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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thatwhichiam)
    Pro choice.
    So you would agree with a woman terminating a pregnancy on the grounds of her having less of a social life?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Blood*And*Chocolate*)
    So you would agree with a woman terminating a pregnancy on the grounds of her having less of a social life?
    An unwanted baby is not going to be a loved baby. If a mother feels resentment towards her baby, then is that really going to be a great life for the baby?

    Having said that, the example you give demonstrates someone with a total lack of maturity who probably shouldn't have a baby anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Pro choice + Pro Israeli -thought I'd add that in
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Miss_Scarlet)
    Also, men who have said they are pro-life... would you really feel the same way if it was YOUR body that would be expanded and pregnated & if it was YOU who had to carry the baby and actually go through GIVING BIRTH?

    Just an interesting question I think.
    I know I can't ever really know what it feels like to have a child or be pregnant, but I'm pretty sure that I would see it through and not get an abortion if I my brain were in a female body.

    I just think it's pretty disgusting to kill an unborn baby so a mother can get out of 9 months of inconvenience when the baby can easily be put up for adoption after birth.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Donnahh)
    Pro choice + Pro Israeli -thought I'd add that in
    Haha, a South African who's pro-apartheid? Well I never
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Definite nay.

    Not in any case whatsoever. A woman should never have the right to terminate the birth of a totally innocent child.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BumperBo)
    True... but they aren't children yet... they're fetuses... in fact they technically fit all the qualifications of a parasite :holmes:
    It's been seen that even fetuses feel pain-they're LIVING creatures,not inanimate.Hit yourself hard & you'll know what I mean...well,that fetus does have a right to be born & contribute to the world .
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BumperBo)
    Then why are there so many unadopted children scattered around the world/in juvie?
    Because they are not babies. If they had been available for adoption when they were babies, there would have been plenty of prospective parents. Most of them (in developed countries) have been taken out of their homes because of abuse, neglect, etc, and many parents are more hesitant to take on a child with those problems, preferring to "start from scratch." That's kind of perverse, but remember that many adoptive parents are adopting because they can't have children, so it makes sense that they'd want to start with a baby.

    As far as around the world goes, there's still a demand for them, but often governments make it difficult. This should be changed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BumperBo)
    Because, while still completely dependent, the baby isn't dependent on the MOTHER once it's born. If need be the baby can be taken care of by an adopted family or someone more capable.

    Before birth, though, the baby has a HUGE amount of needs which can ONLY be satisfied by one person. If that person isn't really capable of dealing with it, there's nobody else who can.
    This is making even less sense. So you're saying that if one person can keep a child from dying, they are entitled to let it die, but if many people are able to keep it from dying, they have a duty to keep it alive?

    I agree if the mother isn't PHYSICALLY able to keep a pregnancy (as in they could die if the pregnancy is carried to term), it makes sense to consider abortion. But we're not talking about that, I've already stated that there are exceptions. We're talking about a woman's "right" to avoid a terrible inconvenience (which, by the way, is a human being).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick_000)
    This is when I am against it. People who have unprotected sex and view abortion as a way out.

    I support it in cases of rape/abuse but a life is too precious to be taken away. I guess I'm pro life.
    Ditto i feel exactly the same way...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nouvelle_vague)
    See, this is why a woman trying to have a rational argument with a male pro-life nut job never goes easy. I don't know what 'abhorrent justification' I supposedly agree with, you're making reference to, whether the fact that you think I believe all elderly troublesome teenagers deserve to be shot, or what... If so, I think that only enhances the fact that you're an absolute moron.

    Thanks alot. First of all, go read the posts. I'm saying that you agree that INCONVENIENCE is an abhorrent justification for taking life, as indicated by your reaction to my admittedly hyperbolic examples. What I'm saying, one more time to reiterate, is that the question lies in when the baby has rights. Because after that point, I'm sure you would agree that it's wrong to kill because it's hard to care for. Right?

    (Original post by nouvelle_vague)
    The fact is, even when a child is born on its due date, it is still hugely dependent on its mother. Beforethat, particularly the time margain within a woman can have an abortion, odds are that was it born under natural circumstances, the child would not be able to survive without being hooked up to machines for months on end, suffering and as a result of being under developed, it would be at larger risk of health problems than a fully developed baby and therefore, again, would suffer.

    I find it quite bizarre that you argue about human rights, but only in the case of an un-born, underdeveloped foetus. You have continuously ignored the rights of a woman to control her own body, as well as her rights to survive and live how she so chooses. Reality is, you as a man should have NO say what happens to a woman's foetus because it's not your body... I'll reiterate what I said before; you have no idea the amount of stress a woman goes through and how hard it would be for her to give up her child for adoption or a potential child via abortion. NO easy option and the fact that you continue to ignore the fact that there is a woman involved in this argument just goes to show what kind of person you are and how little you know about the topic.

    Also, Who are you to decide what your girlfriend does to her body? As a man, you should have absolutley no rights at all until the child is born. You don't have the emotional attachment to the child until it is developed outside the womb, via interaction with the child etc. A woman has this attachment within her from the moment of conception,and likliehood is, regardless of the outcome, abortion, adoption, birth, she'll still have that connection for the rest of her life. You don't have to allow your body to suffer the consequences of either abortion OR giving birth to a child then giving it away. You're male, you have no idea so really your argument is totally redundant.
    Well, I don't know when this Margin is, do you mean legally? I don't know what the UK laws are. Anyway, it's simply not true that a baby can't survive without it's mother until the due date. My sister-in-law can't have natural births, so she is induced every time she has a child. No machines or suffering required.

    I'm not saying I have rights in this issue. This is about the mother, her rights, and the child, and its rights. I'm just trying to give voice to the voiceless.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 35mm_)
    Because it doesn't have rights yet. It can't knowingly consent or not consent, it can't, in fact, do anything outside of the mother's womb thus effectively rendering a feotus a parasite. It's not being "punished" for it has no knowledge.
    If, as you claim, a fetus is a 'parasite' with no rights, then why is it wrong to perform an abortion when the pregnancy came about due to consensual sexual relations?

    (Original post by 35mm_)
    It was quite a facetious reply to your pretty pointless post.
    No, it was not a pointless post. You argued that we have some sort of 'duty' to preserve life but you're not willing to explain why we have such a duty and why we should trample over this duty when the woman has been raped. You argue that abortion is permissible if the pregnancy came about due to rape because 1) she hasn't consented and 2) the fetus is a parasite and has no rights; however, you fail to outline a clear rationale as to why abortion is permissible in one case but not in another.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mexangel)
    I mean...well,that fetus does have a right to be born & contribute to the world .
    Oh, really? And how gives them these rights?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    I love how the loony liberals have corrupted the language of abortion. Orwell talked about language being corrupted in order to bring about change desired by the elites. Black is white and white is black. 'Pro choice?' What about the rights of the unborn child - does he/she have a say? Abortion is murder, population control and eugenics.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by God of War)
    What about the rights of the unborn child
    What rights do fetus have? Elaborate.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JectioN)
    What rights do fetus have? Elaborate.
    A fetus is a living human being at the very earliest stages of development. A sperm and an egg are by themselves useless but when they fuse together the result is life.

    The law unfortunately offers no 'rights' or protection to those that need protecting the most e.g. fetus. This is morally wrong and is what I'am arguing for!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Pro-choice. I believe a woman has the right to choose whether she wants a child or not.

    I don't think she should wait for weeks and weeks to abort it though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by God of War)
    The law unfortunately offers no 'rights' or protection to those that need protecting the most e.g. fetus.
    Why should the law offer rights or protection to fetus'? So what if it's a human being at the earliest stage of development?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JectioN)
    Why should the law offer rights or protection to fetus'? So what if it's a human being at the earliest stage of development?
    because its a living thing?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    I am pro choice
    me too
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • 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.