who's considering it might reduce their mental state even more. So I never say I'm 'against' it, per say. I really, really dislike it.