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

Pro choice or pro life? Watch

  • View Poll Results: Pro choice or pro life?
    Pro choice
    127
    76.97%
    Pro life
    41
    24.85%

    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Tinemither)
    If evidence could be provided of that, I guess so.
    There is evidence for that. Broken condoms and the failure of other contraceptive methods have resulted in conception in the past.

    Simplest solution and best chance to avoid anyone falling pregnant, though... No sex (Unlikely)! Seems like a doable solution for myself :P Asexual lifestyle to the end, I suppose.
    I'm not sure that that solution is based on a cost/benefit analysis.

    (Original post by MostUnciviIised)
    With modern forms of birth control, if you use say both a condom and the woman is on the pill, the likelihood of conception is infinitesimal.

    If a man complains about how sex doesn't feel as good with a condom on and he doesn't want to use one, that's fine but he should also take full responsibility for that decision. A human lifeform should not be killed simply because someone doesn't want to use a condom, that is totally disproportionate and unjust
    Yes, but it still happens. I was trying to see whether that poster would deem an abortion justified in the unlikely situation that contraception did fail.

    As for condoms: I think some innovation is needed, but I don't think that accidental pregnancies should be taken to term just because somebody chose to rely on what either of us would consider inadequate contraception. I'm also not quite happy with the term 'human lifeform' -- it's not specific enough.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mackemforever)
    So a woman who has already had a terrible act committed to her should have to suffer a constant reminder of what has been done to her. That to you seems more fair than removing a cluster of cells that is months away from being anything that could even vaguely be described as a human being?
    How much it resembles a human isnt my main concern. But yes, i do believe it is better, yes its a shame that the victim has to suffer more, and yes it might seem unfair. But we can spend eternity talking about how unfair the situation is, but we dont get to just put our fingers in our ears and pretend nothing happened. Sometimes you have to put others before yourself.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Pro choice for sure.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Pro choice. Their body, their choice.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Pro choice...its your body, your life
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Neither, i'm Pro Tein
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MosdUncivilised)
    The human lifeform in the woman's belly also has a life. Why doesn't its life come into it?

    What of the human lifeform in the woman's belly? It has a body as well. It didn't choose to be conceived.

    I'm not saying abortion should be outlawed, but it seems facile to assert that there are no moral dilemmas here, that there are no moral implications to ending the life of a proto-human lifeform
    The problem with that side of the argument is the differences of opinions regarding where or when it starts being defined as a life. Some believe it is at conception, others when he heart starts to beat. For that reason, it's a fickle argument.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Pro choice. With less importance given to philosophical debates regarding whether or not a foetus is a person/individual or not, no importance given to what God thinks, and a great deal more importance given to the 90 years or so that the child will have to navigate in their time on earth if there is a birth.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Pro choice.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    How much it resembles a human isnt my main concern. But yes, i do believe it is better, yes its a shame that the victim has to suffer more, and yes it might seem unfair. But we can spend eternity talking about how unfair the situation is, but we dont get to just put our fingers in our ears and pretend nothing happened. Sometimes you have to put others before yourself.
    But until it his the point where the foetus can be viewed as a functional human being then what you're doing isn't putting the child before the woman, you're putting a cluster of cells that do not meet any definition of "a person" and that have no awareness of their own existence.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MosdUncivilised)
    I'm an atheist but I'd say life begins at conception, I don't think that's really debatable in that it is a lifeform. The feotus is alive.

    Now the fact it is alive isn't a conclusive argument that it therefore has the right to life and not to be terminated, but I don't think we progress the argument by pretending that it isn't alive. The real question is not whether it's alive, but at what point a human lifeform should accrue legal rights and should be deserving of our protection as a (potential) fellow member of our human society
    And therein lies the problem. Because that is an issue that can never really be agreed upon, it's hard to progress with the argument of terminating a pregnancy.
    Some believe it's a life from conception, some call it murder, some believe it's just clump of cells to begin with. It is an impasse.
    The other issue is that people also ignore the important factor of choice.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Roofas)
    Such stupid names, as though those who are 'pro-choice' are 'anti-life'. It's things like this that got Hitler into power.
    True. An interesting comment I've seen from someone else on the Internet one time on this topic, goes along the line of (and I paraphrase from my memory):

    "Anti-abortionists are not really pro-life, they are merely just pro-birth. They don't really tend to care what happens to the unwanted child after birth, such as if they live a bad life being severely disabled, being stuck in the care system with no one wanting to adopt or foster them, living in dire poverty, or even just being emotionally damaged by being with biological parents who never really wanted them or cared properly for them. All scenarios that would be avoided with abortion."

    For the record, I'm personally pro-choice.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I find it so hard to decide when the life of the foetus begins that we cannot make a decision about its life unless we know/don't know it has one at this stage, and the value of its life compared to the mother.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    However, I strongly disagree with some methods which anti-abortion supporters use, but that doesn't define my opinion on the issue (as you could say about most issues nowadays...)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    pro choice
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by CherryCherryBoomBoom)
    True. An interesting comment I've seen from someone else on the Internet one time on this topic, goes along the line of (and I paraphrase from my memory):

    "Anti-abortionists are not really pro-life, they are merely just pro-birth. They don't really tend to care what happens to the unwanted child after birth, such as if they live a bad life being severely disabled, being stuck in the care system with no one wanting to adopt or foster them, living in dire poverty, or even just being emotionally damaged by being with biological parents who never really wanted them or cared properly for them. All scenarios that would be avoided with abortion."

    For the record, I'm personally pro-choice.
    That's an excellent way of putting it. +1
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Pro life because who should tell a woman what she can and can't do with a body that isn't even hers genetically?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Pro choice
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mackemforever)
    But until it his the point where the foetus can be viewed as a functional human being then what you're doing isn't putting the child before the woman, you're putting a cluster of cells that do not meet any definition of "a person" and that have no awareness of their own existence.
    Why does it have to be a person to matter?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If less than 4 months, and/OR if there is a significant health/mental risk then I'm pro-choice.

    Otherwise pro-life. No one has the right to murder their child once he or she is conscious unless it's the lesser of the two harms.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • 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.