Should men get equal say in abortion?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by joecphillips
Except it isn't a case of a healthy person v a unhealthy person you are saying killing a unhealthy person doesn't violate nap
It is definitely a case of healthy vs unhealthy since we are considering which potential life to realise.
I didn't say killing an unhealthy person doesn't violate NAP, I said it violates NAP less than causing more suffering to the child via birthing it.
Original post by HopelessMedic
This is true, however it is naive use this as an argument for abortion when in reality most abortions are out of convenience not morality.
Why should abortions not be done out of convenience? If people are better prepared to have a child emotionally, mentally and financially, then the children will have better lives. Forcing people to have children at inconvenient times in their life reduces the quality of lives of both the children and the parents, hence convenience is linked to morality.
Original post by h3rmit
It is definitely a case of healthy vs unhealthy since we are considering which potential life to realise.
I didn't say killing an unhealthy person doesn't violate NAP, I said it violates NAP less than causing more suffering to the child via birthing it.
Why should abortions not be done out of convenience? If people are better prepared to have a child emotionally, mentally and financially, then the children will have better lives. Forcing people to have children at inconvenient times in their life reduces the quality of lives of both the children and the parents, hence convenience is linked to morality.
I didn't say killing an unhealthy person doesn't violate NAP, I said it violates NAP less than causing more suffering to the child via birthing it.
Why should abortions not be done out of convenience? If people are better prepared to have a child emotionally, mentally and financially, then the children will have better lives. Forcing people to have children at inconvenient times in their life reduces the quality of lives of both the children and the parents, hence convenience is linked to morality.
Except the discussion is about giving birth to a unhealthy child not what one would you prefer
Original post by cherryred90s
Tbh, I've very clearly explained what I am arguing for and you're choosing to twist it. Nobody should be forced against their will to endure arguably the worst pain that a woman will ever feel.
Women do have to face the consequences of unwanted pregnancy. Either stay pregnant or have an abortion, neither of which are particularly pleasant especially if the pregnant was accidental.
I do agree though that you should protect yourself or avoid sex if you don't want to be a parent. I don't believe that abortion should be used as a contraceptive by any means.
Women do have to face the consequences of unwanted pregnancy. Either stay pregnant or have an abortion, neither of which are particularly pleasant especially if the pregnant was accidental.
I do agree though that you should protect yourself or avoid sex if you don't want to be a parent. I don't believe that abortion should be used as a contraceptive by any means.
Why do only women get an out in your system?
Original post by joecphillips
Except the discussion is about giving birth to a unhealthy child not what one would you prefer
Whenever you choose whether or not to give birth to or to terminate a fetus/embryo/zygote, you are making a choice as to whether or not to realise a potential life. Therefore, considering the other potential lives is relevant.
Original post by h3rmit
Whenever you choose whether or not to give birth to or to terminate a fetus/embryo/zygote, you are making a choice as to whether or not to realise a potential life. Therefore, considering the other potential lives is relevant.
What other potential lives? You are just talking about ending the life of a unhealthy child where had this healthy child came from?
Original post by h3rmit
Why should abortions not be done out of convenience? If people are better prepared to have a child emotionally, mentally and financially, then the children will have better lives. Forcing people to have children at inconvenient times in their life reduces the quality of lives of both the children and the parents, hence convenience is linked to morality.
A reduced quality of life is better than no life at all as long as the quality of life is above a baseline, at which point any lower quality of life would be deemed a life not worth living.
I would argue that most aborted lives would have had a life worth living.
Original post by joecphillips
What other potential lives? You are just talking about ending the life of a unhealthy child where had this healthy child came from?
The potential lives that would come from the fertilisation of the other gametes.
The healthy child is a potential life, as is the unhealthy child.
Original post by HopelessMedic
A reduced quality of life is better than no life at all
Why?
as long as the quality of life is above a baseline, at which point any lower quality of life would be deemed a life not worth living.
Trouble is, the more unwanted children you bring into the world the worse the quality of life gets for everybody (including the children), and the baseline slips further back to that of developing countries.
I would argue that most aborted lives would have had a life worth living.
Maybe, but many would have been on the borderline, or would have had that life from care (fiscally irresponsible), or would have caused the lives of the parents to be of a significantly lower quality of life.
Original post by h3rmit
The potential lives that would come from the fertilisation of the other gametes.
The healthy child is a potential life, as is the unhealthy child.
Why?
Trouble is, the more unwanted children you bring into the world the worse the quality of life gets for everybody (including the children), and the baseline slips further back to that of developing countries.
Maybe, but many would have been on the borderline, or would have had that life from care (fiscally irresponsible), or would have caused the lives of the parents to be of a significantly lower quality of life.
The healthy child is a potential life, as is the unhealthy child.
Why?
Trouble is, the more unwanted children you bring into the world the worse the quality of life gets for everybody (including the children), and the baseline slips further back to that of developing countries.
Maybe, but many would have been on the borderline, or would have had that life from care (fiscally irresponsible), or would have caused the lives of the parents to be of a significantly lower quality of life.
So basically kill the current child that exists for some mythical other child
Original post by joecphillips
So basically kill the current child that exists for some mythical other child
An embryo is a mythical child too essentially, what differentiates an embryo and the two gametes for you?
Original post by h3rmit
An embryo is a mythical child too essentially, what differentiates an embryo and the two gametes for you?
A embryo is the first stage of human life.
You are talking about children that haven't been conceived yet
Original post by joecphillips
A embryo is the first stage of human life.
You are talking about children that haven't been conceived yet
You are talking about children that haven't been conceived yet
Well, technically, the gametes are the first stage of human life.
What's so magical about conception? A zygote is pretty much identical to its separate gametes.
Original post by joecphillips
No as saving your life doesn't violate the nap principle, ending a life to make yours easier does.
It doesn't even have to come down to nap, the question is do you have a right to save your life when it is in serious danger? Yes do you have a right to end a life to make yours easier? No
How many pregnancies result in the death of the mother?
It doesn't even have to come down to nap, the question is do you have a right to save your life when it is in serious danger? Yes do you have a right to end a life to make yours easier? No
How many pregnancies result in the death of the mother?
Two thirds of embryos fail to develop successfully. It is not a life, it is a potential for life. Two very different things.
You can't pick and choose when to apply statistics.
(edited 7 years ago)
Abortion should be illegal anyway, unless you have exceptional circumstances- such as if a women is raped, and the courts convict the man of rape, then they are allowed to abort the child. The second exceptional circumstance i would give permission for abortion, is if the midwife somehow knows the child is going to have a poor quality of life due to a major disability. I do not think it should be allowed by choice.
Original post by Twinpeaks
Two thirds of embryos fail to develop successfully. It is not a life, it is a potential for life. Two very different things.
You can't pick and choose when to apply statistics.
You can't pick and choose when to apply statistics.
Science disagrees 100% of lives end does that mean they aren't lives?
No.
A woman should not have to carry a child for nine months and maybe even breastfeed the baby for about a year just because the father wants that.
On the flip side, a man should not be forced to take responsibility if it was the woman's choice to keep the child while he was against it. In this situation, the man should be free to walk away as if he had no children and the woman should not make any parental demands of him. The woman should also not be entitled to child support if the father did not want the child since it was not the man's choice for the baby to be born.
However, it can be argued that it would be more beneficial for the baby if both parents agreed to have the child, so I can see why people would say yes.
A woman should not have to carry a child for nine months and maybe even breastfeed the baby for about a year just because the father wants that.
On the flip side, a man should not be forced to take responsibility if it was the woman's choice to keep the child while he was against it. In this situation, the man should be free to walk away as if he had no children and the woman should not make any parental demands of him. The woman should also not be entitled to child support if the father did not want the child since it was not the man's choice for the baby to be born.
However, it can be argued that it would be more beneficial for the baby if both parents agreed to have the child, so I can see why people would say yes.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by joecphillips
Why do only women get an out in your system?
I believe men should get an out in the sense that they can opt out and not financially commit or be involved in the child's life if they don't wish to. That's the fairest it can be so that nobody is forced to do something they don't want to do.
Original post by ZuluArmy
Abortion should be illegal anyway, unless you have exceptional circumstances- such as if a women is raped, and the courts convict the man of rape, then they are allowed to abort the child. The second exceptional circumstance i would give permission for abortion, is if the midwife somehow knows the child is going to have a poor quality of life due to a major disability. I do not think it should be allowed by choice.
Why not?
Original post by joecphillips
Science disagrees 100% of lives end does that mean they aren't lives?
False equivalence, most lives end at the end of the organism's lifespan, not at the beginning of the development.
Original post by h3rmit
Why not?
All life is sacred, It probably costs the NHS around £800 pound per abortion, why should my NI pay for someone to abort a kid from a one night stand?
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 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 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 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 ?
