Why I'm Pro-Life & My Answers To Pro-Choice Arguments

[curiousnorway]

I'm a pro-lifer and in this controversial MyTake I'm going to share my opinion with you.

I think seeing the value in a human life is important. Nobody should have the authority to decide who has and hasn't the right to live. It's both making a sorting society and is making a society where some lives are seen as more significant than others more acceptable. 9 of 10 women in my country Norway is undergoing abortion if they get to know their children have downs syndrome or other medical conditions.

I knows about a lot of people who can live a happy life despite their conditions and it shouldn't be an excuse to taking away someone's right to live. I don't think a human gets lesser worth just because of their disability. Regardless of your child do have a disability or not, it's possible to live a happy life. When you're choosing to have children, there's no guarantee your children would be exactly how you imagined them and when you plans getting children you've to keep in mind that they can turn out completely different than expected. Many choose to get children and they've to take the consequences. Children is responsibility.

By nature sex wasn't meant for pleasure only, but also to procreate.

Even parents who didn't plan to have children are in most cases responsible. When people are choosing to have penetrative sex it's a risk of impregnation and sex is part of the reproduction process. By nature it wasn't meant for pleasure only, but also to procreate. Nowadays it exists several types of contraception people can use. If people are hundred percent sure they don't want to have children both sterilization and none-penetrative sex is also some options. So in most cases people have a choice and can choose to prevent a pregnancy without the need of any abortions. Choosing to let the child live when you first gets pregnant and adopt it away if you're not able to take care of it is also an option if you've been accidentally impregnated.

My answer to pro-abortion arguments:

1) What about the women's rights?

This hasn't anything to do with discrimination of a gender. I would be pro-life regardless if it was a male or a female who could get pregnant. I'm also against killing in general speaking regardless of the person's gender. Children can be either a male or a female anyway, so is it still discrimination toward the mother if her child is also a female?

2) Her body, her choice

Yes, the child is depended on the mother's body and is inside her body, but that do still not change that the child has it's own body too. The child don't have a say what would happen with their body and the child's body is not the mother's body. They're separate individuals with two different bodies.

Another thing I want to add is that an already born child would be depended on their parents and has the right to be taken care of them until the legal adult age. If the parents don't do that, they're not doing their jobs as a parent. So if the parents can get away without taking responsibility for the child who's depended on them pre-birth, then it would also apply to post-birth with that logic. Both an unborn and a born child is depended on their parents. Without anyone to take care of them they won't survive.

3) What about incest, rape etc?

More than 90% of the cases are consenting sex between the male and the female. The rape cases is under 1%. Incest and the cases where the mother's life is in danger is also very rare. These cases shouldn't be justifying the 95% + of the abortion cases. Just because someone wronged you don't automatically make your child guilty in that. The child is innocent and shouldn't go punished for someone else's crimes. I do however support saving the mothers life in cases where it's one survive or both dies.

Just because the child is resembling the rapist; a person the victim don't like don't mean she has the right to kill it. If my neighbor resembled a person I didn't like, did it give me the right to kill him? If I knows an unwanted person I don't like and don't want to exist, can I go and kill him like the mother may do toward her unwanted child? If the answer is no, then it should apply to both scenarios, or it would be double moral.

4) What if she's poor?

Poverty shouldn't be an excuse for not letting someone live. If the government gave poor families support, lesser had to undergo abortion.

As a social-democrat I think it's the government's responsibility for the population having a good living standard. I think a welfare state is the solution on this. The government should provide free healthcare and education. In addition the country should have a program which helps economically disadvantaged people and people with disabilities. I don't think poverty should be an excuse or a reason to not let somebody live. If it's a problem, it have to be solved.

5) Don't like abortion, don't have one!

Don't like burglars, don't steal!

Don't like slavery, don't have a slave. Don't like murdering, don't kill. Don't like theft, don't steal and so goes on. With that logic you could defend and justifying absolutely everything. If we're allowing people to do absolutely what they wants to do all the time, it can affect and hurt someone else. It's a reason we've laws and is trying to protect people. This argument is especially flawed if you're not an anarchist.

6) It's not a person yet

Born infants are depended on their parents to survive like unborn children. Do it make them a less of a person?

What determines if someone is a person or not? Is it the size, the intelligence, how depended the individual are, the location?

Size: Yes, the unborn child is smaller than a born child. But an one year old child is smaller than a teenager. Is a 14-years old more worth than an one year old? Is a 14-years old more person?

Pain: Another pro-abortion argument is that the child can't feel pain. But an unborn child do have a nerve system and therefor can feel pain depending on the stage. Even if it couldn't, it's still flawed. People won't notice the pain on anesthesia, when they're asleep, in coma or if they've a medical condition. Can we kill them too?

Location: An unborn child are inside the womb and a born child is outside the womb. It's two different locations. Am I more worth when I'm inside my house than in my garden? Why should location determine someone's person hood and worth?

Dependently: They've not reached viability yet, pro-abortionists says. But as I mentioned earlier in this MyTake new born infants are as dependent on their parents as an unborn one.

A person in coma is unconscious, but is still a potential life and can become conscious again. But they're still being treated differently than unborn children.

7) Abortion is already legal, so live with that

Slavery were once time legal too. So was gender discrimination and many other things. Things change with time. If there's no changes, then there's no room for improvement. With that argument then we should keep having slavery.

8 ) The doctors knows what they're doing, so it can't be inhumane

It exists several methods used during an abortion. Either it's in a form of a pill or a surgically procedure. Very "humane"!

When the mother is taking the pill it's suffocating the child where it's blocking it's blood and neutrinos supply. Then the body is trying to get rid of the child's body. When the child comes out, the mother can sometimes see the child's body and counts the fingers, toes etc. During the surgically procedures the child gets sucked out of the mother's womb by the surgeon. If it's too big, it gets either crushed or cut in several pieces, so the surgeon can take one by one piece out of the mother's womb. Often the surgeon tears off the arms, legs, head etc. of a human being. This is what pro-abortionists are justifying.

#ProLife #Abortion

[BaileyisDarcy]

"Just adopt it away!"

For fucks sake, can you think about the fucking kid for once!

Pro lifers are always going on about how the fetus is a baby, the fetus is a baby! What is your goddamn point? That "baby" is going to be born. Lets say its born to a druggy, well there's a shit life right there. How many kids born to druggys end up outstanding citizens eh? How many lead good lives? Because i dont see very many.
Lets say its born into poverty. The kids now one part of one of thosefamilies in need of a sponsor just so s/he can have lunch at school! What is that kid going to grow uplike if its growing up hungry and without ANY of the oppurtunities their peers have?

What about the kid who was adopted out?
Fuck. What do you know about adoption?
Every year in America, 23,000 kids age out of foster care WITHOUT EVER HAVING BEEN ADOPTED. These kids make up 80% of the prison population, only 2% ever make it to college
And guess what? That number up there? 23k? Thats the smallest number in the world. The US has the highest number of adoptions every year, and if there's 23k children in the US still growing up without a true home or family, imagine how much bigger that number starts getting when you take a gander at other countries.

Pro lifers are pro death. You kill the spirit of children who werent ever meant to be born. You put them in the system then leave them to rot, growing up wondering whats wrong with them, while you pat yourself on the back for a good fucking job.

www.goodhousekeeping.com/.../

[COCOCHANEL]

you know what? he knows a fair amount about adoption, as do do i. we know about it ok? and we are pro life, got it? you have your biological family and you weren't born into poverty and yet you always talk about how fucked up your life is. what is the fucking difference?

[QueenKatherine]

@COCOCHANEL YOu need to understand that a bad life is worse than no life. Aborting it would save a life of suffering,

[BaileyisDarcy]

@COCOCHANEL
Have you forgotten that pople commit suicide because death is often times a friendlier alternative to the shit that has to be put up with in life?

[COCOCHANEL]

@QueenKatherine you can turn a bad life around and people have different standards.

[COCOCHANEL]

how do they or we know that it's a better alternative?

[hellionthesagereborn]

That's stupid. How did the baby come into existence? The parents chose for it to exist. That's the only counter argument needed really. Now in your opinion do those people who are unfit to have a child deserve to be sterilized? I mean since we cannot hold them accountable for their actions then does that not then mean that we have a right to prevent them from performing those actions? As for your "pro lifers are pro death." that's just moronic, you are literally advocating for the murder of an innocent being, so no the "pro choice"(really pro irresponsibility) are pro death because that's literally what abortion is, its the killing of a fetus or nearly fully formed life (depending on which stage its in). As for the population being in prison, no 80% of all inmates come from single mother homes (judging from your argument you are obviously against single motherhood as it is incredibly damaging to the child, yes?). Also I was in foster care and was adopted, was abused to.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Still prefer to be alive then dead.

[lord_chilled]

Nah. Pro lifers are pro choice. Pro choicers are pro death

[BaileyisDarcy]

@hellionthesagereborn Single motherhood is preferable to adoption, the only reason I don't agree with it is because more often than not, it's a direct side affect of some guy not stepping up to the plate.
There is nothing inherently wrong with single parents. The child has just as much a chance to grow up well as any other kid, with the only two drawbacks being, less chance for a consistent male role model, and it's fucking hard to get good money out of one salary.

What's irresponsible is having a kid when you can't afford one, especially when you know for a fact you can't give it the life it both deserves and needs.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Really? Its the guys fault that she made a choice to have sex unprotected? Do you know how often women do not notify the man? Or how often they don't want the man in their life? I think that's a pretty big jump to claim that its all the mans fault when she was just as culpable as he was. Also lets be fair here, how many men where willing to be fathers and she aborted the child instead? This notion that its always the woman as the victim is not accurate to life, some times women can just be shitty and selfish too (in fact if you look at statistics men are twice as likely to pay the child support they owe comparative to women who are ordered to pay (which itself is rare as its almost always the father)). As for your claims that children of single parents do well, no that's factually incorrect. They are more likely to suffer depression, commit suicide, increased risks of criminality (80% of inmates come from single mother homes), drug abuse, academic failure, poverty, and promiscuity

[hellionthesagereborn]

(which just perpetuates the problem). It causes catastrophic damage to the child. Also I would point out that of women surveyed about 30% fully admitted that they would lie about being on birth control in order to have a child if their partner was against it so again, its not "men" that are the issue, its shitty people. The issue here isn't even that the man needs to be responsible, I'm all for that, what I am against is this notion that women don't have to be responsible. She made a choice, she new EXACTLY what she was doing and did it anyway, why does she get a way out? She can abort, abandon (safe haven laws) and give the child up for adoption all without the fathers consent, but if she keeps it she also is entitled to his money without consent too. He has no say at all, she on the other hand has all of it. That's the issue.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Further more while I agree that we should think about the childs well being, the fact is if your for abortion, your not for the childs wellbeing. You can't be well if your dead. So clearly the argument is not about the child's well being because again, we would be against killing it to begin with, its not about the womans choice because she chose to get pregnant (with the rare exception of rape) and its not about the parents stepping up because you do not hold the woman to the same standard as the man. Clearly its about one thing, absolving women of responsibility. That's all this is, their is no, as far as I can tell, logical explanation otherwise we would ban abortion, hold women to the same standard as men and expect both to be responsible for their actions and when they do make a mistake we would expect them to man/woman up and take care of the life they created. That's not what you or other "pro choice" people are arguing though.

[BaileyisDarcy]

@hellionthesagereborn when did I say it's all the mans fault? Tell me where exactly I said that.

Also, 80% of inmates come from single parent homes? That's funny, I found the same statistic about kids who were never adopted. It's either one or the other and I know very few people whose parents are together and even less people who've ever been jailed. The only person I know who was adopted was my grandfather and I don't know anyone who's been in the system.

And for the rest if your "argument" (which is against a point I never even made), it takes two to tango. He knows the risks just as well as she does. She keeps the baby, he has consequences too. She doesn't keep it, he gets away with no consequences. He wanted a kid, he should have fucked a girl who wanted them too.

[BaileyisDarcy]

@hellionthesagereborn
So lets stop fixing cats and dogs then. By doing so we're stopping lives from ever having a chance!

[lord_chilled]

Fixing = no child being born in the first place. So its not abortion. You aren't killing aborn child.

You know people can do that too, in a way. If you didn't want kids, you could get your tubes tied. Thus no need to kill a baby.

But either way, if you are comparing human lives to cats and dogs, that tells me all about how f*cked up your morals are. Pro choicers...

[hellionthesagereborn]

Yeah that's a stupid argument. I didn't say you shouldn't use birth control, didn't say you couldn't sterilize yourself to prevent having kids. How you prevent having children is not a concern to me, what is is when you try to justify killing it because you have found it inconvient. Did you even think that through? That's not even a comparable analogue to the killing of ones offspring after its been conceived. Again we both know this has nothing to do with morality, it has everything to do with avoiding responsibility.

[BaileyisDarcy]

@hellionthesagereborn it's avoiding bringing a kid into the world who will grow up knowing it's not wanted! You think kids can't tell?
A kid born to parents who never wanted it knows. Especially if those parents never grew to love it like they would have if they were that couple who'd been trying for years.
A kid put up for adoption? Many adoption agencies don't allow the adoptive parents to hide the fact from the child. At least not in Australia. Hiding it can lead to the child feeling like their whole life was a lie, and an intense distrust for the people who raised it.
Kids who know? Some go a nice route, they accept it. Cool, I have two mums and two dads. I'm being raised by the ones who didn't make me, but thats okay.
Other kids? Completely divorce themselves form the idea of being a part of their adoptive family. And get incredibly pissed off at the birth parents for not accepting them before even knowing them.

And you can't force people to take BC, same as keeping the kid.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Unwanted? Your talking to some one who was beaten, raped, stabbed in the head, starved and was forcibly removed from their mothers custody. I'm adopted because clearly couldn't stay with them, so yes I do know what that is like, better then you do in fact. However that's not the norm, most people do not hate and despise their young and quite frankly if that's your argument that they are going to be shitty people then why not just sterilize them? Clearly they will never be able to handle the responsibility of children, by your rational, so don't give them the opportunity to ruin a childs life? As for you cannot force people to take birth control or keep a child, that's a stupid argument because your advocating that some one pay for a child for the next 18 years of their life. If you can make them do that, why the hell can't you make them use birth control? Why can't you make them keep the child?

[hellionthesagereborn]

You have very unfair standards. The only rhyme and reason I can find in your argument is punish the man let the woman do what she wants because that's the only thing consistent in your argument. You can't force some one to do something against their will, except if its a man. You have to think of the child, that's why its okay for the woman to kill the child. You have to take responsibility but only if its a man if its a woman she should be allowed to ignore her responsibility. You have to accept your role in the creation of that life. . . if your a man, but if your a woman its your body and your choice, I mean it was your choice for that life to exist to begin with but pro choice only starts after you made the choice to create that life to begin with. See the one consistent thread in your arguments? In every single one of them she gets to shirk responsibility, she gets to do what is convient for her and only her even if it negatively impacts the child or the man.

[BaileyisDarcy]

@hellionthesagereborn the man got sex. The woman got 9 months of hell on earth. Yep. Sounds fair to me.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Oh? So she didn't get sex? She didn't choose to have sex unprotected? Okay so she got nine months pregnant, lets pretend its as bad as your suggesting (its not), does that mean he should only have to pay her for nine months? I mean nine months vs. 18 years is clearly not fair, also again, you keep pretending like her keeping the child is not completely 100% her choice, it is. She chooses to keep the child, no one can make her keep it, NO ONE. But I like how you completely ignored my other statement and created this straw man argument thus validating my initial point that really this has nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with giving her special privileges to avoid being responsible for her actions.

[lord_chilled]

9 months of hell on earth?
Really?
If thats how you see it, then maybe you should get your tubes tied, so it won't ever happen to you.

[BaileyisDarcy]

@lord_chilled because there's a doctor in the world who'll tie the tubes of a twenty year old with no health issues and no kids. *eyeroll*

[lord_chilled]

Well, in that case, you should fight for a right to tubectomy rather than for abortion. Makes more sense right?
And a lot less evil as well.
Tunectomy is allowed to be done on girls after 22, the problem is they usually dont do it for people with no kids, so thats what you should be fighting for.

[Johnnie1000]

80% of a jailed prisoners are foster care children? I would like the sources for these stats. And please don't give me an abortion supporters report.

[BaileyisDarcy]

@Johnnie1000 google adoption statistics

[hellionthesagereborn]

That's not accurate. They have increased statistical chance of going to prison but its not that high, its only 10% higher chance of adult criminality and prison. 80% of convicts however do come from single mother homes, that could be where your confusion is coming from.

[Bananaman177]

You know what I know about adoption? My friend's family runs an orphanage in Cambodia and all those kids are real grateful not to be fucking dead, believe it or not. They like to eat food and play outside and make friends and build stuff and they even like doing chores more than they would like being dead.

Maybe if you think death is so much better than life, you should kill your fucking self and leave the goddamned children of the world alone, you vicious goblin.

[ImagineInsanity]

This is SO freaking rich. No life is better than a shit life, that's bull shit. The earth's a shitty place, so why don't we all just kill ourselves? How many brilliant minds or great leaders have come from shitty backgrounds, or less than perfect lives? And for you to start criticizing all pro lifers, you're really a generalizing douchebag. Most prolifers if not all support protecting life in the womb, AND support the reformation of the adoption and foster care systems in America, as well as providing programs to help single or struggling mothers deal with their children. You've got a lot of fucking nerve to generalize that any person with a crap life would prefer to not be alive, or that they'd be better of dead anyways.

[ThisDudeHere]

How exactly do you explain forcing a raped woman to go through the immense physical pain of childbirth? Especially when you will never what how it feels like?
Who are you to say she has to go through that pain?
Why shouldn't she have the right to not experience that pain, especially if she never signed up for it?

[hellionthesagereborn]

That's less then 1% of all abortions so that's moot point.

[ThisDudeHere]

@hellionthesagereborn you avoided the question. Small percentage or not, how do you explain forcing her to do it?

[hellionthesagereborn]

How do you explain that its perfectly legal to force a man to pay child support no matter the circumstances of the pregnancy?(for example hermsmann vs seyer where the court ruled that a 12 year old boy was legally responsible to pay child support to his rapist (his babysitter) when he turned 18 with back pay (as he was not legally able to do so as a minor. Or when women lie about using contraceptives which for example in Canada is considered rape if a man does it but perfectly legal if a woman does it). As for in the cases of rape, I don't think you should force her to keep the child, but as I said its so incredibly rare that using that as an excuse to justify all abortions is well completely wrong from both a statistical as well as a logical standpoint. However he pointed out that the child is innocent in that scenario and your punishing an innocent and not the person who did wrong so his reasoning was based upon that, so that's how he explained it (not unreasonable).

[ThisDudeHere]

@hellionthesagereborn you got me wrong. I do not believe that rape is an excuse to justify all abortions. All I'm saying is that rape is the only time, along with health issues or if the girl is underage, when abortion should be available. I do believe that casual sex is not an excuse for abortion.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Fare enough, but you asked how he could justify it and he did give his explanation. Also you stated that men would never know what that's like but in fact men do know what that is like as I pointed out. As I said I personally think that its up to the individual in the cases of rape, but that doesn't mean that their is not an argument to be made that to kill the child that did no wrong is just as bad as forcing some one to go to term with a child that is the result of rape.

[ThisDudeHere]

@hellionthesagereborn then we'd have to argue over technicalities of wether that lump of cells is a child or not.

[EpicDweeb]

Which they are if we're talking DNA. We know the "lump of cells" to be it's own entity, defined as human because (whether or not it has a heart) it has unique DNA from that of it's parents which is defined as human, and as each cells are functioning it can be considered alive... THEREFORE: pretty close after conception even at the point of being two cells large, a fetus is scientifically defined as a human life.

[ThisDudeHere]

@EpicDweeb except not everyone agrees with that

[EpicDweeb]

Because we've given a definition to human life beyond the one that science does. (For clarification... science, not scientists who liable to lose their jobs for saying something politically incorrect.) We've said it's not enough for a living being to be "human" it must also be a "person." Why?

It's made even more ironic by the fact that many who would argue this way oppose many prolife/prorights supporters (specifically Christians in this case) for appealing to a higher power or higher sense of humanity... when they do the same thing to say abortion IS okay.

[BeeNee]

Let's actually talk about all these would be aborted children after they're born, shall we, because there is so much focus on can they or can't they be aborted, but in the case of pro-lifers, how much have you thought, actually thought about these children after they are born... and not just in flowery sentiments like, "someone will probably adopt them that can possibly lead them to a good life," or "so what if the parents are poor and can't afford to take care of them, at least they have their lives."

1. How much time have you spent being poor or living with drug/alcohol addicted parents? It's easy to say, well government programs will care for them or the kid is alive, but it is a rare thing that those children come out of those situations well adjusted and doing well, and those government care programs are paid for by you and me and where is my choice to support some person I don't even know for their bad behaviors or having promiscuous sex and creating life? You care so much about them, but my rights to spend my money the way I see fit are where exactly?

2. Yes, it is 10 thousand times easier for you to decide for someone else whether or not they can abort because you aren't living their life and dealing with what they have to deal with either financially, emotionally, mentally, or physically. You're not even a woman who will ever have to make that choice about the life of a child and that is a fact that cannot be denied because it is coming from a place of privilege and of stepping into people's lives you haven't spent more than a few random paragraphs telling them what they should or should not be doing without ever knowing anything about them or ever in your life potentially having to make such a choice as the carrier or a child. Even if you were one of the 1% or rape/incest cases yourself, it's not going to result in you potentially having a child, is it?

3. Your number 7 works both ways. We once had laws on the books that prevented a lot of things from happening as like say blacks and whites marrying, and yet NOW, they are legal. This is an irrelevant point because things do in fact change for the better or worse depending on how society views things at a certain point whether you agree or disagree with them.

4. You would be a prolifer if you were male or female? But you're not female. You can't be. It is impossible thing to know or say because actually being able to get pregnant changes a lot. Ask any woman.

[BeeNee]

Your point about pain---we do in this country kill people under anesthesia all the time in cases of assisted suicide or in death penalty cases.

A 3 week old pea sized fetus cannot exist yet as a human being no matter how much you spin it. There is a reason a child has to be so many weeks before it is even viable and why those babies born prematurely before that time either have tons of problems or cannot survive or have to be aborted at the risk of infection or other to the mother.

Your argument about what the government "should" be doing with welfare is add odds with what they are actually doing and what people are voting that they do. If we had in place a system that actually ensured all these kids could have a safe home/food/money/education until 18, that's one thing, but that's not reality. Reality is foster care until they age out at 18 for about 1/2 of all potential adoptees, prison for many, abuse within these systems, mental problems for about 70%.

[CubsterShura]

So you mean if the government actually provided good child care women would abort less?

[BeeNee]

@CubsterShura That point is in response to the OP saying that governments should provide welfare and education to the poor in efforts to stop them from aborting and using poverty as an excuse, yet my point is, governments generally don't do that and those who vote, tend to vote against such programing anyway even if it is up for a vote. So how is being poor simply "an excuse" for abortion when the fact is, if you have no food, no electricity, no water, no money for the bus, nothing, how is it these women are supposed to care for all these children? One cannot make a point about providing care in the abstract, that doesn't actually exist in reality.

[Jenima]

''You care so much about them, but my rights to spend my money the way I see fit are where exactly? ''
That's not a question you should address to him since government will never come and ask you how you want your money to be spent regardless of the subject.

[Jenima]

''Yes, it is 10 thousand times easier for you to decide for someone else whether or not they can abort''
And it is 10 thousand times easier for you to decide for someone else whether or not they can live.

[Jenima]

''You would be a prolifer if you were male or female? But you're not female. ''
I am.

[Jenima]

''There is a reason a child has to be so many weeks before it is even viable and why those babies born prematurely before that time either have tons of problems or cannot survive ''
It is the same reason why a born baby only drinks mineral water, the same reason why young children cannot take part in some activities etc and that is called growing process.

[Jenima]

''One cannot make a point about providing care in the abstract, that doesn't actually exist in reality.''
So because it doesn't exist he should not even mention it as something that HAS TO BE DONE?

[BeeNee]

@Jenima 1. But this would be specifically asking tax payers to further expand and pay for welfare to support any mother who had a child and could not afford it. We do have things called votes which we can use to vote against such spending. 2. Pro-choice means you allow someone the choice as to whether they want to abort or not. Pro-life says one should or has to have the child regardless of any extenuating circumstances. 3. You did not write this mytake. I am not addressing you, but the OP. Not sure why you wrote that. 4. Doesn't change what I've said and why one can only get an abortion during a certain period of time.

[CubsterShura]

Any society where these women are left suffering on their own like that is shitty.

[Jenima]

1. OK. 2." Pro-choice means you allow someone the choice as to whether they want to abort or not." And the right to decide on the life of a defenceless being. You blame pro-lifes because they decide for someone else on abortion while you allow women in that situation to decide for someone else if they will live or die. 3. I wrote that just to tell you that the fact that he's a man is not relevant in my opinion because even a woman can have those views. Moreover men are also concerned. People have to be two to make a baby. Men are also concered by that decision. Even if they don't carry the baby, it belongs equally to both the man and the woman. 4. OK.

[BeeNee]

@Jenima 1. Yes, voting it's a thing 2. Thanks, my point exactly! YOU or anyone else who is not involved in the lives of these people directly who have to make this decision have put your foot in it. Being pro-life, I have decided in my years of wisdom to let people who's lives are actually effected by this choice, to make that choice whether to abort or not. That is an actual choice, not just telling people you don't even know a thing about, what they can or can't do in their own lives and with their own bodies and their own child. Yes, let's keep government OUT of the bedroom. 3. It's relevant for both reason number 2 here, and because he claims that if he were a female he'd feel the same. Well, if I were a unicorn, I'd fart rainbows---no it's not the same because it can't ever happen. Now obviously as a man, he can state that he feels this way and it is what is it. 4. Okay.

[BeeNee]

Now, just curious, shall we continue on with this discourse back and fourth and back and fourth, in which case, I can go as long as the conversation is civil, which it has been, but I find in regards to questions like these, your mind will no more change then my own in regards to how we feel about such topics. We, and the OP, and anyone else can feel anyway they'd like, but we are like everyone else, bound by the laws that govern this world and what can and can't happen in regards to it so if you or I desire change in this matter, political participation is necessary.

[Jenima]

OK you've said what you had to say and so I did. But let me insist on the fact that men are also concerned because making a baby involves two people. The father is equally concerned. ''(...) with their own bodies and their own child'' : OK since it's your child nobody can tell you not to kill it. There you admit it is a ''child''. Great.

[BeeNee]

@Jenima Actually you don't need to insist that men are involved in the lives of their children unborn or otherwise. My point is not that men/fathers don't matter in regards to the OP or you. That is your inference. My point was that the OP cannot say what he would do or think... as a woman because he cannot be one, ever. I did in fact say, as a man, he is welcome to think as he has here. My concern is less that he is a man and more that he is trying to decide for people he knows nothing about what they can do with their own lives and bodies without even spending 5 minutes knowing their personal stories. Is that how you'd like people to govern your life... make decisions about what you can and can't do based simply on their own personal opinions of what you "should" or "shouldn't" be able to do sight unseen, no questions asked?

[BeeNee]

Secondly, whether I call "it" a child or not makes no difference here. I've said something, an it, if that's what you'd like me to call it for you, is not viable before a certain term which allows abortions to happen legally. It's pro-choice, let people who know and live with their situation decide to abort or not. Notice the "or" part, meaning some may choose yes and some no. That's why it's called a choice---and thankfully, people at this point still have that choice. It's not an easy one for the majority of people who go down that path, but it is their own to make. Thanks for the discussion. You and the OP have helped further affirm my stance on pro-choice.

[Jenima]

Good.

[lord_chilled]

Living bad is still better than no life at all. And what right do you habe to determine someone else's life? Eho are you to make that choice for them?

[heyyyyy123]

I am a person that likes to listen to other peoples perspectives and it was very interesting to read yours actually.
Now I will say a couple comments on my opinion on someone who is pro choice.
I'm not going to get into too much detail because it would just be unwarranted but i'll first just get one thing out of the way, and its the option of just not having sex to prevent pregnancies. Now we all know that isn't going to happen. Me being a realist and all, its like telling kids in high school to go with abstinence. They just do it anyways and aren't even taught the proper ways to prevent pregnancy and STDs when that could have been prevented. That being said..
I am not one to advocate for someone having sex: no birth control, no condom, no method of protection whatsoever on an occasional basis and falling back on the abortion option. That is just careless.
Now, mistakes are always made and things happen (life happens essentially) and people end up on the pill with perfect use of birth control. They didn't ask for this, and I am for the choice of getting an abortion for the main reasons here: 1) Some couples are not stable enough to take care of a child, or a second/third child. Children that are neglected as infants/toddlers can suffer in the long run from abuse (and this isn't because the parents don't mean well or they weren't trying, children need a safe, caring, and nurturing environment) and some people are not able to give that. 2) People who do not want any children should not have children, same as people who do not want animals/pets should not have them either. It can easily turn into neglect and mistreatment. (we are talking about the actual live health of this child) yes, killing them may be seen as inhumane, but putting them in this possible environment isn't any less inhumane). 3) Giving the option for the government to help everyone have good living conditions and good health care is a large stretch. I don't see that happening anywhere in the near future, especially considering our new president who is doing everything he can to shut down every planned parenthood in existence. That's all i'll really get into, but I understand its a touchy topic and you put up some interesting points which are your opinions and I still respect and understand, I just disagree. (I know my answer isn't super amazing but I did the best I could with the time I had)

[Shadow44]

I've personally thought the best way to decrease abortions wasn't by making it illegal. Back alley coat hanger abortions could sitll happen. At leas tin a hospital done by a doctor it is same. Though that's not my point.

I think the best way to decrease abortion was by making contraception cheap and easy to get a hold of, maybe ever have some places that give away free condoms like done in my city. Also affordable birth control would be another good thing. On top of this proper sex education. I know sex education in a lot of schools is just bad and a decent sexual education would probably help prevent a lot of unwanted pregnancies.

[lord_chilled]

But who are you to make that choice for them? All these pro choicers think that they are god

[heyyyyy123]

@lord_chilled It is not playing a god role, it is deciding what is best for you, your body, your health (mental and physical) and your current financial state. People are going to have sex, people are going make mistakes, that is life. If school taught more about contraception and being protected against pregnancy and STDs there would be a lot less cases of abortions, not that it really matters, but abortions aren't necessarily easy on the body. There are a lot factors that you have to take into consideration on why someone would choose to follow through with something like this. It isn't an easy, fun process. These woman aren't playing god, they are just scared and making decisions for themselves that they think is best, and it all comes with a cost. I don't think the government full of middle aged men should be deciding what women should do with their bodies, as if they know what its like to be pregnant in middle/high school or raped and impregnated or shamed because of it.

[lord_chilled]

Nah, its women being narcissistic and deciding that their lives are worth more than their childs live. So yes, you are playing god.

All you said was about you, you didn't mention anything about the kid, the kid doesn't have any say in wether it gets to live or not.
And just because it can't say yes or no yet doesn't make it acceptable for you to make that choice for it
"choice" is the biggest lie in this argument. Only the woman has the choice, the child doesn't according to you.

And dont give me the rape argument , thats only a very tiny fraction of all abortions, and tbh, thats the only ome where "choice" applies.

You already made a choice when you had sex. Everyone knows that having sex makes babies. If you dont know that, you shouldn't be having sex.
Now choices have results and its upto you to take responsibility.
Pro choicers are just people that delude themselve thinking they had no choice. Yes you did, you made that choice when you spread your legs. Dont want a kid? Dont have sex

[lord_chilled]

If you do have sex, you need to accept that there is a chance that you get pregnant and that there will be a baby.
You can't just kill a life and claim it was your choice. Delusional.

The only time abortion is acceptable is when the mother is in danger of death herself. Or in cases of rape, where it really wasn't her choice.

But other than that, there is no reason as to why simply kill a life. What, you made a mistake?
Well taking a life isn't gonna correct your mistake.
Deal with your "mistake". Accept the responsibility.

"Pro-choice"... What a scam.
You're just pro death.

[heyyyyy123]

@lord_chilled Those are actually really good points, and in a way I see where you are coming from. The child doesn't have a choice, but we are also talking about something that has no memories, no sense of itself, and no real emotions or feelings. And i'm talking about in the time span of abortion. I know to you that is not a good argument, because I know right now I am sounding cruel and heartless. And yes it may seem that way, but I look at things from a more realist perspective and I take into consideration and life that is already fully living. If that child is born into a family of dysfunctions, where are you to say that is a better life for them? And adoption isn't always an option people want to take. I know people who would not want the baby, but wouldn't be able to give them up for adoption, which is crazy to me but true. And yes, when people have sex they know what they are doing. ... cont.

[heyyyyy123]

@lord_chilled I explained that I do not agree that woman should just have unprotected sex constantly and get abortions to erase mistakes they were clearly making and fully aware of. I don't necessarily agree, but I also wouldn't want a child to be born into a family of people who do not want them. I have seen that happen before, and they are very hard childhoods to endure. My mother was also a product of someone who didn't necessarily want another child, her mother loved her very much, but she didn't have the time for her and her siblings. She was constantly marrying new men and her father didn't want anything to do with her. Of course she is happy she is alive now and her mother loves her, but it is just an example to think about. And that is not the worst a child can be born in. There are drug addicts and alcoholics giving birth to babies they obviously not ready or mentally stable to have. Its just something to think about.

[lord_chilled]

No, i dont think all pro choice people are heartless and cruel.
I just think you guys dont see the whole picture or have been misguided.
Or at least i hope so. Thats why i even bother argueing.

Here is the problem tough, i acknowledge your points , but the problem is that you are making a choice for another person. And its not just something small, its wether they get to live or not.
Now they may not be conscious , have memories or arguably even feel pain. But in a year they would have all these sensations. They were still gonna have a life. And no matter how bad, i still think that its not someone else's call to make that choice for them.

Your mom's example, i understand. But she still has siblings, she got to have you, im sure she got to do many things in life. Think about another person deciding she shouldn't have existed, all that, including you would never exist. Thats just unfair.
I dont know, but im fairly certain she is glad to have had this opportunity.

[lord_chilled]

As for the people, that have it much worse, im sure thete are some that might have wished they were a number of them that wished they were never born.
But there may be an equal amount of people in such situations who are glad that they at least get to live.
If they didn't , they would have given up, but they still struggle.
You know, sometimes 1-2 good friends may all you need to keep on going.
Im by no means in a bad situatiom, but i have been trough times were i wake up and dont have the energy for anything. No motivation, no purpose, nothing. During those times my few friends were the only thing i wanted. Seeing them was the only positive in my life. They were literally the reason i went to school for.

For a person who has been/ is in a sh*t life, this may be intox10. people like that usually know exactly who their real friends are and who are fakes.
And who knows, maybe that would want to keep them on.
All im saying is that, that should be their choice, and not another persons

[_Enigma_]

First off: I don't believe it's murder as there is a long period where it's not even alive, but of course you already know my stance on that. That's just for everyone else.

Now, I don't think there is anything wrong with choosing to get an abortion if you find out that your child will have autism or some kind of deformity or mental illness. You may personally know people that live happy lives regardless, as do I, but that doesn't take away from the fact that are many who aren't and that some parents don't want their child to have suffer because of that, and would rather have a child that doesn't have to suffer. I would rather we had a way to prevent or fix it before or after birth as an alternative to abortion, however science is not that advanced yet.

What happens to a lot of women is that they find someone they love and whom they think loves them, but when their partner finds out they're pregnant, they up and leave, leaving nothing for the mother to support herself and her child. Is it fair for that child to be brought up in a situation where they will struggle to afford basic things such as food, education and clothes? Or is it better to not let them have to suffer through that? I personally believe the latter, but it's entirely your choice. Some mothers are great despite being single mothers and experiencing all the hardship that comes with.

It's debatable whether or not the collection of cells within a mother is even sentient, and it's also debatable when it gains sentience. Until that collection of cells forms a sentient, living being, it is the mothers body and hers alone, and it's her choice if she wants an abortion or not.

Running out of space so quick summary: In rape and incest cases, abortion is fully justified, you should not have to bear a child that you never wanted in the first place. Don't like abortion, don't have one and don't take away from peoples right to choice.

The trouble with this is that both sides arguments are backed and fueled by belief with little science actually being used or presented. For example, point #6. I don't believe it's a person yet because from the evidence I have seen, it is not. But you believe it is, for whatever reasons that led you to believe that. Also, #5... Really? Mental gymnastics much?

[_Enigma_]

Like I said in the other thread, I don't have anything against you. Debates like this are just a bit of fun for me, something to pass the time. I don't have anything against you, I just enjoy debating.

[lumos]

I always find it interesting to read other people's opinions. Thanks for sharing your take.
I have a couple of questions though.
Concerning point number 1, it seems like you didn't really understand the question "what about the women's rights?". Might have been poorly worded, but I don't think it was a question about gender, but more so a question about women's rights to their own bodies. Do you think the rights of a fetus are more important than the rights of a fully grown, fully conscious, independently living woman? If so, why? Why are the women's rights less important than the rights of a being that hasn't even been born yet?

Also, a question (or concern) you didn't add in the take would be about back-alley abortions. If abortions were made illegal, many women would still perform them in unsafe and unhygienic situations. This means that the likelihood of women dying due to complications and infections would be a lot higher. What's your stance on that, as someone who is pro-life? Would you be ok with not only embryos and fetuses dying, but also adult women? Legal abortions = abortions being performed in safe and clean environments. Illegal abortions = abortions being performed in unsafe and unhygienic environments, with dangerous and damaging methods. And if you deem it ok that these women die due to unsafe abortions, how can you with a conscious mind call yourself pro-*life*?

[lumos]

"conscious mind" :O um, had a bit of a brainfart there. I meant that how can your conscience allow you to call yourself pro-life if you're ok with women dying from unsafe abortions.

[curiousnorway]

It's still the woman's choice to undergo abortion. Not only are they committing a crime if it was illegal, but they're also choosing to do so despite the risks. They could choose to not do it and they shouldn't do it. It was also in most cases the woman's and the man's decision to have penetrative sex. They knew the risks of impregnation and they could avoid it either using contraception or avoid having penetrative sex. They could choose more wisely. You can't just doing what you wants to without knowing sometimes there's consequences.

[lumos]

But how can you call yourself pro-life if what you support will lead to the death of many more women?

[lumos]

Also you didn't answer my question concerning whether you think the rights of a fetus are more important than a woman's right to her body, and why?

[COCOCHANEL]

we have to teach morals at home and at school.

[lumos]

@COCOCHANEL morals are subjective though.

[ThisDudeHere]

Well said.

[lumos]

@ThisDudeHere kinda disappointed that he never really answered my questions. Oh well. No surprise there really.

[ThisDudeHere]

Those logical questions have no place in a pro-birth world view. You're supposed to ignore it all until you've pished the kid out of yourself.

[lumos]

@ThisDudeHere and once the kid is out, fuck 'em if they need welfare. Lol.

[ThisDudeHere]

*pushed

and yup, exactly

[COCOCHANEL]

actually, the two beings (mother and fetus) should fight it out and the winner gets to survive. guess who has the advantage?
how did that being get the advantage? time. it had time to grow.

the law protects children for a reason right? isn't it wrong and illegal for a mother to kill her child whether it's throwing it in a garbage can or smothering it a year later or drowning it in a bathtub when it's 7 years old? why does the law not just allow parents to kill their children or beings to kill other beings?

[lumos]

@COCOCHANEL perhaps because an embryo or a fetus is hardly considered a life? It's not conscious, it can't think or feel. Scientists have found that fetuses can't even feel pain up until around 20 weeks of gestation. The vast majority of abortions occur within the first trimester (13 weeks). The baby isn't aware of its own existence. How you could even compare it to drowning a 7 year old kid is beyond me.
Who exactly is going to take care of these kids otherwise? Foster care and adoption centers are overcrowded. Tax payers don't want to pay for their welfare. How is abortion any more cruel than giving birth to a child that doesn't have a home?

[COCOCHANEL]

do you consider people who have nerve damage to be undeserving of life? i'm not sure why that would be a reason to say that a being isn't a being.

so, because a newborn isn't aware of what it is yet, that makes it ok to murder it?

i doubt that many adults who were born poor have more self pity than anyone else just because of their situation. they don't go around stuck on the fact that they got the short end of the stick. they aren't all on welfare either.

[ThisDudeHere]

@COCOCHANEL except people with nerve damage are already conscious and aware of their own existance. A foetus is just a blob of cells.

[COCOCHANEL]

@ThisDudeHere it's a human life, not a blob of cells. life starts at conception.

[lumos]

@COCOCHANEL I just think abortion is the lesser of two evils. I'm not out here saying that abortion is great and lovely and rainbows and sunshine and candy. It's not. But when the alternative is having millions of kids with no homes, living in poverty and famine, not having a stable life situation, being totally overlooked in overcrowded adoption and foster care centers, I just think abortion is the most realistic and utilitarian approach. I'd rather take a look at the quality of life over churning out these massive quantities of babies that have no real families. Sure, not everyone living in poverty is unhappy, but poverty is awful nonetheless and something that we as a society should do our best to get rid of. Not encourage.

[lumos]

@COCOCHANEL and my point about welfare was that there are many people in society who are calling themselves "pro-life" but are totally unwilling when they actually have to support said life.

[CubsterShura]

I'm pro-life too and I absolutely agree. You just worded out my opinions too in a better way and I'm surprised by how much it matched my opinion too.

People can easily abort babies in the womb but not murder them because babies can cry but fetuses cannot! I'm also feminist but only because I believe every life has value doesn't mean that I believe women should be treated badly. Unwanted pregnancy is inevitable and if you are dealing with sex, you have to be mentally prepared for accidents. People are stupid. And rapist? Lol I thought that the ones who believe that babies carry their parents sin are backward? So why are women in modern days using this backward bullshit now?

Seriously, those who support abortions are only giving excuses. "What about rape?" Tell me this first what about sex? "What if the mother is sick?" The point of being pro-life is that all lives have value. So no, in case of illness it is not worth risking one or both lives for the other.

Doctors know what they are doing... we all know they are killing,

Abortion is legal live with that, my ass. In Saudi Arabia it is illegal for women to drive. A rule of another country gets you butthurt and you are telling us to deal with abortion laws?

What if she is poor? Umm if you care about that poor mother so much then how about you donate her money or other useful things? The world would be a much better place if everyone capable of charity gave their best.

Her body her choice... yeah her body her right to scar herself and injure herself too, right? Only if babies could cry in the womb. It's sad that people take the bad advantage of their silence.

Seriously, those who support abortion and say these things are only giving lame excuses. This is why I'm not interested in debates about it with anyone. It is a waste of time.

[Kai02]

I respect your opinion, but will comment my own. Not to disrespect your opinion but because this is gag and comment section is to put your own views.

Until recently, I was also pro life and would have agreed with you 1000%. However, I realized a few things.

If a grown human was dying, and needed an organ from a donor to live, can you force someone to donate to them?
No you can't.
Even if someone NEEDS something from another human to live, it is NOT okay to FORCE someone to give it to them.

Also, being pregnant is 9 months of having a living being inside you. This causes sickness and so much pain. That is NOT right to force onto anyone, regardless of the reason. You, as a man, will never understand this fully. I am 15 so I don't understand this completely, but I still understand how terrifying the thought of pregnancy is to some women.

And right now, even if the government SHOULD help everyone to have good living conditions, THEY aren't
So your argument there is doing nothing. They SHOULD be doing something but THEY ARE NOT. FORCING a woman into having a child when she does not have the money needed to care for this child may lead her to getting into trouble for child neglect.

Also, WHAT IF THE MOTHER doesn't WANT A CHILD?
This leads to one of two conclusions:
1. Child is sent to an orphanage, where they live there for 18 years (unless they get adopted, however there are thousands of children already stuck there so the probability of them being adopted is very low) until they are kicked out of the system and probably homeless.
2. They are unwanted and neglected, and probably get depression. Much better than getting aborted before they could speak though.

Chances are, this will be ignored or discounted because of my age (which is why I usually use anonymous), but Im gonna post this anyways because it needs to be said.

[MsMusic]

I'm pro life in most cases scenarios, but you make very good points.

[COCOCHANEL]

what is the so much pain part?

[Kai02]

@COCOCHANEL Every women who has been pregnant that I've ever met has a lot of pain during pregnancy, and during birth. Birth isn't "oh I pushed out a baby life is back to normal", even with pain killers it is very painful

[COCOCHANEL]

it doesn't have to be that way. with csec it's painless. with epidural you're numbed.

[BaileyisDarcy]

@COCOCHANEL you dont get those DURING the pregnancy though and some women see those as unethical. I know if i have kids im having my first one naturally with no pain killers (we'll see how we go on theno pain killers) So i know what its like, then i can decide to different if i have a second one.

[COCOCHANEL]

i think that during pregnancy it's more about discomfort than pain but people do experience different things. not sure why it would be considered unethical.

[ThisDudeHere]

"Even if someone NEEDS something from another human to live, it is NOT okay to FORCE someone to give it to them."

This is the best point I've encountered thus far.

[Jenima]

@KaiO2 : I like the fact you've been respectful ulike others who are even older than you. You said ''Even if someone NEEDS something from another human to live, it is NOT okay to FORCE someone to give it to them.'' The two cases are different cause in your case the person dying is not dependent (I mean under the responsability) from the donor. Also the pain of pregnancy is not as horrible as you would prevent a person from living just to avoid that. Almost every mother has gone through it some harder than others and many are happy today with their children.

[ThisDudeHere]

@Jenima it is still not right to force someone to endure pain for someone else, no matter what your opinion on said pain is. I will never know what the pain of pregnancy is like, but I would also never take a woman's freedom away and force her to go through it.

[Jenima]

@ThisDudeHere Force? The baby never asked to live man! You can't conceive a baby and then complain that you are being forced when people ask you not to kill them but let them live! When you kill the baby you force them to die! You have not asked for it's opinion. You made a mistake and because of that mistake you assume you have the right to decide whether or not they are worth living? I can imagine how it can be hard to face that situation and I know even I, will think of abortion. But I am also convinced that if I do, I will bear that crime on my conscience all my life. But people lack so much of conscience nowadays.

[Jenima]

@ThisDudeHere In addition if a mother can't endure pain for her baby, who will? Parents have to endure everthing they can to take care of their children whether born or unborn.

[ThisDudeHere]

@Jenima I was referring to cases of rape. I do agree that consensual sex that leads to pregnancy should also lead to giving birth. Mostly. But I believe that a woman was raped, it is unethical to force her to let the foetus develope into a child and then to go through the pain of birth. The woman did not ask for it.

[Jenima]

@ThisDudeHere OK. That's your opinions. But what I said is applicable in any case. Don't blame the child for the father's crime.

[ThisDudeHere]

@Jenima don't force the woman to do something painful she did not ask for.

[EpicDweeb]

@Kai02 Let me ask you this... Say you've donated a kidney to someone who couldn't live without it... would you be able to take that kidney back? I think we all know the answer is no. And yet a woman CAN take back... what? a sense of being comfortable? Now don't get me wrong, I get that pregnancy is painful. I know that it hurts like nothing else and is terrifying for many women... I also know that if given the opportunity to actually be moms, most women would gladly die for their children. That's my perspective at any rate. I don't think anyone has the right to kill a child no matter what. And yes it's a child. It has unique DNA from both parents defined as "HUMAN DNA" and it is considered alive... therefore whether you call it a fetus or a child it is still a HUMAN LIFE. It's a human life. The way I see it, whether voluntarily or involuntarily a woman gives up a certain aspect of her bodily autonomy for 9 months.

[ThisDudeHere]

@EpicDweeb "whether voluntarily or involuntarily a woman gives up a certain aspect of her bodily autonomy for 9 months."

That is the whole cruz of the argument. And it is unethical.

[EpicDweeb]

@ThisDudeHere What ethic are we talking here? Who/what is defining the ethic?

[dipta]

@EpicDweeb
It's not just 9 months either.
I know some women seem to have babies like it's nothing, but actually pregnancy changes a woman's body forever.
If she's not responsible enough during pregnancy, the baby might not be born healthy, plus there's also the financial aspect of giving birth.

Well, I'm not really pro-choice, but I don't agree that women should take a pregnancy to term no matter what.

[EpicDweeb]

@dipta The only valid exception in my eyes is the endangerment of life (and not of life style as so many make it). I'm honestly amazed that the very idea of having an abortion doesn't feel insulting to us. It's preventing a child from living. If we could look back to see our parents wanted an abortion that'd seem horrible because we know it's actually us in there. It wouldn't be a "mass of cells" to us any more (one of the most disgusting things I've ever heard someone call a baby). Every fetus is a person, they're our brothers and sisters, our nieces and nephews, they're our cousins, and our close friends. When every person on this fucking planet was "once a fetus" (fetus is a dumb name too cause it's still a baby) we don't take issue with the fact that we're killing them? Or do we really see ourselves as THAT superior? We who really have no control over what happens in life and who can barely seem to effect it? If anything at least a baby in the womb doesn't put on a facade of power.

[Jenima]

@EpicDweeb You're such a reasonable young man.

[EpicDweeb]

It'd be one thing to say it's just a clump of cells if it weren't for the aftermath of EVERY ABORTION AND MISCARRIAGE EVER. Have any of you had a miscarriage? Have any of you passed a tiny baby in a flow of blood? Abortion is an insult to those women who have seen just that. It's an insult to those who mourn the loss of their children. My sister just had a miscarriage and is grieving over her child who was less than two months old. She was going to name the kid Roger if it was a boy, and Peggy if it was a girl. But she was never given that chance.

"Think about the Children?" (in regards to the horrible lives they'll lead in the orphanage) So what? Living in the orphanage may be really hard, and miserable, and may lead me to feel depressed. But what human being WOULDN'T choose the orphanage over death? There's still a possible to succeed in life even from there believe it or not, and yet you see it as merciful to abort a baby? It's mercy to prevent them from even trying for success?

[EpicDweeb]

@Jenima Thank you :) Though I'm afraid this topic can make me frustrated and/or very angry at times :/

[BaileyisDarcy]

@EpicDweeb its merciful tp prevent that kid from becoming part of the 80% prison population.

[EpicDweeb]

@BaileyisDarcy That's not the system's fault. The kid needs to not make bad decisions getting him into crime... or he needs to get good and stop getting caught by the police. xD

[BaileyisDarcy]

@EpicDweeb because 20 000 kids all making the same choice every year is coincidence is it?

[lord_chilled]

Let me tell you something. A woman has something called a CHOICE wether or not to have sex. And everyone knows that sex is hoe kids are made. You can't just make a life a life and then kill it. Accept your responsibility. If you aren't rrady for a kid dont spread your legs

[EpicDweeb]

@lord_chilled And then deal with instances of rape when it comes to that. Until then, if you have sex, be ready to take a baby to term.

[lord_chilled]

@EpicDweeb i can tolerate abortion when it comes to rape and i understand doing it in case of birth complication, where the mother may die. But to end a life for no reason is unacceptable.

[dipta]

I think saying that all babies "have a right to live" no matter what medical condition they may have is a bit naive.
In some cases, the parents still decide to proceed with the pregnancy and the baby ends up dying a few months after being born, but at least it was their decision.

In many cases, the baby will never grow up to be an independent functional member of the society, which means they will be forever dependent on someone else and not just financially.
Is that living? Is their "right to live" bigger than the right of other people to opt, the people who will actually have to take care of them forever?
Raising a healthy kid is tough enough and a great commitment as it is.

Also having the government's help would be great, but that's making it everyone's responsibility (not just the parents) which I personally think it's irresponsible and probably unfair.
There goes the "survival of the fittest" where the strongest work in prol of everyone else and never get to reap the benefits of their own work because they're at the top of the chain. Such is our society already.

[bubble_tea]

I'm sorry, but all I kept thinking while reading your mytake was.. you must be a virgin and probably stay one for a long time. I mean, since you're so responsible and wouldn't risk getting her pregnant when you couldn't provide for your offspring. I mean, it's only reasonable that you would act right now as if you could get pregnant yourself, right?
Also, you seem under the illusion that any life is better than no life. I imagine myself being physically abused since I can remember by parents who don't love me, who rather treats me like their slave at home than someone to pamper and kicks me out when I'm of legal age and they can't get child support for me anymore that they keep for their addictions, or myself being sexually abused by caretakers in an orphanage, sold at age 5 to people I'm serving as a free maid to later be sold by them to human traffickers to work as a prostitute in brothels in unsanitary conditions that repeatedly kick me in the stomach to terminate an unwanted pregnancy so I can keep working for them... I would wish I wasn't born.

[curiousnorway]

Yes, I'm a virgin. I'm also single and still waiting for the right one. I've been in relationship before and took it slowly.

[CubsterShura]

Geez your parents need to be in the prison! Don't hate on pro-lifers because of your parents abusing you though.

[bubble_tea]

@CubsterShura I don't hate you.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Why do women immediately try to virgin shame men? Its strange how that works. You also didn't address any of his points. As for the abuse part, why would they abuse a child? That's a huge leap, if that was the case abuse would be rampant and its not. Further more having been abused as a child (and I'm not talking about mistreated, I'm talking about being beaten over and over again, raped, starved until my skin was nearly transparent, stabbed in the head etc.) I can safely say I would rather be alive then dead. Also that doesn't even get into the fact that abortion shouldn't even be an issue due to the prevalence, accessibility, and cheapness of effective birth control (fifty cents for a condom).

[Gusheth]

feminazi. . . so they do exist.

[somewheresomeway]

@hellionthesagereborn would you expect better from a libtard?

[hellionthesagereborn]

@somewheresomeway I just think that one should never let any one get away with poor reasoning.

[bubble_tea]

@hellionthesagereborn Sorry, but why is this virgin shaming? I didn't even say being a virgin is a bad thing, just that morally he should follow what he preaches which means he has to be a virgin for me to take his take serious. I didn't address any of his points? Do I need to write bullet points? He didn't address the second part of my opinion either, which is more or less addressing all of his points that is in support of giving the unborn a chance at a happy life. My point is, the happy life isn't happening already for a majority of unwanted children, why create more suffering and misery? I applaud you that you still prefer your life to no life, but I know I wouldn't. Also, it's not a huge leap, human trafficking is happening in the third world, and from what I heard in a speech to congress, it's happening in the US as well. The people I saw, the things I read, I don't wish for more of it. I want life to be better for them first, before creating more people who need caring.

[bubble_tea]

@hellionthesagereborn The prevalence of abortion is about 19 per 1000, 0,019%. So less than 2% of pregnancies get aborted. Last time I checked, the condom has a higher failure rate than that. The condom itself is often not the problem, but the user.

[bubble_tea]

@hellionthesagereborn en.wikipedia.org/.../Comparison_of_birth_control_methods 2% is the perfect use failure rate, but 18% is the typical failure rate.

[hellionthesagereborn]

www.cdc.gov/.../index.htm 200 abortions for every 1000 live births should come out to 20% not 2%.

[bubble_tea]

@hellionthesagereborn My bad then. But how can you determine that the majority of then didn't result from malfunctioning condoms?

[hellionthesagereborn]

because you said a failure rate of 2% the rate of abortions is 20% so that would still leave 90% of all abortions being unrelated to condom failure if its rate of failure is 2%. Also the fact that they have done some studies and when given free birth control those areas saw a dramatic decrease in abortion rates (I don't have the article so I don't know the exact percentage but it was around 70% I want to say) thus suggesting that it was not failure of the birth control but failure to use birth control.

[bubble_tea]

@hellionthesagereborn No, I actually said 18% is the typical failure rate for condom use. 2% is the *perfect use* failure rate, but since human error is common, it's 18%. The drop in those studies come from implanting IUD, a longterm working birth control that doesn't rely on people to remember to take or correctly use.

[hellionthesagereborn]

No, its not.

[Diocese_Plunger_PALS]

'By nature sex wasn't meant for pleasure only, but also to procreate.'

100% agree with that. Nature doesn't place condoms on our penises. So when we have sex, it's nature is to feel pleasure and procreate.

It's terrible if a woman is raped and decides to seek revenge by killing her rapist's baby. It's part of her body she's killing whether she wanted the baby or not. The same women wouldn't think when a man is raped by a woman that he got to choose if the baby is aborted or birthed even though he had no say which she forced his sperm into her. His body, his rights as much as her body, her rights.

This is exactly why I lost my heart for women on the most part. Last poll I read, 63% of women would have an abortion even if she was not raped, just to have one. It's not a reason to abort, regardless of circumstances. She's about to be a mother, regardless of how she got pregnant. The average woman has 3 times the rights as men and they complain that abortions now are slightly more harder to get down and legally unpaid by certain countries now.

The same women with the her body, her right mantra don't apply that when baby boys lose their foreskin. They want to make that decision for them.

[N2thing]

Listen, my friend. I´d rather have a female abort her child than raising it up in a horrible way. A teen can´t raise up a baby. A whore can´t raise up a baby. A drug-addicted woman can´t raise up a baby. A woman without partner can´t raise up a baby as successful as with a partner ETC. I´m mentioning as well that a father figure is important. It has many negative consequences to raise up a child without a father. Since a man teaches his child stuff a woman can´t. Also if a couple isn´t ready for a baby, it´s better to abort as well.
Females like these could better make the choice to abort it rather than to let it and raise it up in a way which will lead to many problems for the child in the future (mental, health problems) > ends up suffering or might even lead to suicide.

Doctors know what they do and they remove it before it has a ´soul´. So it won´t suffer since it´s still underdeveloped. If you want a healthy society in a time where promiscuous behaviour is promoted it´s better to have the right to abort so that most of the babies are from couples who made the choice.

[COCOCHANEL]

doctors take souls away?

[michellebrown48]

yes!!! i can't stand when pro-lifers just ignore this. they say they are all 'moral' and 'humane' but what is really inhumane is forcing a child to be born when their life is already made out to be horrible

[lord_chilled]

Bad life is better than no life

[michellebrown48]

@lord_chilled untrue. no life is better than a shit life. just like 0 is greater than -1. wondered why people kill themselves?

[lord_chilled]

@michellebrown48 well here's the thing. How can you judge that another persons would-be life is gonna be worse than no life?
Thats not your call to make.
Like, just because you are the mother doesn't mean that you can make that call.
For every person that says i wish i was never born, there could be 5 people that would say, "well , could be worse!".
Its not like you have a time machine to go 18-21 years to the future and ask them" would you rather be aborted or are you ok with the shit life we got now?"

I don't know about you, but i know id rather have a life.

[goaded]

Firstly, I'll point out the obvious fallacy in "Born infants are depended on their parents to survive like unborn children". (You use that one at least twice.)

They're not. The mother can die in childbirth, and the child may still live a long and happy life. Up until about 24 weeks (?), the fetus needs its living life support system.

Secondly: "sex wasn't meant for pleasure only, but also to procreate"; meant by whom? There are 7 billion people on the planet today, it's tripled in a lifetime. If everyone would still be having that many children, the world would be a disaster.

I think you mean neutrient supply in the last paragraph.

You mention that you know a lot of people who live a happy life, even with Down's syndrome. I suspect that's because they have amazingly strong parents and a really, really good support system. I know several people in a similar situation, and I'm not sure I could cope.

I don't think there's such a problem with detecting a triplicated gene (Down's, Edwards, Patau syndrome...), than less extreme cases that don't require lifelong care. "Will have brown eyes" is orders of magnitude less than "will never talk".

Finally, if the abortion takes place really early, there's a good possibility it wouldn't have resulted in a baby, anyway.

[goaded]

Before I go: brilyn.net/.../

[Diocese_Plunger_PALS]

"Secondly: "sex wasn't meant for pleasure only, but also to procreate"; meant by whom? There are 7 billion people on the planet today, it's tripled in a lifetime. If everyone would still be having that many children, the world would be a disaster."

And people don't have the will power to abstain from sex if they want the population not to increase as much?

What he's saying is that people ought to accept the fruit of their sex with the please, not just deny the fruit.

[goaded]

@Diocese_Plunger_PALS No, they don't have the willpower, and it's no surprise because sex is nice. Also, most people just don't think on a global level.

Fortunately, there is contraception, but accidents still happen. We've reached a point where the number of children per couple worldwide is approximately 2, which is probably managable.

[pickyourcliche]

I'm a vegan, I'm all about the "there's no humane way to kill what doesn't wanna die" angle, but it's not about size. When pregnancy begins, what will eventually become a foetus isn't just "small", it's just a small bundle of cells. That isn't sentience anymore than a sneeze is sentient at that stage.

I also don't feel "90% of abortions are from consensual sex" is a good argument. That implies 10% isn't, so what about those, the people actually being talked about when someone asks "what about rape and incest etc?"

My ex had an abortion. I didn't want her to, but since it's on the woman to carry, I told her I'd support whatever she chose to do. It.. wasn't an easy thing. But a therapist asked me how is it different, at such an early stage of development where it's just a few microscopic cells, than using a condom?

Later development, obviously carries different considerations, if there's actually a body developing.. well then it's time for a pro-life/pro-choice debate, that's murky. But in the first month or something, it's no different to a period from what I hear, psychological impact aside.

Since everyone seems to interpret when it's acceptable or not to different times and circumstances, I don't feel it should be forced one way or another, but the option has to be there, because sometimes it IS due to rape and accidents and such. I was born because my mother's birth control didn't do the job, AND the condom ripped. I was an accident. I was the second child born during an economic slump in the 80s. Sometimes that happens, and I wouldn't think less of anyone for not wanting it.

The final thing I wanna say is, who says sex isn't just for fun? :P Sometimes it's ok to enjoy something for its own sake.

[ladsin]

"By nature sex wasn't meant for pleasure only, but also to procreate" Naturalistic fallacy, making us a slave to natural whims is silly, otherwise there's be no point in any health care.
1-2.) These are the same argument, perhaps you aren't properly understanding or someone did a poor job of explaining it to you. We all have the right to bodily autonomy (the right to do with our bodies what we want more or less) forcing a woman to sustain the life of another, or granting her organs to another entity without her permission is diametrically opposed to this basic right.
3.) Again, now you have a woman who's right to her own body was usurped by her rapist, and now you'll force her to keep this infant this constant reminder of possibly the most traumatizing experience of her life day and night for at least 9 months? Aren't you kindhearted.
4.) This argument is probably levied against people who think that all life is sacred, until it comes out of the womb then, fuck it. XD
5.) I agree with these. IF you don't want to be stolen from, you shouldn't steal from others. If you don't believe that your god wants you to have an abortion don't get one, but you can't legislate your religion against other persons.
6.) Personhood is something that we grant, in utero the doctors at one point can remove 1/8th of the fetus' body and it'll have no difference. Obviously this is not the same for you. There's a difference here, and pregnancy is the process in which a small zygote goes throught the process of becoming a person.
7.) I have no problem with you here.
8.) This isn't an argument. It's an attempt to poison the well.

[ladsin]

I wonder why this just popped up in my feed again.

[oddwaffle]

Your whole take is a personal rant of someone who haven't experienced the low points of life.

When you have a daughter who had a disease so crippling that she would never have a normal life. Her life would consist of pain and suffering every day. You will be the one helping her to hang on. Until you can't take it anymore and shoot her in the head.

That was a real case.

You have this delusion that every parents can give the child a life at anytime but you gloss over how to face the problem on having an unwanted child and how that child is going to grow up.

How about you give me a real plan for a single mother without support making minimum wage to support a child.

I can tell you this: based on statistics, children with only 1 single parent do worse in life than those with 2 parents. Children with parents who didn't have a degree are less likely to have a degree.

Know this, will you gamble with the unborn child's future? It's statistics. It's a chance. Can be better and can be worse. Will you bet that the child will do well? Or do you bet that he will lead a doomed life?

[oddwaffle]

Robert Latimer, in case you need to read. It's not shot in the head since I think I misremembered it. Still, it was a very very strong case in Canada.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Making laws for abortion just interfere's with people's view. I don't view fetus as humans so does sperm and egg cells so I wouldn't say it's killing but rather shedding or discarding. But saying those are humans, well those are your views. I don't like sex being taken for granted not because I'm concerned for the fetus but for the mother's health but I still give them choice to abort with their own consequences. Pro lifes want every baby to be born, but they don't care if that baby is going to be an orphan all their childhood, or if the baby is going to suffer malnutrition, or if the baby has no medical insurance and end sick and dies or if the baby is going to grow up feeling unwanted, develop depression and suicide. They want all babies but they are not going to take care of them. If they really cared that much they would offer themselves to take care of every unwanted kid of people who are going to abort. The funny thing is that many pro life aren't that pro life when it comes to death penalty. So what you called "murderer" is wrong except when it's justified. "But where's the justice in that? The baby didn't do anything" Yeah the baby didn't do anything that she have to keep it either. I can also say, the baby didn't do anything except for the fact that it's inside the mother causing her pain and can cause her a lot later on in life so I'm a pro choice because I'm concerned about the mother, the child (Who's gonna suffer as a human being later on), the husband, the family and the government. Kids not taken care of properly can go violent and be suicidal which is a very big issue to society and last I check, Earth has over 7.5 billion people polluting the world.

[rich4-sparx]

I don't live in the US, so I don't have much to say about how things are there. But I think the majority of other developed countries, e. g. European and Australasian, society has agreed that abortion should be legal for 'damage control' reasons, as in it doesn't matter if the baby was considered alive or not.

First we have to consider the pro-life assumption and what the outcome is --> pro-life will mean that every pregnancy will result in a baby. Every life has a cost for the system we live in. Every one of those babies will eventually grow into a adult which society will have to accommodate until death.

1. Cost / Poverty - The child will not be born into an ideal world or situation. This is a fact that cannot be ignored, all over the world, both in the third world and in the first world, there are many situations and conditions where people live, which you would not want to grow up in. The majority of society has decided that there may not always be enough resources to help those people, let alone the children living in such circumstances. Allowing for abortion, besides already available forms of contraception, will not only provide those people more power and ability to control their circumstances, but will save money, water and food.

2. Power to decide - As much as everybody says 'nobody should have the right to decide who lives or dies', people have also argued that parents should have the right to decide when and where is the best for their future offspring. Abortion allows parents to decide, versus if every pregnancy birthed a child, there would be no choice for the parents, both man and woman to accept that the baby would be born.

Besides what other posters have said, I believe these are the two biggest unspoken reasons.

[Maxemeister]

I'm pro choice but nowhere in this did you seem to completely dog after pro-choicers so I can't really be angry at you lol.

For me as a pro-choicer, there is an interesting way to look at whether you would consider the baby to be alive or not in the stages of pregnancy.

When a baby is born, a switch is sort of flipped that in some ways incurs many stages of individuality that were otherwise left dormant inside the womb. When inside the mother's womb, it acts much more like an organ of the parent, acting way more symbiotically with the mother's body as a whole than with the single-mindedness of an individual. So to claim consciousness before birth is another controversial thing.

However, me and many other pro lifers tend to agree that an abortion during the third trimester is sort of too close for comfort, for if there were a time for a baby to feel pain or a want to live, it would be during this trimester.

My beliefs: as most abortions occur before the third trimester, I'd say that legalizing them before that point is perfectly fine to me.

Also, considering the health risks and financial challenges regardless of whether you keep the baby or not is too risky. There is too much physical and emotional trauma to someone who would not want the baby.

As well to the rapist argument, I agree that is a minority. But even in a pro-life society, I don't see how you could justify forcing a mother to do that. Birth is a HUGE process to go through, and for some even deadly.

So I don't really think you're dumb in any way for thinking this, but I will support the federal government's upholding of the supreme court decision that makes this possible. We can disagree, but on this topic it's way more grey than black and white.

[taleswapper]

My wife DIED for want of an abortion, and took the child with her. In places were the procedure is illegal, it still happens, but the pregnancy mortality rate is MUCH higher, and the risks are much greater. So as far as I'm concerned, anyone who thinks that forcing a woman to carry to term is okay should be forced to be pregnant repeatedly, until it kills them, too. You love the unborn so much; YOU have the kids. Oh, you can't afford them? Too bad. As you said poverty is no excuse. "But that's rape!" you cry? Well, it's not the baby's fault, remember? Your excuses for imposing your will on others should be used by others to impose their will on you. I hope you're happy in your new life as a breeder...

Yes, that's harsh. But it's what you yourself are asking for. that women be denied choice in the matter of their bodies. Abortion is a horrific problem, but it's still better than the alternative.

[juliaanita]

A verbal thumbs up to you

[curiousnorway]

I wrote in the MyTake: "I do however support saving the mothers life in cases where it's one survive or both dies."

[taleswapper]

Sorry, but that's too little too late. Such cases can only be judged in hindsight, and while the lawyers and doctors are arguing over it, the mother stays pregnant, and the risk increases. The case that started it all, Roe v. Wade? The woman in question gave birth years before the case was decided.

[juliaanita]

This is indeed an important question to think about, and I respect your views. But (always but :)) I respectfully disagree.
Do I have a right to disagree? Do I have a right to disagree with your definition of when life begins? Scientists certainly disagree on this point.
And if I have a right to disagree with that, do I not also have a right to do what I want with my own body?
I think that the problem I have with your argument is that it relies on opinion-your opinion. Which is not my opinion.
Do I have a right to have my own opinion? And if I do-do I not have the right also to have an abortion?
It's not that i am not pro-life ( as you call it). But maybe being pro life is more nuanced than opinion.

I would gladly converse more about this in a civilized way if you would like.

[curiousnorway]

I do support a properly democracy with freedom speech. Regardless if it's republican, democrats, social-democrats, socialists, far-right, far-left etc. people should be allowed to share their opinion. Even people with the most controversial ideologies should be allowed to voice their opinion. But why do you support abortion?

[juliaanita]

i didn't say that I support it.
I think that my point is that I support the right of women like myself to believe that what is right for us should not be inhibited by other people's opinions. Does that make sense?

[juliaanita]

I will never have an abortion, because i take the proper precautions.
I don't think that I would have an abortion even if i accidently became pregnant.

[juliaanita]

However I support women who might have to make that choice.

[curiousnorway]

People who's pro-choice or pro-abortion is people who believes people should be allowed to undergo abortion if they wants to. They wants the female to decide over herself and she doing what she wants to. But I think you can't get everything you want in life. If you choose to not being responsible during sex, you've to take the consequences and not think your wants is more significant than someone else's life.

People should have the right to their opinion, but people should have the right to being disagree too. If I had a female S. O and she wanted to undergo abortion, I should have a say too. But if it was a stranger, I wouldn't go up to her and discuss except if she wanted to discuss.

[juliaanita]

just to address one of your points-
I don't think being responsible or irresponsible has a lot to do with any decision. To call an accidental pregnancy irresponsible always, unfaily puts the blame on the woman. Unwanted, accidental pregnancies do happen to the most responsible of people. Believe me, I know.
If they happen because of rape or incest, or just plain bad luck, should the woman have bear the financial burden, even if she is unable or unwilling to?

[curiousnorway]

In the take I explained what to do in such cases. Adoption if she can't take care of it and that the government should focusing more on the welfare bit.

[juliaanita]

I sometimes wonder if this is so much easier for guys. It is pretty glib for a guy to say, Just give it up for adoption.
It is so much more serious for women-a nine month long pregnancy. The medical costs for that pregnancy. The possible loss of income during pregnancy. Depending on the level of care, a possibility of death during or before childbirth.
And then the question of giving a baby up for adoption! It is so very difficult for us to do such a thing, even if the pregnancy was unwanted.
So I always think that, when a man so glibly says, "just give it up for adoption"... i wish that guy could experience life as a woman for just a little while, just to gain some perspective.

I will be glad to continue to talk-i am going for a run. Thanks for your civilized conversation.

[Imperra]

I would give a thumbs up for the last comment if I could, @juliaanita.
There are a couple of things men usually don't think about coz they're not in our shoes.
@curiousnorway
We talk about monthly consulting + ecography + blood tests + ultrasounds + fetal testings + amniocentesis + supliments, vitamins and certain medication for avoiding certain complications. Look for the price on each of those and do the math. Most of those might be covered by women only because many would believe it's "her resposibility". Believe it or not, a pregnancy is much more troublesome than you might think and a lot more should be taken into account.

[juliaanita]

@Imperra Thanks Imperra-complete agreement with you!

[Diocese_Plunger_PALS]

@juliaanita
Right. Women shouldn't have to bear the burden of a baby if she had no say in it but neither should a boy who is raped by a woman who has a baby, should he be forced to pay child support.

[juliaanita]

@Diocese_Plunger_PALS Did I make an argument contrary to your statement?

[somewheresomeway]

I wish every pro-choice fanatic was aborted...

Okay, okay... jk. Abortions are a serious and painful decision for most women to make. Despite best efforts I can understand that contraception can sometimes fail and accidents happen. I've had worries and close calls with girls before. I've hooked up with girls who would make HORRIBLE mothers. If they did get pregnant I hoped to God they would never tell me about it because I would be morally forced to ask them to keep the baby.

However what drives me nuts about pro-choice fanatics is that they are usually hypocrites about other political issues involving life in death. They will support animal rights, oppose capital punishment, pro-gun control, etc.

If you feel that is okay to pull the trigger to kill a terrorist, hang a serial rapist/murder, love animals but NOT put them above humans and support the right to bare arms then go ahead and kill an innocent baby fetus.