Why is child birth 100% a woman's choice?

HomerThompson said:
No one else's survival is dependent on living inside another person. It's not the same thing. Embryos are literally inside a special chamber that is part of the woman and absolutely crucial for them to grow into a person. There is no analogous situation.
Click to expand...

Did you never learn how to answer questions? Because I asked one, and this isn't an answer.

Should we have the choice to kill anyone whose survival, in their current circumstances, is dependent on the goodwill of another?
 
PrinceOfPain said:
Did you never learn how to answer questions? Because I asked one, and this isn't an answer.

Should we have the choice to kill anyone whose survival, in their current circumstances, is dependent on the goodwill of another?
Click to expand...

You are confusing goodwill with biology
 
Pwent said:
lots of people are entirely dependent on their parent

an infant would die if left alone as well
Click to expand...
It's not the same. Another person could take care of them. You cannot remove an embryo from the womb before a certain time. The youngest surviving premature birth in history is 21 weeks and 5 days.
 
PrinceOfPain said:
Did you never learn how to answer questions? Because I asked one, and this isn't an answer.

Should we have the choice to kill anyone whose survival, in their current circumstances, is dependent on the goodwill of another?
Click to expand...
No, no you shouldn't. But, I've already demonstrated how that's different from an embryo so your next move in this argument is already countered.
 
Banchan said:
I know i would.

Not just out of self pity at the thought of being marginalized by other people and society but seeing my mom or dad go out on the street and have sex with strangers for money to raise me would make me feel worthless, not to mention how scary it is thinking they may get into a serial killers car and never come home. If you cant see the potential of that kind of life to f someone up especially a young kid then i dont know i think you are being too idealistic.
Click to expand...

so you predict that someone may potentially want to commit suicide later, so you just kill them now and save them the trouble

ok
 
HomerThompson said:
No, no you shouldn't. But, I've already demonstrated how that's different from an embryo so your next move in this argument is already countered.
Click to expand...

Not really.
So, under what circumstances is it permissible, in your view, to abort a baby?
Should the baby have no chance of survival outside of the womb? Or is only having a small chance of survival acceptable grounds to terminate?
If we're at 23 weeks or so, and there is only a small chance of survival, but the incubator decides at that point that she does not want the child, should labour be induced, so that we can just roll the dice that the kid'll make it through?
 
HomerThompson said:
It's not the same. Another person could take care of them. You cannot remove an embryo from the womb before a certain time. The youngest surviving premature birth in history is 21 weeks and 5 days.
Click to expand...

ok so the potential of another person doing the job, makes it morally not ok to abandon it because another person can take care of them

but because the fetus would die without the mother it makes it morally ok for her to kill it?

feel like youre arguing against yourself
 
skold said:
Or we can let the parents make the choice, instead of having some asshole from the outside dictate the decision for them because it makes him feel fuzzy inside

Like in every advanced nation in the world
Click to expand...

did you even read my posts, i said it should be legal to abort the baby

that doesnt mean i think anyone should do it. i also think it should be legal to smoke cigarettes, but i also dont think anyone should do it
 
PrinceOfPain said:
Not really.
So, under what circumstances is it permissible, in your view, to abort a baby?
Should the baby have no chance of survival outside of the womb? Or is only having a small chance of survival acceptable grounds to terminate?
If we're at 23 weeks or so, and there is only a small chance of survival, but the incubator decides at that point that she does not want the child, should labour be induced, so that we can just roll the dice that the kid'll make it through?
Click to expand...
I think 13 weeks is reasonable.
 
Pwent said:
ok so the potential of another person doing the job, makes it morally not ok to abandon it because another person can take care of them

but because the fetus would die without the mother it makes it morally ok for her to kill it?

feel like youre arguing against yourself
Click to expand...
I'm addressing the level of dependency, which was your only point. Also, that person is now a person, and not a potential person.
 
HomerThompson said:
I'm addressing the level of dependency, which was your only point. Also, that person is now a person, and not a potential person.
Click to expand...

a person is still a person if theyre dependent

there are people who are dependent on specialized machines and it would be considered murder to remove it

the fact that a fetus can die, is pretty much proof that its alive.

the only argument on not being a person, is if you consider it part of her body, which becomes another person, but i have a hard time accepting that unless the sperm becomes part of her body
 
Fawlty said:
It's strange when people like TS faux-concede that "it's her body" but then immediately ignore that for the duration of their argument- yet it happens almost every time. It's typically followed by an immediate appeal to the less important rights of the person whose bodily autonomy is not compromised. So it's a phony way to argue. Don't do that.
Click to expand...

You act like her choice to have a baby has no consequences on the father's body. Many fathers who never wanted the baby are in jail or prison for not paying for the baby they had NO choice in bringing to this world.

Her body, his NO choice?


Every 'feminist' should be in favor of financial abortion for fathers, right? If she can legally MURDER his child without consequence, then shouldn't he be able to legally murder financial responsibility? His money, his choice?
 
Grenz said:
I'm assuming that it's the woman's choice to do with her body what she wants. Virtually every civilized society on this planet reflects this opinion in their legal code, and most of the uncivilized ones do not.

And even if we carry on with the murder theme, murder isn't the same as absolving yourself from the responsibilities of fatherhood, because you wanted to murder the child, but the woman didn't. Again, the two things aren't equivalent.
Click to expand...


Why are calling it a child? I thought it was a clump of cells to you people.
 
lifelessheap said:
You act like her choice to have a baby has no consequences on the father's body. Many fathers who never wanted the baby are in jail or prison for not paying for the baby they had NO choice in bringing to this world.

Her body, his NO choice?


Every 'feminist' should be in favor of financial abortion for fathers, right? If she can legally MURDER his child without consequence, then shouldn't he be able to legally murder financial responsibility? His money, his choice?
Click to expand...

If the pregnancy is accidental, and the father didn't want the child yet the woman refused to have an abortion, the father should be able to legally absolve himself of responsibility, I'm all for that.
If a woman doesn't want the child, she can legally absolve herself of the embryo.

Boom, problem solved

PRAISE ABORT
 
HomerThompson said:
It's the termination of a potential life. It is not murder. Take a 10 week old fetus out of a woman and see how long it survives. it's not possible.
Click to expand...
Were it only potential it would not be possible to kill the baby, which is precisely the function of abortion. The child is, scientifically speaking, undeniably both human and alive. Parasites don't survive without their host either, but they're not parts of their host or not alive. Your denial is as spurious as it is anti-scientific and irrational.
 
Pwent said:
did you even read my posts, i said it should be legal to abort the baby

that doesnt mean i think anyone should do it. i also think it should be legal to smoke cigarettes, but i also dont think anyone should do it
Click to expand...

Cool, what's all this commotion all about then?
 
Pwent said:
so you predict that someone may potentially want to commit suicide later, so you just kill them now and save them the trouble

ok
Click to expand...
I never said they would be suicidal just that growing up like this cant be good for their chances at a nice happy life

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,282,725
Messages
58,456,193
Members
176,040
Latest member
jaybuff

Share this page

Back
Top