Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by madders94)
    Again, how interesting that the majority of posters so desperate to control women's bodies under the guise of being pro-life are male, and will never have to carry a baby they don't want. I hold you in the same regard as I hold the people who stand outside abortion clinics protesting - privileged, misogynistic and inherently ignorant.
    Similarly, the same people who tend to be pro-life (in general, I've not been searching through posts of others, but those that are conservative with a lower case c) are pro-life as far as the baby being born, but after that they don't care.

    The baby has a teenage mother and will have a rubbish time, don't care, pro-life - no abortion. The baby is being born to a woman who despises children and will only look after it's basic needs and not nurture it, don't care, pro-life - no abortion. The baby is being born to a family that already has 5 children and can't afford another mouth to feed, don't care, pro-life - no abortion. The baby is being born to a woman who will have to leave her dangerous job because she's pregnant and may find it's not there when she gets back and therefore will have very little money, don't care, pro-life - no abortion. Baby being born to a drug addict, don't care, pro-life - no abortion. Baby being born to a woman in an abusive relationship, don't care, pro-life - no abortion. Baby being born to someone who's already had several children removed by social services, don't care, pro-life - no abortion.

    Who exactly is pro-life in this situation?
    They're not pro-life, they're pro-baby-to-term.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    You are confusing what back street abortionists did with what real doctors do to induce an abortion. Illegal abortionists would use anything from injecting poisonous chemicals to using unsterilised and inappropriate equipment to induce an abortion.

    Nice try rewriting history, which pro life site did you get your "facts" from?
    I am not confusing anything and there is no advantage to be had in attempting to belittle me or what I say.

    I quite clearly said that illegal abortions carry a greater chance of risk.

    However, it is true that legal abortions also carry a chance of risk, and that the overall harm done to women is roughly the same in number even though in proportion far fewer women come to harm with 'proper' abortions.

    No re-written history and it does not matter where facts are written, so long as they are factual.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2344277)
    abortion's only legal up to the point where the fetus can survive anyway, which imo is when it 'counts' as a person.
    In the UK, abortion is legal beyond that point.

    See my post here.
    • TSR Support Team
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    The irony is, you are appearing totally misandric. Sure, men can't carry children - but why do you assume that is an advantage? I'm gay and want to settle down with a man I love and have a family. I can't carry a child, no matter how much I might want to. You can't assume that men not being able to carry children is some 'privileged' advantage over women because it simply isn't necessarily.

    I am not a strong supporter of abortion, but I accept that in some situations it may be practical and acceptable. With that said, when you hear about women aborting their children so they can go on Big Brother, it makes you feel sick to the stomach that people like that can get pregnant but men who may be the best parents in the world can't. It's biological fact that nobody can change, but I have to reaffirm that it is wrong of you to assume men are at some kind of advantage by not being able to carry children.
    I don't think anyone has said that we have an advantage by not having to carry a child, but rather that it's easy for us to say no abortions when we are completely ignorant of what it's like to be pregnant or the issues that arise as a result (how could we not be, we can't get pregnant or experience that for ourselves).

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    Apparently while it's still in the womb it's a parasite but as soon as it leaves it's a baby.
    Another inconsistency is that if someone kills a pregnant woman, they are guilty of murdering TWO people, the mother and the child. Whereas the mother can kill the child and not be guilty of murdering a person.

    Another inconsistency is that a pregnant woman is referred to as a 'mother' unless she is going through the doors of an abortion clinic.

    In reality, it does not matter what we call it, or the pregnant woman: it matters whether we care about the termination of a life and whether we put the life of a child above the (huge) inconvenience to a woman who is accidentally pregnant, or above the global interest in keeping the population down.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Absolutely ****ing not.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Darien)
    Another inconsistency is that if someone kills a pregnant woman, they are guilty of murdering TWO people, the mother and the child. Whereas the mother can kill the child and not be guilty of murdering a person.

    Another inconsistency is that a pregnant woman is referred to as a 'mother' unless she is going through the doors of an abortion clinic.

    In reality, it does not matter what we call it, or the pregnant woman: it matters whether we care about the termination of a life and whether we put the life of a child above the (huge) inconvenience to a woman who is accidentally pregnant, or above the global interest in keeping the population down.
    I hate this silly argument. Murder is the wilful taking of life. Foetuses aren't alive. I agree that the inconsistency is absurd. Murdering a pregnant woman is murdering 1 person in my view.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWorldEndsWithMe)
    Let me just ask. Say you go to a party, hook up with some girl and then go off and have sex. You've no intention of ever seeing her again. She gets pregnant and wants to abort. Are you seriously going to try and stop her getting an abortion? Force her to carry around a fetus that she never even wanted?
    That's a good question. Many men are suffering enormously as it is from women deliberately becoming pregnant to be a single mother, yet claiming 18 years worth of finance from a man who never wanted to be a father.

    Men on the side of no-abortion need to think carefully about how they feel increasing that risk by having to support every child, rather than only the ones deliberately created against their will.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rosie786)
    You don't agree with me? I created this thread lol
    ye I agree with you. I meant nearly everyone else in the first couple of pages were supporting killing the kids without any good reasons. Just #yolo reasons.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    No. I believe that every woman has the right to choice- it's her body and her life will be affected.

    Even if abortion was illegal, it wouldn't stop people getting them- probably under unsafe or unsanitary conditions.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    I don't think anyone has said that we have an advantage by not having to carry a child, but rather that it's easy for us to say no abortions when we are completely ignorant of what it's like to be pregnant or the issues that arise as a result (how could we not be, we can't get pregnant or experience that for ourselves).

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The inference from the post I quoted was that men are at an advantage by not having to carry a child. Because we will never have to carry a child, it's apparently easy for us to judge and make decisions for women.

    Men who are against abortion are said to be misogynous, but in fact I would say that this lack of respect for a man's opinion based on his predispositional inability to carry children is misandric and unfair. Just because one can't do something, that doesn't mean they can't make a rational judgement about it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    that is a realistic situation since premature births have happened at 23 weeks.

    I think they become a person once their brains have developed since they can start thinking on their own at that point. Theres already been research showing babies have dreams while they're in the womb.

    Can't remember the point at which their brains have developed but it's well before 24 weeks.
    I outlined the most relevant time-points in an earlier thread. The brain develops between about 9 and 16 weeks old.
    • TSR Support Team
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    The inference from the post I quoted was that men are at an advantage by not having to carry a child. Because we will never have to carry a child, it's apparently easy for us to judge and make decisions for women.

    Men who are against abortion are said to be misogynous, but in fact I would say that this lack of respect for a man's opinion based on his predispositional inability to carry children is misandric and unfair. Just because one can't do something, that doesn't mean they can't make a rational judgement about it.
    It is easy for us to judge having never been through it - just like it's easy for a teetotal to tell an alcoholic to just stop drinking.

    Well, men who think that a woman shouldn't have control over their own body are misogynistic. I wouldn't call it misandric to say that a man doesn't really have the same weight in such a discussion, just as it's not anti-teetotal to value the opinions of reformed alcoholics on how to deal with alcoholism over that of a teetotal. The same should extend to women who've never been pregnant - those who speak in hypotheticals don't have the same gravity of opinion as those who speak from experience - in all walks of life. That's not to say that you can't have opinions on the subject, just that they aren't as valuable as those of people who've been through it

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Messalina)
    [Abortion is] not murder. The law does not say it is murder. It's just you who does...
    The law says it is murder, too, but only if the mother is murdered at the same time.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    It is easy for us to judge having never been through it - just like it's easy for a teetotal to tell an alcoholic to just stop drinking.

    Well, men who think that a woman shouldn't have control over their own body are misogynistic. I wouldn't call it misandric to say that a man doesn't really have the same weight in such a discussion, just as it's not anti-teetotal to value the opinions of reformed alcoholics on how to deal with alcoholism over that of a teetotal. The same should extend to women who've never been pregnant - those who speak in hypotheticals don't have the same gravity of opinion as those who speak from experience - in all walks of life. That's not to say that you can't have opinions on the subject, just that they aren't as valuable as those of people who've been through it

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    no abortions =/= no control over body.

    You have the same amount of control you always had. Just don't have sex and don't kill anyone. Who's to say the child is your material possession to destroy anyway.

    feminists always think it's some conspiracy to control them, when in fact it's just wanting to save lives. Sad they can't think about anyone other than themselves.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    The inference from the post I quoted was that men are at an advantage by not having to carry a child. Because we will never have to carry a child, it's apparently easy for us to judge and make decisions for women.

    Men who are against abortion are said to be misogynous, but in fact I would say that this lack of respect for a man's opinion based on his predispositional inability to carry children is misandric and unfair. Just because one can't do something, that doesn't mean they can't make a rational judgement about it.
    I don't think anyone's actively saying 'men can't make rational decisions about women'. We're saying that no man will ever have to go through any shame over being a single mother, or not knowing who the father is. No man will ever have to face the idea of carrying something living inside him for 9 months that he doesn't want to have. It's then very easy to underestimate the feelings of the women involved because they don't have to face these issues. Obviously not every single man would. But the fact remains that this is an issue that affects women much, much more than men, and that women's feelings should be given higher priority than men's.


    I hate linking to Wikipedia but I don't have time right now to go and look up anything better.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortio...es_to_abortion
    Most women, and most people for that matter, believe that abortion should be legal. So that's how it should stay.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Darien)
    The law says it is murder, too, but only if the mother is murdered at the same time.
    Murdering a pregnant woman, thereby killing the foetus inside her at the same time, is not the same as having an abortion. It may have the same end result but it is a completely different action. Abortion is terminating a pregnancy, which is perfectly legal before 24 weeks in this country.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Thoughts on Thompson's argument? Anyone?

    You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist'scirculatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.[4]
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    I don't think anyone has said that we have an advantage by not having to carry a child, but rather that it's easy for us to say no abortions when we are completely ignorant of what it's like to be pregnant or the issues that arise as a result (how could we not be, we can't get pregnant or experience that for ourselves).
    That is a very narrow view.

    Most women who abort have never been through a birth: in this, they are just like all men. Men can understand and empathise with someone going through labour just as a woman who has never gone through it can.

    If a woman starts to carry a child, she can decide - completely on her own - whether to take the child to term or whether to have it killed. If she takes it to term, she commits the father to 18 years of financial servitude for a child he might never have wanted. If she has the child killed, she denies the father the opportunity of parenthood that he might crave.

    Under current law, the decision is hers alone, yet it not only obviously affects the child's life but affects the father's life, too. A man is completely at the mercy of the woman's decision and is never given the chance to decide whether to be rid of the child if he wishes, or to become a father if he desires.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rosie786)
    Hmmm lets see. Please don't take offence. I'm saying it beforehand so you don't.

    What if your mom aborted you when you were only a fetus? You wouldn't be talking to me at this very moment.
    I love my mum enough that I'd rather I wasn't born than her to have had to go through a pregnancy and birth that she didn't want. I (and no-one else) has the intrinsic 'right to be born'. Once we are we have the right to life but before that you have no rights.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.