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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PinkMobilePhone)
    Just thought I'd raise a point (one which I've never actually made during other abortion debates)

    people do not have full rights over their bodies

    so anybody that says that they're pro-choice because a woman has rights over what happens to her body....well, nobody has full rights over their bodies, because if they did, illegal substances wouldn't be illegal.

    Why is heroin illegal?

    Because our bodies are not really ours to do with as we wish.

    I really don't want to debate abortion though, I've done it to death, I just thought I'd raise a point worth thinking about that just occurred to me.
    I dare say a least some of the people who support abortion are also advocates for drug legalization and assisted suicide.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    Because they are human. Many disabled humans don't have those characteristics, is it okay to kill them?

    A fetus is clearly a human like the rest of us. Tell me that doesn't look like a human:

    According to our law that is legal to kill.

    And on the issue of a miscarriage, of course it isn't manslaughter as it is unintentional.
    Manslaughter is unintentional too :rolleyes: hence why it is "manslaughter" and not "murder".
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
    It's not illegal to use heroin, it's illegal to sell it/provide it etc. The usage is not prohibited.
    It's illegal to possess it. You have to possess it in order to use it, so it equates to the same thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Don_Scott)
    Because they are human. Many disabled humans don't have those characteristics, is it okay to kill them?

    A fetus is clearly a human like the rest of us. Tell me that doesn't look like a human:

    According to our law that is legal to kill.

    And on the issue of a miscarriage, of course it isn't manslaughter as it is unintentional.
    Erm, Don, I think you're missing the point, but then I haven't asked you if there should be a point before which abortion could be permitted.

    What makes a bunch of cells fewer in number than the number of cells in a fly's brain inherently human? It can't be the DNA, because the DNA is shared for the most part with creatures which aren't human, and this bundle of cells has none of the recognisable characteristics of a human. It has no neural capacity at this stage, it can't think of itself as an independent entity so on and so forth. at this stage, a cow has far more capacity for thought, but I presume you're not a vegetarian.

    I've acknowedged that a foetus may have a right to life at the point at which it could survive independently of the mother's uterus, because I acknowledge a moral distinction between killing something and allowing it to die. That makes me more moderate than most of the other pro-life posters on this thread. However, unlike yourself, I don't think something can be distinctly termed a human person (as opposed to being biologically human) by virtue of its DNA, human characteristics are more complex than that/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    until that point you have lost the right not to have a big stomach for 9 months. Says who?
    Getting pregnant isn't a lifelong disease, no. But it's still a parasite living off my body. It still changes my life enormously for a year. It's still my body. You might think that pregnancy is merely a minor inconvenience- well, tough, it's still my body and I can do what I like with it, and nobody can force me to let someone live off it for 9 months without my permission. I don't want to have my life disrupted for 9 months. If got pregnant now, I would have an abortion, because I don't want to ruin my relationship with my boyfriend, and put off university for a year, and have all the stigma attached with teenage pregnancy, and have my body change so much. It doesn't matter whether you think these are petty reasons or not, because it's my body, not yours, and for me it would be worth it to have an abortion to retain the right to have my body and my life entirely to myself.

    'Because abortion exists women now have to choose between a career or a child, whereas if it didn't exist businesses would be forced to accomodate women who want to have children' -I very much doubt that. More likely that women would be forced to give up a career to care for children.
    Here's the thing, how it should be. If you choose to become pregnant, it's a decision for life.
    You may suffer that inconvenience, but you chose to labour under that inconvenience when you became pregnant of your own free will.

    If you don't like the inconvenience, you must remember that you chose to suffer it for the sake of new life. Even if circumstances or your mind change halfway through.

    Now, there's a big difference between choosing to become pregnant and becoming pregnant accidentally. In the case of accidental pregnancy when contraception has failed, you could simply check if you're unsure, and get an abortion during the embryonic stage.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PinkMobilePhone)
    Just thought I'd raise a point (one which I've never actually made during other abortion debates)

    people do not have full rights over their bodies

    so anybody that says that they're pro-choice because a woman has rights over what happens to her body....well, nobody has full rights over their bodies, because if they did, illegal substances wouldn't be illegal.

    Why is heroin illegal?

    Because our bodies are not really ours to do with as we wish.

    I really don't want to debate abortion though, I've done it to death, I just thought I'd raise a point worth thinking about that just occurred to me.
    But a lot of us think that those things should be legal.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Voted 1st option.

    There are too many people on this thread implying that an abortion, particularly a later term one, is a rash decision. No woman wants to go through that. I would never want to go through that. Personally, I'm not sure I would have an abortion if I got pregnant, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be dictating to others what choice they would want to make.

    As for the father input, I'm sorry, but it's hard for me to rationalise any suggestion that the father should have rights in this situation. Granted, the father has a right to debate it, counselling, etc, but no abortion is undertaken in a 10 minute hospital visit anyway, so discussion is bound to take place. I can't accept anyone who says men should have legal rights in this situation.

    I could go on and on but I can't be bothered right now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    So what is the difference between 8 months and 20 weeks then?
    Sentience and viability for a start.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    So what is the difference between 8 months and 20 weeks then?
    One of them is viable, one of them isn't. I'm sorry, it's not a pleasant topic, but a line has to be drawn.

    Essentially, this comes down to the woman's rights vs the foetuses rights, and I support the living, breathing, functioning woman.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Pro-choice in all circumstances. I don't buy the argument for a time limit. Theroetically in the future scientists could make it possible for a foetus to survive outside the womb at say 2 weeks. This wouldn't change my view that it is a woman's/family's right to choose. My opinion is not based upon whether and when the 'baby' can survive on its own.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy the Anarchist)
    Sentience and viability for a start.
    So if you kill a baby you should get less of a sentence than if you kill a todler? If this was the case each year that we lived the value of our lives would increase.

    What about this hypothetical situation; someone in a temporary coma to allow their brain to go down from swelling. They are not sentient or viable. Why should killing them if you are paying for the bed carry a prison sentence?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
    One of them is viable, one of them isn't. I'm sorry, it's not a pleasant topic, but a line has to be drawn.

    Essentially, this comes down to the woman's rights vs the foetuses rights, and I support the living, breathing, functioning woman.
    Viability doesn't even come into it. A baby is less viable than a teenager. A retard is entirely dependant on those around it. There are varying levels of viability and dependancy throughout our society.

    It isn't fetus vs the mother. A fetus has a right to life more than a mother has a right not to have an enlarged stomach for a few months. How can you say that a womans right to not feel temporary discomfort is more important than a childs right to live?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
    Ok, lets hypothetically imagine that abortion was banned. Do you know what would happen?

    There would be an advent of backstreet abortionists, where they pretty much rip the foetuses out of a woman with iron coat hangers, or squirt soap in her vagina or other nasty ****. Banning abortion won't stop people having abortion, but it will mean that they're often left infertile, or they might die.

    I wouldn't wish that on any woman, for what... the crime of having sex?! Ok, you could argue they shouldn't have had sex if they couldn't have a baby, but mistakes happen, and for the 'crime' of having sex, I don't think I should be subjected to iron coat hangers in my vagina quite frankly.

    You will never understand, because you are not a female.

    This woman was found in a hotel, after a botched abortion went wrong. If I remember right she had a few children at home as well, but couldn't cope with this last one.
    You want to go back to this? You're primitive.

    Yeah, I knew that too. I NEVER said that abortion should be banned outright.
    My stance on it is clear. Abortion is fine in the early stages, but after that only special cases of rape, severe physical disability, or threats to the mother's life should result in abortion.

    Of course mistakes happen, but now we have superior medical technology in which contraceptive errors are generally reduced.

    If the woman didn't want to look after another child, she should have taken it to be adopted, I'm afraid. Use scare tactics all you want, but that was a case of a poor person who made a very bad decision, both in having sex without contraception and going to a backstreet abortionist.
    Before the 20th century, abortion was a very grim process indeed. :yes:

    Don't use that "you wouldn't understand, because you're not female" ****. Whilst I can't understand what it is to be female, I can very well understand the troubles that women go through, and most men can, really. We're not on a totally different planet.

    You want to see something ugly too?
    Spoiler:
    Show



    That's at 11 weeks.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rlw31)
    How can you say men have very little control over whether women get pregnant or not

    Without men, women would be unable to get pregnant. Men know that by having sex with women there is a chance that pregnancy may result, in the same way that women know that if they have sex with men there is a chance that pregnancy will result.

    So back to your original point, perhaps people (male or female) shouldn't have sex with people who don't love them or who they cannot trust.
    The reason why women are allowed to choose whether or not to have an abortion and a man isn't is because society percieves they suffer more from having a child than a man does. It is under this pretence that I think it should, in our current society, be more down to women to keep themselves unpregnant. At the end of the day I don't think men or women should be having sex with anyone they don't intend to have a baby with.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Liquidus Zeromus)
    Here's the thing, how it should be. If you choose to become pregnant, it's a decision for life.
    You may suffer that inconvenience, but you chose to labour under that inconvenience when you became pregnant of your own free will.

    If you don't like the inconvenience, you must remember that you chose to suffer it for the sake of new life. Even if circumstances or your mind change halfway through.

    Now, there's a big difference between choosing to become pregnant and becoming pregnant accidentally. In the case of accidental pregnancy when contraception has failed, you could simply check if you're unsure, and get an abortion during the embryonic stage.
    I agree for the most part. If women choose to become pregnant they should carry out the pregnancy, unless there are disabilities involved or other major reasons. I think the woman should have the baby. However, I think she should legally be allowed to get an abortion, even if she's chosen to get pregnant herself.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Andy the Anarchist)
    Erm, Don, I think you're missing the point, but then I haven't asked you if there should be a point before which abortion could be permitted.

    What makes a bunch of cells fewer in number than the number of cells in a fly's brain inherently human? It can't be the DNA, because the DNA is shared for the most part with creatures which aren't human, and this bundle of cells has none of the recognisable characteristics of a human. It has no neural capacity at this stage, it can't think of itself as an independent entity so on and so forth. at this stage, a cow has far more capacity for thought, but I presume you're not a vegetarian.

    I've acknowedged that a foetus may have a right to life at the point at which it could survive independently of the mother's uterus, because I acknowledge a moral distinction between killing something and allowing it to die. That makes me more moderate than most of the other pro-life posters on this thread. However, unlike yourself, I don't think something can be distinctly termed a human person (as opposed to being biologically human) by virtue of its DNA, human characteristics are more complex than that/
    Well, they aren't only "biologically" human but they are fully human (just less developed). A human embyro (a human fetus looks clearly human anyway) will never turn into a cow or a pig, it will always come out as human.

    And what are we to use to define human life? Biologically seems the best way because there are many adult humans who don't have those typical characterestics but are still considered human. And yes, chimps have very similar DNA to us but they are different enough so that they clearly don't belong to the same species.

    And on the issue of leaving to die. I don't think it is moral to just allow another human being to die. If someone is tied to a tree and is starving to death while you have the chance to free him and feed him, it is not moral to just say "no, thanks" because it may cause you discomfort to bite through the rope or whatever.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Viability doesn't even come into it. A baby is less viable than a teenager. A retard is entirely dependant on those around it. There are varying levels of viability and dependancy throughout our society.

    It isn't fetus vs the mother. A fetus has a right to life more than a mother has a right not to have an enlarged stomach for a few months. How can you say that a womans right to not feel temporary discomfort is more important than a childs right to live?
    Don't denegrate your own argument by being stupid. You and I both know that's not all being pregnant is about.

    It's not simply an enlarged stomach, that's almost laughable. You make it sound like being pregnant is like having bad gas.

    All the complications of pregnany, leaking milk, your body being absolutely changed (my mother has had pretty bad acid reflux since she had my sister, over 10 years ago. She also had an epileptic fit whilst pregnant), increased risk of prolapse, blood pressure etc etc etc etc... there's so many aspects of being pregnant.

    And take that asides, loads of women who give their kids up for adoption have alot of psychological torment... is she happy? Does she look like me? Did her family treat her well?

    And then add this kid, growing up in different foster homes, because the adoption system in this country is frankly ****.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubbles*de*Milo)
    Ok, lets hypothetically imagine that abortion was banned. Do you know what would happen?

    There would be an advent of backstreet abortionists, where they pretty much rip the foetuses out of a woman with iron coat hangers, or squirt soap in her vagina or other nasty ****. Banning abortion won't stop people having abortion, but it will mean that they're often left infertile, or they might die.

    I wouldn't wish that on any woman, for what... the crime of having sex?! Ok, you could argue they shouldn't have had sex if they couldn't have a baby, but mistakes happen, and for the 'crime' of having sex, I don't think I should be subjected to iron coat hangers in my vagina quite frankly.

    You will never understand, because you are not a female.

    This woman was found in a hotel, after a botched abortion went wrong. If I remember right she had a few children at home as well, but couldn't cope with this last one.
    You want to go back to this? You're primitive.

    If there are 10,000 illegal abortions carried out per year and 2% of them die that's 200 deaths. If there are 200,000 legal abortions and 1% of them die that's 2000 deaths. That means less people will die if abortion is illegal than legal. This is before you factor in the increased suicide rate among any woman that has an abortion.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think I could have an abortion myself, although I see why other people might.

    It really bothers me when people say that it's the woman's choice, because it's her body. I think men should have just as much say in it - I don't think women would be too impressed if a man aborted a baby they wanted. It just seems sad that because the women has to physically carry the child, psychological effects on men are often ignored. Do you not think a man might mourn an aborted child, as a woman might? Just something to think about for those from the 'it's MY body' school of thought.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Liquidus Zeromus)
    That's at 11 weeks.
    whilst I get that you're trying to hit home with your message, did you really HAVE to post that picture? I'm currently pregnant and it has seriously churned my stomach seeing that.
 
 
 
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.