Abortion

[The Dark One]

People keep talking about preventing 14 year old sluts from getting an abortion... WTF?

 

Do you want a child being raised by a 14 year old slut?

 

It's not a solution to keep a "repeated offender" from getting an abortion. They should get teh operation' date=' but then they should be sterilized.

 

And maybe the father should be too.

 

 

I know it's harsh, but repeated teen pregnancy shows a fundamental immaturity, and these kids should not be having sex if they can't properly regulate themselves. Use a f***ing condom.

[/quote']

 

Adoption, while not ideal, is a viable solution to the issue. There have been studies that show that some psychological issues may arise from growing up in an orphanage//moving through various foster families. It really boils down to whether you believe that the fetus (at...whatever the time is for it to be legal for abortion) is considered a living thing or not/ whether it is moral to destroy it.

 

Actually, sterilization of a "repeat offender" seems like a rather logical choice....

 

At least in America, the adoption system is terribly poor and drastically overloaded. There are too many kids in the system and not enough families that want them. Kids that grow up in orphanages or in non-permanent families have a whole host of psychological problems, many of which lead to pathologically criminal behavior. Adoption is simply not an acceptable option right now. Anything is better.

 

Which includes terminating the baby. That basically solves all problems, if you get right down to it. Less load on the government, school systems, etc by having one less child to pay for education, welfare, etc. Mother doesn't have to interrupt school, etc. for pregnancy leave. Mother and father don't ruin their lives by having to take care of the baby and therefore not having time to properly educate themselves. They are still kids, after all. Only one that loses out is the baby. But he's not around to care, so why does it matter?

 

I mean, I find the concept of abortion disgusting, but the fact is it's merely the solution provided to a certain problem: Unwanted pregnancies. The fact is, removing the solution will not magically make the problem disappear altogether, it will instead make unresolved consequences of that problem begin to stack up. The true answer is not getting pregnant in the first place. Be responsible. But past that, I think that reason should be used regarding possible solutions.

[CrabHelmet]

The obvious place to draw the line is the age of independent viability, which occurs approximately five and a half months into the pregnancy. Before this point, the fetus literally cannot survive without the mother and is nothing more than a parasite; beyond this point, the fetus actually can live without leeching off the mother's body. This seems like the perfect time to place the cutoff point between when the fetus is an unwanted, parasitic extension of the mother's body and when it is a being unto itself. Unfortunately, nobody cares about the actual science of all this, so instead we get arbitrary, inconsistent distinctions drawn about meaningless trimesters and other such nonsense.

[The Dark One]

The obvious place to draw the line is the age of independent viability' date=' which occurs approximately five and a half months into the pregnancy. Before this point, the fetus literally cannot survive without the mother and is nothing more than a parasite; beyond this point, the fetus actually can live without leeching off the mother's body. This seems like the perfect time to place the cutoff point between when the fetus is an unwanted, parasitic extension of the mother's body and when it is a being unto itself. Unfortunately, nobody cares about the actual science of all this, so instead we get arbitrary, inconsistent distinctions drawn about meaningless trimesters and other such nonsense.

[/quote']

 

The issue is the definition of independent viability. Modern science has, I believe, enabled children born earlier than that to survive. Incubation equipment and all that stuff, I think.

 

That being said, this is the most logical cutoff point. I do, however, think that it's not entirely ridiculous for a later-term abortion to take place. THe most ridiculous part is the fact that the mother would not have already received an abortion, had she intended to at any point, but beyond that, the baby is still not sentient at any point during birth, so it has NO will to live beyond that of any animal. Thus, infant rights are rather questionable.

[Scatty]

Actually' date=' sterilization of a "repeat offender" seems like a rather logical choice....

[/quote']

 

Although to me this sounds gruesome, atrocious, completely unethical and wrong on all planes of reason and makes me not want to think about it at all, that's just me.

[Tabris]

Actually' date=' sterilization of a "repeat offender" seems like a rather logical choice....

[/quote']

 

Although to me this sounds gruesome, atrocious, completely unethical and wrong on all planes of reason and makes me not want to think about it at all, that's just me.

 

We already do it on some other animals to curb burgeoning populations. Why not on us?

 

(Though I agree it's somewhat crude.)

[Dissonance]

Actually' date=' sterilization of a "repeat offender" seems like a rather logical choice....

[/quote']

 

Although to me this sounds gruesome, atrocious, completely unethical and wrong on all planes of reason and makes me not want to think about it at all, that's just me.

 

We already do it on some other animals to curb burgeoning populations. Why not on us?

 

(Though I agree it's somewhat crude.)

 

I'm just saying, if you can't handle the responsibility of having an uterus, you shouldn't be allowed to keep one.

[Tabris]

Actually' date=' sterilization of a "repeat offender" seems like a rather logical choice....

[/quote']

 

Although to me this sounds gruesome, atrocious, completely unethical and wrong on all planes of reason and makes me not want to think about it at all, that's just me.

 

We already do it on some other animals to curb burgeoning populations. Why not on us?

 

(Though I agree it's somewhat crude.)

 

I'm just saying, if you can't handle the responsibility of having a uterus or testicles, you shouldn't be allowed to keep one.

 

I'm feeling that I'll lose mine marbles liking this... but aye.

[Father Wolf]

Abortion it really brings out the kid in you

[Teh ZWOOTS]

I don't see anything wrong with it. The thing can barely think when it comes out. How much thought or soul could it have while it's still "in"? Sure there is always adoption, but, there is a serious issue of human overpopulation. Why would we want to add to that by stomping on people's rights?

[Dissonance]

I don't see anything wrong with it. The thing can barely think when it comes out. How much thought or soul could it have while it's still "in"? Sure there is always adoption' date=' but, there is a serious issue of human overpopulation. Why would we want to add to that by stomping on people's rights?

[/quote']

 

I assume you want all mentally handicapped people to be killed too, right? After all, how much thought or soul can they possibly have?

[Teh ZWOOTS]

I don't see anything wrong with it. The thing can barely think when it comes out. How much thought or soul could it have while it's still "in"? Sure there is always adoption' date=' but, there is a serious issue of human overpopulation. Why would we want to add to that by stomping on people's rights?

[/quote']

 

I assume you want all mentally handicapped people to be killed too, right? After all, how much thought or soul can they possibly have?

 

1. The mentally handicapped have brains. They just don't work very well. A baby developing in a fetus is still developing a brain.

2. The mentally handicapped are alive. Fetus babies are technically alive.

3. I never said much about babies after they're born. I just said that they are not capable of thought. I never said that they don't have souls and I never said anything that could possibly indicate that if you're stupid you don't have a soul. =/

4. Forgive me for saying "fetus babies". I don't know the proper word(s) to use. xD

[Dissonance]

I don't see anything wrong with it. The thing can barely think when it comes out. How much thought or soul could it have while it's still "in"? Sure there is always adoption' date=' but, there is a serious issue of human overpopulation. Why would we want to add to that by stomping on people's rights?

[/quote']

 

I assume you want all mentally handicapped people to be killed too, right? After all, how much thought or soul can they possibly have?

 

1. The mentally handicapped have brains. They just don't work very well. A baby developing in a fetus is still developing a brain.

2. The mentally handicapped are alive. Fetus babies are technically alive.

3. I never said much about babies after they're born. I just said that they are not capable of thought. I never said that they don't have souls and I never said anything that could possibly indicate that if you're stupid you don't have a soul. =/

4. Forgive me for saying "fetus babies". I don't know the proper word(s) to use. xD

 

See above bolded.

[Teh ZWOOTS]

I don't see anything wrong with it. The thing can barely think when it comes out. How much thought or soul could it have while it's still "in"? Sure there is always adoption' date=' but, there is a serious issue of human overpopulation. Why would we want to add to that by stomping on people's rights?

[/quote']

 

I assume you want all mentally handicapped people to be killed too, right? After all, how much thought or soul can they possibly have?

 

1. The mentally handicapped have brains. They just don't work very well. A baby developing in a fetus is still developing a brain.

2. The mentally handicapped are alive. Fetus babies are technically alive.

3. I never said much about babies after they're born. I just said that they are not capable of thought. I never said that they don't have souls and I never said anything that could possibly indicate that if you're stupid you don't have a soul. =/

4. Forgive me for saying "fetus babies". I don't know the proper word(s) to use. xD

 

See above bolded.

 

Still not about the baby after they're born and still has nothing to do with the mentally handicapped.

[Scatty]

Actually' date=' sterilization of a "repeat offender" seems like a rather logical choice....

[/quote']

 

Although to me this sounds gruesome, atrocious, completely unethical and wrong on all planes of reason and makes me not want to think about it at all, that's just me.

 

We already do it on some other animals to curb burgeoning populations. Why not on us?

 

(Though I agree it's somewhat crude.)

 

I'm just saying, if you can't handle the responsibility of having a uterus or testicles, you shouldn't be allowed to keep one.

 

I'm feeling that I'll lose mine marbles liking this... but aye.

 

I didn't want to state an argument, merely an opinion. I will never agree to human castration, to me, it sounds worse that death penalty for shoplifting. But I don't want to change your opinions at all...

[Dissonance]

Actually' date=' sterilization of a "repeat offender" seems like a rather logical choice....

[/quote']

 

Although to me this sounds gruesome, atrocious, completely unethical and wrong on all planes of reason and makes me not want to think about it at all, that's just me.

 

We already do it on some other animals to curb burgeoning populations. Why not on us?

 

(Though I agree it's somewhat crude.)

 

I'm just saying, if you can't handle the responsibility of having a uterus or testicles, you shouldn't be allowed to keep one.

 

I'm feeling that I'll lose mine marbles liking this... but aye.

 

I didn't want to state an argument, merely an opinion. I will never agree to human castration, to me, it sounds worse that death penalty for shoplifting. But I don't want to change your opinions at all...

 

Er....who the hell still castrates? Last time I checked, we have this neat thing called a "vasectomy"

[Tabris]

Actually' date=' sterilization of a "repeat offender" seems like a rather logical choice....

[/quote']

 

Although to me this sounds gruesome, atrocious, completely unethical and wrong on all planes of reason and makes me not want to think about it at all, that's just me.

 

We already do it on some other animals to curb burgeoning populations. Why not on us?

 

(Though I agree it's somewhat crude.)

 

I'm just saying, if you can't handle the responsibility of having a uterus or testicles, you shouldn't be allowed to keep one.

 

I'm feeling that I'll lose mine marbles liking this... but aye.

 

I didn't want to state an argument, merely an opinion. I will never agree to human castration, to me, it sounds worse that death penalty for shoplifting. But I don't want to change your opinions at all...

 

Er....who the hell still castrates? Last time I checked, we have this neat thing called a "vasectomy"

 

And a still neater thing to reverse that. Neat 'cause it has a minimal chance of success.

[Cyber Altair]

[Yasu]

 

I waited 1 month for this D:<

I'm disappointed.

[Tentacruel]

Let's assume you are a girl. At the moment, you may be a girl, or maybe a boy, or maybe a transvestite. But, just assume you are a girl.

 

 

You walk home one day and your father rapes you. You have not a clue why. He straps you down to the bed, and you can tell what happens from there. No condoms, nothing.

 

 

In a few weeks, you realize you are pregnant. This is going to be your child where your father is the father. You are about to give birth to your own brother.

 

 

Tell me, wouldn't you want to get an abortion? Would you want to give birth to a baby that was created by mistake? By your father's horrible intentions?

 

 

Even if the baby was going to be adopted, wouldn't you feel horrible just thinking of giving birth? Seriously, it's your fathers damn child. I'd hate to give birth to it.

 

 

And to further my point, let's assume you are 16, still in high school. You have all of these things to worry about, and now the potential for a baby.

 

 

Abortion is perfectly fine as long as people don't abuse it.

 

Dammit I hate when Dark is right. But he is. The problem is, if its made as legal as some people want it, people will abuse it.

[2sick4u]

Let's assume you are a girl. At the moment' date=' you may be a girl, or maybe a boy, or maybe a transvestite. But, just assume you are a girl.

 

 

You walk home one day and your father rapes you. You have not a clue why. He straps you down to the bed, and you can tell what happens from there. No condoms, nothing.

 

 

In a few weeks, you realize you are pregnant. This is going to be your child where your father is the father. You are about to give birth to your own brother.

 

 

Tell me, wouldn't you want to get an abortion? Would you want to give birth to a baby that was created by mistake? By your father's horrible intentions?

 

 

Even if the baby was going to be adopted, wouldn't you feel horrible just thinking of giving birth? Seriously, it's your fathers damn child. I'd hate to give birth to it.

 

 

And to further my point, let's assume you are 16, still in high school. You have all of these things to worry about, and now the potential for a baby.

 

 

Abortion is perfectly fine as long as people don't abuse it.

[/quote']

Dammit I hate when Dark is right. But he is. The problem is, if its made as legal as some people want it, people will abuse it.

 

What the fuck? I think Dark's hypothetical situations are nonsense that try to invoke principle but get too indulgent on the specifics of it's own story.

 

You're talking about people abusing abortion? That's the defining argument for you? Not whether the woman has the right to bear the child; whether the embryo deserves distinction as lifeform before it's full development, but whether it's abused. I find it highly unlikely a women would have willing, unprotected sex with the intention of just getting the result of which sucked out of her later.

 

Now onto an actually reasonable point of view.

 

In my opinion, the right to abortion obviously rests with the female. To assume she doesn't have a right to termination does she see fit, is to assume she's an incubator. People are not a means to an end, people are ends themselves. In other words, a female is not inherit of committing to pregnancy outside of her will for the purpose of the embryo, as to say so, would be to call her less of a person than the embryo itself. Before proper stages of development (Mental activity, central nervous systems), a woman has every right to abort at her own will.

[Tentacruel]

What the funk? I think Dark's hypothetical situations are nonsense that try to invoke principle but get too indulgent on the specifics of it's own story.

 

You're talking about people abusing abortion? That's the defining argument for you? Not whether the woman has the right to bear the child; whether the embryo deserves distinction as lifeform before it's full development, but whether it's abused. I find it highly unlikely a women would have willing, unprotected sex with the intention of just getting the result of which sucked out of her later.

 

Now onto an actually reasonable point of view.

 

In my opinion, the right to abortion obviously rests with the female. To assume she doesn't have a right to termination does she see fit, is to assume she's an incubator. People are not a means to an end, people are ends themselves. In other words, a female is not inherit of committing to pregnancy outside of her will for the purpose of the embryo, as to say so, would be to call her less of a person than the embryo itself. Before proper stages of development (Mental activity, central nervous systems), a woman has every right to abort at her own will.

 

 

Cool story bro.

[Dr. Cakey]

Dammit I hate when Dark is right. But he is. The problem is, if its made as legal as some people want it, people will abuse it.

See, the thing about this is that it makes about as much sense as people "abusing" the name change system (lol current events). People seem to think that "abusing" means "doing it a lot", and anything that allows someone to do something frequently is somehow dangerous. Now, while changing usernames and abortions are about as different as you can get, it doesn't make much sense for someone to "abuse" abortions when contraceptive pills exist. Seeing as the pills are, um...pills, and the abortion is, um...a medical procedure with this that and the other risk, and probably costs more, too.

[2sick4u]

Cool story bro.

 

Go away.

[The Dark One]

For those worried about "abuse" of abortion: With legality comes regulation.

[King of Yesonia]

I think if people aren't ready to have a baby, they should have the right to abort.