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

Should Abortion be made illegal? Watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmallTownGirl)
    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.
    :rolleyes:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    My personal opinion - which is not based on any religious dogma whatsoever - is that life starts at conception and I therefore disagree with abortion in a lot of instances. I'm not sure what valid basis there is in trying to say that life begins anywhere else on the human development timeline (i.e. viability, sensitivity or whatever else) as it's all arbitrary. The formation of the zygote which contains the full set of chromosomes and signals the onset of human development seems to be the most sensible approach to me.

    However, this is just my opinion so I do think abortion should be legal. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't find casual abortions or abortions where people don't think they're ready as morally abhorrent. I do, but it's not my position to tell anyone this as I don't know what they're going through.
    Offline

    15
    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.
    Oh poor men who never have to worry about being shamed by society for their sex lives or forced into carrying a foetus to term when they don't want it. If you want a child adopt one who needs a family. Don't go complaining about your privilege and forcing women to ruin their lives for something they don't want and forcing unwanted children to go through the care system and have their lives screwed up when they never asked to be born.

    I bet most of these pro-life people would never consider actually adopting the children they think should be born into a world that doesn't want them.

    Also, if I were to get pregnant and I couldn't have an abortion I'd kill myself rather than carry a foetus to term but I bet all these 'pro-lifers' would rather I was dead than me have a basic medical procedure to remove a parasite from my body because they don't actually give a **** about quality of life - just quantity.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by keromedic)
    Thoughts on Thompson's argument? Anyone?
    Somewhat illogical, no? Hardly an equivalent comparison.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    Somewhat illogical, no? Hardly an equivalent comparison.
    Well, many people say that abortion is okay as the foestus is not human.

    The argument says that even if foetus were human, doesn't disprove that abortion is fine as having something depending on a person for life, even if it's human, does not give the host the responsibility of maintaining it.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the mezzil)
    Why is killing inherently "wrong"?
    If science is our source of knowledge, there are no objective moral truths. Thus, any moral statement is neither inherently wrong or inherently right. If you wish to be that pedantic about killing then you have to apply that to rape, genital mutilation, etc.

    Killing is not illegal, murder is. Distinct difference.
    I was more working off of the assumption that killing another, in 99% of circumstances, is wrong. There is a distinction between whether a killing is justified and whether a killing is morally right.

    Also most women feel relief after an abortion, not emotional turmoil.
    Yeah, I accept that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hariex)
    If science is our source of knowledge, there are no objective moral truths. Thus, any moral statement is neither inherently wrong or inherently right. If you wish to be that pedantic about killing then you have to apply that to rape, genital mutilation, etc.



    I was more working off of the assumption that killing another, in 99% of circumstances, is wrong. There is a distinction between whether a killing is justified and whether a killing is morally right.



    Yeah, I accept that.
    No, I accept that in terms of ethics, killing can be justifiable. (Such as in warfare, abortion or extreme self defence) The law also agrees with me. I do not agree with rape or genital mutilation, and neither does the law.

    I would also say on the contrary, 80% of killing is lawful and morally right. Since relatively few murders occur, but on the otherhand, many willing combatants in warfare die/ get killed.

    Science is the basis of fact, not ethics.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    YES!
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Darien)
    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.
    The fact is if abortion was made illegal, I could set myself up as a back street abortionist despite the fact I have virtually no knowledge of medicine and still get patients. If I was to do it now, I would get no patients because its easier and infinity safer to get one on the NHS.

    I think its stupid to equate the risk of having a serious medical procedure done by someone like me and a qualified doctor. There is no comparison and I think its criminally misleading and scare mongering to suggest otherwise.

    Its a good job your attitude is so stupid and extreme few people will be taken in by it.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmallTownGirl)
    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.
    Personally I'd rather have the choice to live my life and not be killed by someone else. That's just me though
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    Personally I'd rather have the choice to live my life and not be killed by someone else. That's just me though
    :five:
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    The fact is if abortion was made illegal, I could set myself up as a back street abortionist despite the fact I have virtually no knowledge of medicine and still get patients. If I was to do it now, I would get no patients because its easier and infinity safer to get one on the NHS.
    This is nonsense as a lot back alley abortions are conducted by trained physicians trying to earn extra money. This idea that back-alley abortions are literally back-alley abortion where a screwdriver is inserted into a vagina is nothing more than a myth perpetuated by pro-choicers.

    (Original post by Maker)
    I think its stupid to equate the risk of having a serious medical procedure done by someone like me and a qualified doctor. There is no comparison and I think its criminally misleading and scare mongering to suggest otherwise.
    And calling abortion a medical procedure is every bit as misleading and dishonest. Calling it a medical procedure implies that pregnancy is some kind of disease or an injury that needs to be treated. Abortion doesn't ''cure'' pregnancy, nor is it conducted to heal the mother - it is conducted with the sole intention of terminating a life developing in the womb of the mother. Terminating the life involves causing harm, damaging and injuring the fetus - this is not the purpose of medicine. The purpose of medicine as a discipline, is to heal.

    Abortion goes against everything the hippocratic oath stands for.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Maker)
    I think its stupid to equate the risk of having a serious medical procedure done by someone like me and a qualified doctor. There is no comparison and I think its criminally misleading and scare mongering to suggest otherwise.
    I quite agree, and have never seen anyone equate the two, nor would I be silly enough to do so.

    (Original post by Maker)
    Its a good job your attitude is so stupid and extreme few people will be taken in by it.
    It's a pity you are too stupid, arrogant and ignorant to understand what I have written (which does not reflect my attitude). Thankfully, most people are sensible enough to see your pathetic attempts to insult me as pure digression, indicating low intelligence and lack of manners.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    Personally I'd rather have the choice to live my life and not be killed by someone else. That's just me though
    So you'd rather your mother went through hell putting her life at risk and potentially ruining her future plans so you could live? How ****ing selfish.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmallTownGirl)
    So you'd rather your mother went through hell putting her life at risk and potentially ruining her future plans so you could live? How ****ing selfish.
    Well MY mother didn't put her life at risk and doesn't describe it as going through hell either. And her life isn't ruinned lmao.

    What's more selfish? being pregnant for 9 months so your own child can live?

    Or killing your own child that you can go around shagging more people.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    Well MY mother didn't put her life at risk and doesn't describe it as going through hell either. And her life isn't ruinned lmao.

    What's more selfish? being pregnant for 9 months so your own child can live?

    Or killing your own child that you can go around shagging more people.
    But this is exactly how a pregnant woman who doesn't want a child sees it. Because pregnancy can ruin lives and yes, most women don't die in childbirth or through complications with the pregnancy but it's still a risk that's not worth taking if there's no benefit to you.

    Clearly you know nothing of pregnancy because it's not an easy nine months - there's physical and emotional consequences which cause a lot of suffering for the woman. Why should she go through that if she doesn't have to?

    Who said anything about shagging more people? I was talking about lifestyle, career opportunities etc...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmallTownGirl)
    But this is exactly how a pregnant woman who doesn't want a child sees it. Because pregnancy can ruin lives and yes, most women don't die in childbirth or through complications with the pregnancy but it's still a risk that's not worth taking if there's no benefit to you.

    Clearly you know nothing of pregnancy because it's not an easy nine months - there's physical and emotional consequences which cause a lot of suffering for the woman. Why should she go through that if she doesn't have to?

    Who said anything about shagging more people? I was talking about lifestyle, career opportunities etc...
    But why wait till 24 weeks and then get abortion is beyond me. Why not wait three months more?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rosie786)
    But why wait till 24 weeks and then get abortion is beyond me. Why not wait three months more?
    Most abortions that late are when the baby would be born with severe disabilities or the live of the mother is in danger.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rosie786)
    But why wait till 24 weeks and then get abortion is beyond me. Why not wait three months more?
    The vast, vast majority of abortions are carried out in the first trimester. And I'd imagine a reasonable amount of the ones after that time are for birth defects or people who just didn't realise they were pregnant until that point.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/upload..._and_Wales.pdf

    "91% of abortions were carried out at under 13 weeks gestation, 77% were at under 10
    weeks"

    So most people aren't 'waiting until 24 weeks'.
    • TSR Support Team
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    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.
    When you are arguing a women shouldn't be allowed to terminate a pregnancy, you are arguing that they shouldn't have the decision over what they do to their body.

    Ah, so essentially you don't think women should be allowed to have sex except for having children. I assume you follow the same principles and abstain from doing anything yourself unless you want a child? (and by extension you don't use contraception or support it's use). Having an abortion is not killing anything, just like having a tumour removed is not killing anything (also, a foetus is not a child) - it's simply removing a ball of cells from your body. That it has the potential to grow into a person means very little - a pile of scrap metal has the potential to be made into anything, doesn't mean it shouldn't be scrapped.

    There's no lives to be saved - it is simply telling a person that they don't get to decide what they do with their bodies.

    (NB. there is no you in this situation - I'm a man).

    (Original post by Darien)
    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.
    But they've been pregnant, which is what I said. The simple facts of the matter is that men have never been pregnant, as such they do not know what it is like to be pregnant. We can know what it's like to go through a pregnancy as a couple, but we don't experience the effects that being pregnant causes upon the body.


    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.
    Well yes, but that doesn't mean that abortion should be made illegal. What that suggests is that the father should be given some say, however the mother is the one that has to carry the child to term, they should be the one who gets the final call.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • 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.