Abortion

[ripley]

Hey, hold it right there, I'm right about everything!

I don't think your points have much bearing on the ethics of the situation. The ethical demand that considers the foetus' life more important than others' convenience would hold regardless of the type of person who invokes it, whether they are male, female, premiership footballer or dwarf.

first, you persist in discussing "convenience." please stop ignoring the fact that it childbearing is actually life-threatening, first of all. And beyond that 9 months of incredibly intimate and constant servitude (in which your body is 24hour at the service of another in what is often painful and tiring ways), loss of job and livelihood, loss of educational opportunity, potential loss of partner or other social connections (having a baby can be totally isolating), these are not trivial. Do you really think that all that goes into bearing and raising a child is :convenience"? isn't it rather more important than that? if it is so important, why should it be enforced on a happenstance?

beyond that, your equation (fetus vs. all) is a false and easy one. that equation leads to systematic inequality, because it does not account for all the costs to people involved in creating a fetus, and how those costs are distributed. it's not just fetus vs. others' individual rights, it is fetus vs. the systematic enforcement of women's inequality - and that inequality is not "natural" since (as I pointed out before), nature 'allows' abortion alongside lots of other things. It's true nature has only women get pregnant, but after that nature has little to do with fetal survival. In nature, women could kill the foetus any number of ways. this seems hard for people to grasp, but it is society that forces childbearing on women, not nature.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

first, you persist in discussing "convenience." please stop ignoring the fact that it childbearing is actually life-threatening, first of all. And beyond that 9 months of incredibly intimate and constant servitude (in which your body is 24hour at the service of another in what is often painful and tiring ways), loss of job and livelihood, loss of educational opportunity, potential loss of partner or other social connections (having a baby can be totally isolating), these are not trivial.

Very seldom life-threatening (at least in the West) - http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/80743.php; inconvenient in different ways, none of which would justify killing anybody out of the womb.

 

[Martin Dust]

but it is society that forces childbearing on women, not nature.

Ermmm...What?

 

[bassnation]

Very seldom life-threatening (at least in the West) - http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/80743.php; inconvenient in different ways, none of which would justify killing anybody out of the womb.

childbirth is fucking difficult and can be dangerous, either for the child, the mum or both. i've witnessed two births now, and believe me our anatomy makes it very difficult compared to other mammals to get the baby out - mainly the size of the brain and the fact we are bipedal which makes it so. even so recently as 80 years ago 1 in 8 women died during childbirth. theres every indication that its getting more dangerous in the uk, due to the chronic shortage of midwives.

i'm not going to comment on the morality beyond saying its a womans choice. funny how these discussions is always a bunch of men sitting round wailing how wrong it is, when they'll never have to carry a baby or make such a difficult decision as to terminate.

 

[bassnation]

I still don't know why, if women are dead set against having a baby, they don't just make a special effort to avoid getting knocked up in the first place. Unless the pregnancy is forced, it's just a question of mismanagement.

this is ludicrous and sexist. so its totally a womans responsbility??? wtf? if more men had the ability to face up to their responsibilities maybe less women would abort. i view statements like yours as being totally indicative of this attitude.

bet you don't have kids either and probably no experience of the soul destroying drudgery that is being a parent, at times. theres already too many fucking people in the world, we don't need more unwanted babies.

 

[Mr. Tea]

this is ludicrous and sexist. so its totally a womans responsbility??? wtf? if more men had the ability to face up to their responsibilities maybe less women would abort. i view statements like yours as being totally indicative of this attitude.

I don't think it's sexist, beyond that fact it's 'sexist' that it's women and not men that have babies.
If the consequences of pregnancy affect the woman more than the man (which they clearly do), is it not therefore more the woman's responsibility to avoid pregnancy if she doesn't want to become pregnant?

That said, if the woman actually has the baby, then I'd say she and the father definitely have equal responsility towards it.

 

[bassnation]

I don't think it's sexist, beyond that fact it's 'sexist' that it's women and not men that have babies.
If the consequences of pregnancy affect the woman more than the man (which they clearly do), is it not therefore more the woman's responsibility to avoid pregnancy if she doesn't want to become pregnant?

That said, if the woman actually has the baby, then I'd say she and the father definitely have equal responsility towards it.

it takes two people to make a baby and contraception is as easily available for men as it is for women, christ, does no-one use a bloody condom anymore, lol.

its a shared commitment. if men had to carry the baby and commit to bringing up the child like women do, you can bet your mortgage they'd be more in favour of abortion, simple as that. women grow up, men don't. i don't think most people who've argued in favour of the pro-life position would be able to handle that kind of responsibility, to be honest.

 

[Mr. Tea]

f men had to carry the baby and commit to bringing up the child like women do, you can bet your mortgage they'd be more in favour of abortion, simple as that.

Two things:
1) If men had babies, they'd be women. It's pointless to hypothesise about this.
2) Most of abortion's most vociferous opponents are women.

women grow up, men don't.

What the hell is that meant to mean? Are you going to start wibbling on about how women can't drive and men can't cook (LOL!!!)?

i don't think most people who've argued in favour of the pro-life position would be able to handle that kind of responsibility, to be honest.

Well if they're that pro-life then they presumably would use contraception if they wanted to avoid having kids, wouldn't you say?

 

[bassnation]

What the hell is that meant to mean? Are you going to start wibbling on about how women can't drive and men can't cook (LOL!!!)

let me explain it in simpler terms for you then.

people like you and mixed_biscuits aren't even prepared to take responsbility for your part of the bargain, apparently this is mainly down to the woman. but you are quite happy to sit there wittering about how a woman should put her entire fucking life on hold to bring up a kid. if you can't even commit to one tiny responsibility (and it is as much your thing as hers, lets not beat around the bush) then don't lecture others about what they should commit their entire lives to (in this case a child).

this is what i mean by the fact that most women grow up fast, but a lot of men can't, won't and ultimately, don't.

seems pretty bleeding obvious to me.

and like i said upthread i bet you don't have kids.

 

[Mr. Tea]

So from the content of my posts, you've deduced that I never, ever use condoms and basically couldn't care less if I got my girflfriend pregnant. Well done, that's a really Sherlock Holmes-standard bit of detective work, I have to say.

How exactly do you think I'd feel if I unintentionally got a woman pregnant? I specifically mentioned upthread that it's certainly not consequence-free for a man to impregnate a woman - quite apart from the obvious financial aspect of it, there's the far more important emotion involvement in having (potentially) fathered a child.
As I've said before, I think it's a good thing, on balance, that we have abortion available in this country: my corollary to that was that I don't think a lot of the arguments put forward in favour of it are particularly good, and just because I think it ought to be legal, doesn't mean it doesn't still have some thorny ethical issues surrounding it.

Has it occurred to you that I might not want to be the father of an unwanted baby? For you to assume that because I'm questioning some of these issues that I'd happily go around sticking my dick here, there and everywhere and then say "Oh, sorry love, looks like you should have been more careful!" if a pregnancy were to result, is both idiotic and insulting.

Edit: no, I don't have kids. This is because my girlfriend and I - jointly - take responsibility for making sure this doesn't happen. And if I did have kids I'd take good care of them and bring them up to the best of my abilities.

 

[Martin Dust]

let me explain it in simpler terms for you then.

people like you and mixed_biscuits aren't even prepared to take responsbility for your part of the bargain, apparently this is mainly down to the woman. but you are quite happy to sit there wittering about how a woman should put her entire fucking life on hold to bring up a kid. if you can't even commit to one tiny responsibility (and it is as much your thing as hers, lets not beat around the bush) then don't lecture others about what they should commit their entire lives to (in this case a child).

this is what i mean by the fact that most women grow up fast, but a lot of men can't, won't and ultimately, don't.

seems pretty bleeding obvious to me.

and like i said upthread i bet you don't have kids.

That's you told, now get to bed with no supper

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Why is there such a strong correlation between being fervently pro-abortion and failing to use capital letters? :slanted:

 

[Mr. Cheese]

Why is there such a strong correlation between being fervently pro-abortion and failing to use capital letters? :slanted:

It’s PoMo, isn’t it? By the way, Mr. Tea is so on the money on this thread he deserves a prize.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

It’s PoMo, isn’t it? By the way, Mr. Tea is so on the money on this thread he deserves a prize.

PoMo is good in Scrabble now and can therefore be written pomo!

 

[vimothy]

I mean, who calls themselves 'pro-death', for fuck's sake?), I just find the arguments used by some of the more vociferous pro-choicers a bit specious.

Pro-death - sounds like a good name for a metal band!

 

[Mr. Tea]

It’s PoMo, isn’t it? By the way, Mr. Tea is so on the money on this thread he deserves a prize.

Cheers, Mr. Cheese.

 

[nomadologist]

oh please. Until any of you find yourself pregnant I don't think your opinions on abortion matter much. It's simply not your decision to make.

Someday when you get pregnant accidentally and can neither afford to take care of a child, nor wish to have one with whomever you may have slept with, get back to me about the "ethical issues" surrounding abortion.

It's always hilarious to read men's opinions on this. Because they are so unqualified.

 

[nomadologist]

It’s PoMo, isn’t it? By the way, Mr. Tea is so on the money on this thread he deserves a prize.

"pomo" is a perfectly acceptable form of that word

 

[Mr. Tea]

It's always hilarious to read men's opinions on this. Because they are so unqualified.

So you have to have experienced something personally to have the right to an opinion on it, do you?
Right, I'm just off to Texas to kill someone so I can get myself on death row and therefore be entitled to an opinion on capital punishment, back on a tick...

 

[nomadologist]

The implicit (occasionally explicit) assumption of your posts is that women have abortions because a baby would be too "inconvenient" or because they were too lazy/stupid to use birth control (and thus deserve the "punishment" of a baby which the man, who in many cases decided not to wrap his own shit up, faces nothing of the sort, by your own previous admission). These one-dimensional characterizations really need to be left out of any meaningful debate on abortion.

Yes, this is a huge problem with all of these arguments. There are plenty of medical reasons (I suffer from two of them now and used to suffer from three) why many women can't take hormonal birth control (for example, one was the fact that I was on topamax for bipolar disorder and raging migraines/seizures, and it renders birth control ineffective.)

Because I had no more reliable form of birth control to rely upon other than condoms (which apparently can be defective without you knowing or noticing), I got pregnant once. I knew because I felt TERRIBLE. AWFUL. I couldnt' eat a single bite of food. I felt like I had the worst motion sickness you'd ever experience. And I was only a few weeks along.

So I got an abortion at a clinic. Waves of joy and relief washed over me when that shit was over with. I wasn't put under so it was ridiculously painful, and far from "convenient." I don't mind talking about it because I'm not ashamed and I don't think I did anything wrong. It wasn't a "hard" decision to make, either. I knew immediately that whether a fetus is a person or not is really irrelevant when you're 21-years-old, a barely employed bipolar junkie with no chance in hell that you could raise a child properly in a manner I think all children deserve.

Convenience has nothing to do with it. I don't think adding insult to injury by forcing a child to bear the brunt of my accidents in life is a very ethical thing to do either.