On the fence about abortion, and I have some moral questions for both sides

Oh, I did. You chose to ignore it but here, I'll clarify. You say all complex life has rights, no? Well, are you telling me the animals slaughtered everyday have rights? My point is; not all complex life has rights. And won't ever.

NGL, I have no clue what pro choice is.

ok well then how do you justify your distinctions morally, ie what are the constant laws that define which complex life has aright to live and which doesn't

well science defines it at conception but i personally am torn because the day after pill is not the same as an abortion or the killing of a baby so my question is where do you make the distinction and what basis do you have for it.

but we have laws against animal cruelty and they cant kill the animals in anyway they want

Perhaps a pro-choicer would condemn selective abortion, not because they think it is a violation of anybody's rights or morally wrong on a fundamental level, but rather because of the potential impact it might have upon society. For example in India, gender selective abortion is banned in order to avoid a huge gender imbalance in society, because as a result of cultural factors, many people prefer to have sons rather than daughters.

I think abortion is fine and should be allowed ONLY during the first trimester, when the 'foetus', if you can call it that, is just a bunch of cells.

After that the water become waaaaay too murky and the current limit of 26 weeks is unacceptable, many children have survived after being born that early.

And also it shouldn't be free and covered by the NHS. If you don't want a child there's a plethora of contraceptives available. It's also not like women wake up one day and they're randomly pregnant; if you can't afford a child or an abortion, it's simple just don't engage in sex, it's not a birth given right for a person to have sex.

Perhaps a pro-choicer would condemn selective abortion, not because they think it is a violation of anybody's rights or morally wrong on a fundamental level, but rather because of the potential impact it might have upon society. For example in India, gender selective abortion is banned in order to avoid a huge gender imbalance in society, because as a result of cultural factors, many people prefer to have sons rather than daughters.

Exactly. I am 100% pro choice with every fibre of my being but you cannot have selective abortion where people start having abortions just because they dont like some minor detail. If you choose to be a parent you will have to love that kid no matter if he turns out ginger, left handed, gay or whatever else. Imagine the amount of idiots who would start getting abortions because it isnt the 'perfect baby' they imagine, birth rate would significantly drop, increase in health and fertility complications for women, and as you said, imagine if people in India started aborting fetuses based on gender!! It would be a disaster.

Anyways,miniscule foetuses are not human beings, just like any other cells in your body arent human beings either, is the sperm you shoot into your tissue a human being thrown out into the trash? Like seriously, people need to get a brain.

true but does anyone really think abortion should be covered by the NHS? lol.

Tbh I dont understand those who say tampons

or contraceptives or whatever should be free,

I understand those are basic items we all need, but having a place to live or water to drink are also basic items we all need yet that isnt free.

Yes we can and we do. It is not contradiction.

Individual characteristics like handedness arent even known in the first trimester since the foetus DOESNT HAVE INDIVIDUAL HUMAN CHARACTERISTICS. It is not a human. As I said its just a bunch of cells the same way sperm is just a bunch of cells that could potentially evolve into a human being but sperm itself is not a human being. When you go in for an abortion a few weeks after you got pregnant its just a bunch of cells. You can actually tell handedness in the later stages of pregnancy, and obviously at that point it is a human being when it has developed a heart, etc, thats why abortion is not allowed in all stages of pregnancy - the cells evolve into a human! Therefore aborting a foetus because it is left handed is wrong BECAUSE if you can tell it is left handed, it is not just cells at that stage , it is already a human being!

Also, just a side note, I cannot deal with the idiots who say things like 'What if your mom aborted you???' The question, nothing. If you got aborted you would have never been born and if you had never born born you would not have a brain to realize you were never born therefore it does not matter to anybody whether they are born or not. Cells that get aborted in the first trimester dont go to heaven crying about how mommy aborted them. Then again some people might believe that does happen which isnt surprising since some people also believe the Earth was created in 7 days by some random guy with a beard.

no uterus no opinion

You can tell handedness well before the fetus is viable. I'm not sure you understand when the fetus becomes a human being, it isn't just "when it starts to look a bit human".

You cannot tell a bunch of cells is left handed at the early stages of pregnancy. I'm not sure you understand English though.

Thank you!

Lets face it, if men were able to get pregnant, abortion would not even be a question at all and you could get it done at the corner shop whenever you wanted.

Abortion is still legal even when the fetus has most recognisable human characteristics. Handedness is supposedly determinable at 10 weeks, well within the abortion limit:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6186-handedness-develops-in-the-womb/

Do you actually know what the current abortion limit is based on? Your posts seem to indicate you don't the first clue, so perhaps discussing this topic isn't really your thing.

Its pretty vile how you want to turn a debate about an important moral question into a men vs women argument. You're just doing the same old thing all murderers do, you try to dehumanise what you're killing and claim it isn't really human because it is an inconvinience to you. Its delusional rationalisation which is why so many people find abortion abhorrent, they can see right through your morally corrupt reasoning, its really just about murdering something you find annoying.

The first trimester is until week 12 so 'well within the abortion limit' is a bit of a stretch, its plus two weeks out of 9 months. Therefor you cannot tell whether it is left handed or not for 75% of the first trimester. Perhaps the abortion limit could be lowered by a few weeks. All of this correspons with what I said, which is that cells at 4 weeks old havent developed characteristics like that yet. So thank you for providing a source to prove me right!

1. Does a foetus have any rights or value?
2. On what moral grounds does the mother alone decide a foetus's worth?
3. In instances like a woman aborting a girl because she wanted a boy, or aborting a gay baby because she wanted a straight one is this any less moral that aborting a child simply because you didn't want one, and if so would you ban it?

And also it shouldn't be free and covered by the NHS. If you don't want a child there's a plethora of contraceptives available. It's also not like women wake up one day and they're randomly pregnant; if you can't afford a child or an abortion, it's simple just don't engage in sex, it's not a birth given right for a person to have sex.