Scroll to see replies
24 weeks, start to develop nerves to feel pain at 28 weeks.
I think that ending human life is wrong. I don't think it should be banned but there it isn't right.
It's the person's choice. I don't think we should judge. Would I get an abortion if I became pregnant by accident? Yes, but I have reasons for it. Just like people may have reasons for aborting or carrying on with the pregnancy. I'm just a firm believer in not judging a person's decision when it comes to abortion especially. At the end of the day, it's their choice, not ours.
I can see the point of principle that life begins at conception, and there's no point in discussing that - either you do or you don't.
To address your question directly, I don't see how anyone who is not one of the above camp can argue that all abortion should be banned. I can see the point that it's the woman's body, so it is her choice what to do, but at some point I feel the baby's right to live outweighs the woman's bodily autonomy. If a 38-weeks pregnant woman wanted to terminate, that ought to be rejected and the baby and mother very carefully monitored if not separated.
To address your question directly, I don't see how anyone who is not one of the above camp can argue that all abortion should be banned. I can see the point that it's the woman's body, so it is her choice what to do, but at some point I feel the baby's right to live outweighs the woman's bodily autonomy. If a 38-weeks pregnant woman wanted to terminate, that ought to be rejected and the baby and mother very carefully monitored if not separated.
Original post by Airmed
It's the person's choice. I don't think we should judge. Would I get an abortion if I became pregnant by accident? Yes, but I have reasons for it. Just like people may have reasons for aborting or carrying on with the pregnancy. I'm just a firm believer in not judging a person's decision when it comes to abortion especially. At the end of the day, it's their choice, not ours.
Personally I think this is one of the biggest problems with the abortion debate. People think "what would I do if it happened to me?".
The problem is, if it happens to you, you're no longer impartial. If I were a woman who accidentally got pregnant, maybe I would abort too, because it would be the most preferable option for me. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's right or fair on that child.
When it comes to making laws, I'd be much more likely to respect an impartial opinion where care is taken to ensure that the rights of the mother, the father and the child are all considered and taken into account.
Original post by tazarooni89
Personally I think this is one of the biggest problems with the abortion debate. People think "what would I do if it happened to me?".
The problem is, if it happens to you, you're no longer impartial. If I were a woman who accidentally got pregnant, maybe I would abort too, because it would be the most preferable option for me. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's right or fair on that child.
When it comes to making laws, I'd be much more likely to respect an impartial opinion where care is taken to ensure that the rights of the mother, the father and the child are all considered and taken into account.
The problem is, if it happens to you, you're no longer impartial. If I were a woman who accidentally got pregnant, maybe I would abort too, because it would be the most preferable option for me. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's right or fair on that child.
When it comes to making laws, I'd be much more likely to respect an impartial opinion where care is taken to ensure that the rights of the mother, the father and the child are all considered and taken into account.
I definitely agree with the bold part. Abortion is just one of these tricky situations where there is truly no right or wrong answer.
No, it isn't wrong. Sometimes a woman will become pregnant and she doesn't feel ready or stable enough to carry a baby, let alone bring it up and have access to funds for raising the child. We should respect the woman's choice as a free individual, as the onus is on her womb to carry the baby.
I definitely agree with the bold part. Abortion is just one of these tricky situations where there is truly no right or wrong answer.
Ultimately, the tricky part of the abortion seems to be the issue of whether or not the foetus has the right to life or not.
There are some who will say that "it's just a clump of cells, not a real person", and some who will say "we're all just big clumps of cells, a foetus is as much a person as anyone else". But these are just subjective opinions. The truth is we don't really have the knowledge or the authority to say which one is the right answer.
Personally, I would err on the side of caution and say it's far better not to abort - at least that way you have unequivocally done no wrong to anyone. As much as I agree that women should be able to choose not to have a baby if they don't want one, that choice can be also exercised before (taking the risk of) getting pregnant, without needing to have an abortion carried out.
This debate is the most irresolvable because it has three impossible components to it.
1. Spiritual- does a soul exist and if so when?
2. Biological- When is a fetus/baby a biological human. There are more than one possible definition.
3. Philosophical- Self awareness, human potential, the ability to interact with environment, etc. How do we define a philosophical human.
These things are not provable, but that does not mean the truth is subjective. There is a truth even if we can't prove it. In order for a person to be guilty of a crime they have to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Since that is impossible to prove that a pregnant mother killed a person then abortion should not be illegal.
Caveat: If you choose to end the life of your unborn baby when it is impossible for you to be certain that it isn't a human life based on your own convenience, then you have taken a reprehensible risk with your own morality.
1. Spiritual- does a soul exist and if so when?
2. Biological- When is a fetus/baby a biological human. There are more than one possible definition.
3. Philosophical- Self awareness, human potential, the ability to interact with environment, etc. How do we define a philosophical human.
These things are not provable, but that does not mean the truth is subjective. There is a truth even if we can't prove it. In order for a person to be guilty of a crime they have to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Since that is impossible to prove that a pregnant mother killed a person then abortion should not be illegal.
Caveat: If you choose to end the life of your unborn baby when it is impossible for you to be certain that it isn't a human life based on your own convenience, then you have taken a reprehensible risk with your own morality.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by JustAGuyy
I feel that if you put yourself in a position where you could become pregnant then you should be prepared to carry to term and bring that child into the world.
Abortion is murder
Abortion is murder
Even if your child will die within a few months of birth?
Original post by Tiger Rag
Even if your child will die within a few months of birth?
Knew that someone would bring up 'but what about rape/incest/birth defect'.
In reality these issues make up a very very small number of the reasons why people abort. For rape and incest it is below 1%.
The point remains - abortion is murder.
Original post by ckingalt
This debate is the most irresolvable because it has three impossible components to it.
1. Spiritual- does a soul exist and if so when?
2. Biological- When is a fetus/baby a biological human. There are more than one possible definition.
3. Philosophical- Self awareness, human potential, the ability to interact with environment, etc. How do we define a philosophical human.
These things are not provable, but that does not mean the truth is subjective. There is a truth even if we can't prove it. In order for a person to be guilty of a crime they have to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Since that is impossible to prove that a pregnant mother killed a person then abortion should not be illegal.
Caveat: If you choose to end the life of your unborn baby when it is impossible for you to be certain that it isn't a human life based on your own convenience, then you have taken a reprehensible risk with your own morality.
1. Spiritual- does a soul exist and if so when?
2. Biological- When is a fetus/baby a biological human. There are more than one possible definition.
3. Philosophical- Self awareness, human potential, the ability to interact with environment, etc. How do we define a philosophical human.
These things are not provable, but that does not mean the truth is subjective. There is a truth even if we can't prove it. In order for a person to be guilty of a crime they have to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Since that is impossible to prove that a pregnant mother killed a person then abortion should not be illegal.
Caveat: If you choose to end the life of your unborn baby when it is impossible for you to be certain that it isn't a human life based on your own convenience, then you have taken a reprehensible risk with your own morality.
I don't think I would agree with this argument.
There is a conundrum in philosophy known as "The problem of other minds", whereby each of us have no way of being certain whether other human beings are genuinely conscious and self-aware, or if they are simply robots/illusions that can appear to replicate conscious human behaviour.
Going by this logic, no murder should be illegal because we can never prove that the victim who got killed had a soul, nor that they were self aware. Indeed throughout history, many murders (or what we would now consider to be murders) have been justified on the basis that the victims were considered to just be soulless creatures and were defined out of their personhood. For example in the Australian continent it used to be legal for white people to hunt and kill Aborigines, as they came under the legal definition of "flora and fauna" (i.e. animals) rather than biological humans.
Ridiculous argument by pro choicers: 'her body her choice'
Ridiculous argument by pro lifers:
'It's wrong to kill a human'
The simple fact is there is only one good reason to allow abortion and that is that there isn't a good reason not to allow it. The problem is abortion is, like so many other topics, almost impossible for so many people to debate rationally.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Ridiculous argument by pro lifers:
'It's wrong to kill a human'
The simple fact is there is only one good reason to allow abortion and that is that there isn't a good reason not to allow it. The problem is abortion is, like so many other topics, almost impossible for so many people to debate rationally.
Posted from TSR Mobile
No, being forced to have a child you don't want is wrong.
Original post by Nirvana1989-1994
No, being forced to have a child you don't want is wrong.
+1 on this
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
