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

Abortion Watch

  • View Poll Results: What are you?
    Pro Choice in all circumstances
    91
    41.94%
    Pro Choice in most circumstances
    68
    31.34%
    Pro Life in all circumstances
    14
    6.45%
    Pro Life in most circumstances
    44
    20.28%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vander Beth)
    I was just trying to get the poster to justify why she believed the fetus (or zygote or embryo) was being aborted/killed/deprived of its right of life/whatever she wants to call it, if it was conceived through consensual sex but not rape. I didn't say that's what I believed.
    Ah, fair enough
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vander Beth)
    I'm not satisfied with that. Tell me exactly how you do not have reservations for one abortion (unless you do, then tell me) and how that does not extrapolate for twenty. Why is the fetus from a mother who has multiple abortions different from one who had none?
    Like I said before, people have the right to use these systems responsibly if they feel it is the only option to them, but that doesn't mean it's an easy decision to make. One abortion isn't to be taken lightly, but it's a fair choice to make. I see it as a personal moral choice that should be taken extremely seriously. As a fetus I see it as part of the woman's body than it's own being, and so her decision to make, but at the same time it is potential life that will more than likely result in a person if left undisturbed.

    Therefore, if someone feels it's their only choice and they feel they can burden the guilt, then fine. But there are so many forms of effective contraceptives out there that could be used to easily avoid abortion and it reaches the 20th time, then they obviously aren't taking responsibility for their actions. In short, people should be given a second chance, not once it reaches the twentieth chance then they can't be taking the choice seriously. It's become almost routine; the safety net that's there for the easy answer to everything.

    Some may see that as cloudy logic, but c'est la vie. After all the councilling and so forth I doubt many women would take the decision of abortion lightly, this is all talking about the extremely small hypothetical minority. I'm sure the system of abortion is probably geared towards preventing this situation becoming a reality anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm pro choice in most circumstances; however, i feel it is wrong to have late term abortions. In the cases where no contraception has been used, abortion may be the most suitable path to take, but i feel the parents should be punished (fined?) and educated.

    Couldn't women just take a pregnacy test a week after their missed period and then get an abortion asap? Why do they need 24 weeks?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I find it disgusting that a foetus can be aborted beyond the point where it becomes viable outside of the womb, to me in effect you are then killing something which is able of living without you so it's as bad as killing a baby that has been born say at 24 weeks, just because it's still inside you doesn't make it different.

    I also think it's now becoming somewhat of an easy option for SOME women (I emphasise some because I realise that many people suffer the psychological after effects for a long time). Oh I'm pregnant, let's just have an abortion. I don't think abortions should be used as a lifestyle choice. Having no money to bring up a baby is no excuse, basically there you're saying 'I'm too stupid to use contraception and now I'm pregnant so I've had a bit of a panic because I can't afford this life I've created so let's just kill it.'

    I find it hard to outright refuse that there are any situations where abortion is necessary. In the case of health issues I would like to believe the baby should always be saved over the mother as it's an innocent thing that has never done wrong...however, in cases where the woman has other children something it's necessary to weigh up the fact that she has dependents.

    Summary: abortion as a lifestyle choice or late on in the pregnancy I'm absolutely against, abortion as a means to save the woman acceptable in SOME circumstances.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Also, I hate the term 'pro choice.' The woman (and the man, let's not pretend that it's not his fault as well) made her choice when she had sex without using contraception, or failed to sort it out when the contraception failed. Choice is have safe sex or don't have sex. The choice is not have unsafe sex then decide whether to get rid of the life that's been created out of that.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by haz220807)
    Also, I hate the term 'pro choice.' The woman (and the man, let's not pretend that it's not his fault as well) made her choice when she had sex without using contraception, or failed to sort it out when the contraception failed. Choice is have safe sex or don't have sex. The choice is not have unsafe sex then decide whether to get rid of the life that's been created out of that.
    :ditto:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    I think that unless the abortion is a result of incest or rape then it is unjustified as long as it poses the mother no serious harm.
    so it is unjustified to terminate a foetus that has been shown to have no head???? You'd rather put the mother through the labour for a baby that can't survive outside the womb???
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paella)
    Pro choice in most circumstances, though if a healthy child is going to be born, really late stage abortions should not be allowed if the mother 'doesn't want a kid) as by that point it could exist outside the womb (on life support) and then put up for abortion (because in my eyes it's the the same as killing a premature baby).
    Define really late abortion. Define able to "live" on life support, are we talking hours? days? weeks? years?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    i am against abortion... unless the girl was raped wasnt ready to have a baby from a rapist O.O ... other than that i think its ridiculous because its just like killing a baby and i also think that early abortions are okay. but if its a late abortion then no
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Always pro choice
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Antonia87)
    Totally pro-choice. I cant wait to see what utter rubbish the militant pro-lifers come up with - "OMG MURDER!!!!!!11!1!11!!"
    And I can't wait for pro-abortionists who condemn the Chinese for eating aborted foetuses, I mean why waste it?, (if it's not murder then it's not cannibalism), or meat eaters claiming veal, foei gras, Halal and Kosher are morally incomprehensible but are happy to tuck in to products of intensive battery farming like KFC.

    I'll await the 'contraception fails too easily brigade', despite evidence on the contrary, who are happy to castigate young teenage parents as chavs who decided not to rid of their responsibilities. I don't buy getting pregnant for a council house, council houses are often architecture that I will happily bulldoze.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Nobody agrees to getting pregnant when they have sex
    I'm sure that's why those who kill behind the wheel on the road never get done for homicide in this country. Even joy-riders who kill on the road could say, "How am I supposed to know that guy was crossing the road? I agreed to drive 50mph in a 30mph estate, but not to kill."
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    I'm sure that's why those who kill behind the wheel on the road never get done for homicide in this country. Even joy-riders who kill on the road could say, "How am I supposed to know that guy was crossing the road? I agreed to drive 50mph in a 30mph estate, but not to kill."
    On that partilcular example, if someone drives cautiously and sticks strictly to the speed limit, are they morally culpable for the death of a person in the same way as someone who takes no precautions and drives at 100mph whilst under the influence?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy the Anarchist)
    On that partilcular example, if someone drives cautiously and sticks strictly to the speed limit, are they morally culpable for the death of a person in the same way as someone who takes no precautions and drives at 100mph whilst under the influence?
    Depends on the intent I'd guess. Obviously if a pedestrian was stupid enough to cross between cars and get knocked over like this and the car was within the speed limit you cannot fault the driver, though the loss of the life is nonetheless as tragic. I know where you're going with this but I cannot see 200,000 abortions a year being the result of a failure of all precautionary measures taken. There are a number of those who have abused the law on this note and sod all is done about it. Although the laws differ on abortion across Europe, England appears to have one of the most abortions each year per 1,000 people. I don't see Germany requiring abortions so often as us.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    Depends on the intent I'd guess. Obviously if a pedestrian was stupid enough to cross between cars and get knocked over like this and the car was within the speed limit you cannot fault the driver, though the loss of the life is nonetheless as tragic. I know where you're going with this but I cannot see 200,000 abortions a year being the result of a failure of all precautionary measures taken. There are a number of those who have abused the law on this note and sod all is done about it. Although the laws differ on abortion across Europe, England appears to have one of the most abortions each year per 1,000 people. I don't see Germany requiring abortions so often as us.
    Yeah, I'm just saying on that point that an individual who takes all reasonable precautions against pregancy can't be said to have consented to having a child.

    And I'd be interested what percentage of those abortions occurred in the first trimester. As it happens, I don't consider an embryo with almost no neural development to be of equal worth to a fully grown human, and ultimately this being has at best only limited rights, rather than full human rights, and that these rights don't extend to being able to use someone's organs without their consent.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy the Anarchist)
    Yeah, I'm just saying on that point that an individual who takes all reasonable precautions against pregancy can't be said to have consented to having a child.
    Indeed. But many of these individuals who advocate this use different logic when it comes to being a victim of crime by not using your head etc. I'm sure in this day and age, if people used contraception properly, then I'm sure the sheer numbers will be down. I understand that mistakes happen and nothing is perfect but sometimes when people say in debates that contraception fails it's as if their success rate is like 50% or something. I mean, how many times must people be having sex in order to justify the amount of abortions we have each year if the contraceptive measures are good? Simple. We have an abortion on demand culture, though politicians will never admit that because the law likes to pretend otherwise.

    (Original post by Andy the Anarchist)
    And I'd be interested what percentage of those abortions occurred in the first trimester. As it happens, I don't consider an embryo with almost no neural development to be of equal worth to a fully grown human, and ultimately this being has at best only limited rights, rather than full human rights, and that these rights don't extend to being able to use someone's organs without their consent.
    I saw some figures ages ago but I'll see what I can find in the near future. Cross-comparisons will always be difficult when there are different criteria to permit abortions but there will still be some form of basis to make a correct evaluation. For example, we know the ex-Communist states are more relaxed on this matter as many were very left-wing which permitted abortion on financial grounds, whereas western Europe would advocate the use of the welfare state as an alternative measure.

    Obviously we're going to have differences of opinion on what constitutes a human but my issue is that some pro-abortion lobby will happily castigate someone killing the foetus of a pregnant mother as a murderer. Or bemoan that they're eaten in China. To please the BNP I think we should change the law so a foetus becomes alive after 40 days of gestation.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    I'm sure that's why those who kill behind the wheel on the road never get done for homicide in this country. Even joy-riders who kill on the road could say, "How am I supposed to know that guy was crossing the road? I agreed to drive 50mph in a 30mph estate, but not to kill."
    Er, no, not really. Driving 50mph in a 30mph zone is against the law, and obviously dangerous. There's nothing wrong with having protected sex, there is something wrong with speeding. Bad analogy.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Er, no, not really. Driving 50mph in a 30mph zone is against the law, and obviously dangerous. There's nothing wrong with having protected sex, there is something wrong with speeding. Bad analogy.
    Or people should have the discipline to be responsible for their actions. Novelty these days.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    Or people should have the discipline to be responsible for their actions. Novelty these days.
    Erm. I don't see how this is at all addressing what I posted... and I don't think discipline and novelty are the right words. Not being rude, just that this post doesn't make much sense.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJcebIEOkhY

    Bill Hicks should do for this one. ******* hate the hypocrisy of pro life people who endorse the death penalty. I get people who are pro life and i sympathise with them but they are complete moron's if they also are pro capital punishment.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 6, 2010
  • 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
  • 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.