The Abortion Thread

[Dak]

When would coercion be a factor? Few people would ever actually voice their secret opinion "she should just get an abortion."

I meant specifically, coercive funding for the abortion.

However, I have an inlaw that was browbeat for months by her family to get an abortion until she acquiesced to be dragged to it late in the pregnancy, and has been mentally fucked because of it ever since. So coercion does happen in the way you meant as well. Maybe not often, but it does happen.

 

[Blind Guardian]

I thought the term "pro-life" was used only by the non-abortion-people, tactically to make them appear better than the other side by default.

 

[damnromulans]

I meant specifically, coercive funding for the abortion.

However, I have an inlaw that was browbeat for months by her family to get an abortion until she acquiesced to be dragged to it late in the pregnancy, and has been mentally fucked because of it ever since. So coercion does happen in the way you meant as well. Maybe not often, but it does happen.

That's pretty messed up and I'm sorry they did that to her, but instances like that are pretty few and far between.

 

[-CC-]

Speaking of abortions, can you fuckers stop posting giant pictures? Horizontal scrolling is for faggots.

 

[Mort Divine]

I understand the pro-life position, but the way I see it is in cases like this that regard things that don't affect anyone but those directly involved in the situation outside voices should mean nothing.

 

[Dak]

It does involve them when it's publicly funded. One of the many problems coercion brings to the table.

 

[JontRevolting]

You'd have to think euthanasia is a far greater topic of importance.So-called 'pro-lifers'are really just incredibly arrogant to think that anyone would care about their opinions concerning people they don't even know based on their bullshit ideas of what they think is right.And the kid is really too young to know or care,if anyone has been circumsized or been through infant hernia they will know this.And as it stands people currently have the right to choose and 99.99% of parents will make the right decision if it arises,based on varying factors.
I feel far worse for those poor folk in various stages of terminal illness,extreme discomfort and misery that don't have that control over their right(and it is a right) to live or die in a dignified manner.It'd be nice when we get older just to know that the option is there as a last resort if things get so bad.Of course there are a swag load of different factors involved in each individual case,same as abortions.

 

[Vimana]

The idea of fucking a bitch, impregnating her, and then terminating that little fucker in her uterus makes me interested in having sex again.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

And the kid is really too young to know or care,if anyone has been circumsized or been through infant hernia they will know this.

Then why not just make it legal to kill people as long as you do it in their sleep without waking them?

 

[JontRevolting]

There has to be a very good reason to be legally able to take life.Not sure if going around killing people in there sleep for the hell of it is a good idea.

The courts and legal system are happy putting people to death as a form of punishment,in certain parts of the world.Why do they have problems allowing individuals to make their own decisions based on mercy.

 

[Einherjar86]

We discussed this a bit on fb. Like I said earlier, I think potential personhood confers a prima facie right to life.

"Potential personhood" could also apply to the reproductive capacity of human beings (i.e. sperm, ova). Do you also think it's wrong for people to take contraceptive measures, or wear condoms?

 

[crimsonfloyd]

"Potential personhood" could also apply to the reproductive capacity of human beings (i.e. sperm, ova). Do you also think it's wrong for people to take contraceptive measures, or wear condoms?

That is one of the extreme consequences people who accept the "potential personhood argument" have to accept. This is why Catholics are against masturbation and birth control.

 

[Mort Divine]

It does involve them when it's publicly funded. One of the many problems coercion brings to the table.

This whole stop them being 'publicly funded' thing is really nothing more than an attack on women's sexual and reproductive rights.

 

[Dak]

This whole stop them being 'publicly funded' thing is really nothing more than an attack on women's sexual and reproductive rights.

Yes, that's all it's about Mort.

Public funding means it's funded at gunpoint. When you bring the gun of government into the issue, you can't be surprised when people fight to point the gun at each other.

You want to pig out in the trough of stolen money through the proxy of government, there are strings attached, and one of those strings is forever fighting to keep the trough full through whatever bullshit reason you can think up. Like declaring the trough a "right".

 

[skeptik]

For the sake of the immediate discussion, it would probably be beneficial to hold off the issues of government and third trimesters until the crux of the discussion has been reached.

 

[Einherjar86]

That is one of the extreme consequences people who accept the "potential personhood argument" have to accept. This is why Catholics are against masturbation and birth control.

Yeah, I'm aware of those prohibitions among certain people within the Christian community; but I don't think Cyth is a Christian, which is why I'm asking.

 

[Dak]

For the sake of the immediate discussion, it would probably be beneficial to hold off the issues of government and third trimesters until the crux of the discussion has been reached.

Absent public funding, why is it even much of a discussion(especially on this board)? No one goes into the altered consciousness thread and *starts a riot*.

Yeah, I'm aware of those prohibitions among certain people within the Christian community; but I don't think Cyth is a Christian, which is why I'm asking.

I think there is an obvious distinction between possible outcomes and an outcome already realized. If mere sperm or egg were capable of life seperately, then the potential life argument may be extrapolated. But without uniting and implanting in the uterine wall, there is no actual potential, any more than a stack of wood alone is a potential house. It's also potential mulch. It takes more than that.

 

[MasterOLightning]

what a dumbass statement. what idiot doctor will do abortions for free and who will pay for all the medication, equipment, disposal, etc and who will shell out for those stipends? it will come out of YOUR taxes, genius!

also, such action will only promote perpetual mindless fucking and aborting. SOME order must be upheld to control the moral decay of society.

abortions should not be illegal but certainly not dirt cheap or free. contraception should be cheap. late stage abortions should be illegal though.

I'd love for the government to pay for these things. You couldn't seriously have thought I expected that funding to magically appear out of thin air. I pay property taxes, and a very large chunk of that goes to pay for schools. I'd rather that money went to fund abortions for those who wanted them.

It doesn't take a whole lot of critical thinking to realize a publicly funded abortion is considerably less expensive than a publicly funded childbirth at the county hospital, much less 12 years of public schooling. I can understand people who, for moral reasons, don't want the government paying for abortions. But it can't be defended on fiscal grounds.

I think all abortions are regrettable things, as do most pro-choice people. I'm assuming most are also not in favor of 3rd trimester abortions either, other than extreme instances. Not really necessary to debate.

 

[Einherjar86]

Absent public funding, why is it even much of a discussion(especially on this board)? No one goes into the altered consciousness thread and *starts a riot*.

Well, I think the "right-to-life" issue is important to discuss, since there seems to be some disagreement on this board.

 

[Dak]

Well, I think the "right-to-life" issue is important to discuss, since there seems to be some disagreement on this board.

I edited my original post to respond to your previous post, hope you catch that.

Anyway, yes, right-to-life is important, but from a law/policy perspective, abortion is almost impossible to handle practically. All courses of legal/coercive action run into the issue where they cause more problems than they solve.