I guess abortion is murder after all?

[Cleveland33]

Again, since when? If I am speeding and hit someone, and they require a new kidney after the accident, who can force me to donate my kidney?

It seems you've concocted your own version of how autonomy works (ie. where it doesn't exist) and people can be forcibly made to give up their body in ways that you personally decide. Which is totally at odds with the concept of bodily autonomy and how the world actually works.

You aren't reliant on my body in that situation.

There are no real world examples that I can think of. So hypothetically - let's say blood transfusions were done straight from the donor body to the recipient. If I agree to give you a transfusion and halfway through the procedure I change my mind. But you would die if the line was removed.

No I don't have body autonomy in that situation to remove the lifeline.

[BrocepCurls]

You aren't reliant on my body in that situation.

There are no real world examples that I can think of. So hypothetically - let's say blood transfusions were done straight from the donor body to the recipient. If I agree to give you a transfusion and halfway through the procedure I change my mind. But you would die if the line was removed.

No I don't have body autonomy in that situation to remove the lifeline.

Two things: 1) the mere act of having sex does not imply consent in the same way your blood transfusion scenario does. Pregnancy is in these cases an unintended consequence of sex, which can happen through everything from sheer careless idiocy (using no protection) all the way to very bad luck (all protection and reasonable measures taken). But certainly not explicit consent.

2) Any rational person would vehemently disagree with you in the scenario you've given. If the nurse injects the needle into you and you tell her to stop and that you no longer want to go ahead, absolutely no one can pin you down to the table and take that blood from you anyway, even if the consequence is that the recipient will die.

Let me guess, you call yourself a "small government conservative". Lulz

[Cleveland33]

Two things: 1) the mere act of having sex does not imply consent in the same way your blood transfusion scenario does. Pregnancy is in these cases an unintended consequence of sex, which can happen through everything from sheer careless idiocy (using no protection) all the way to very bad luck (all protection and reasonable measures taken). But certainly not explicit consent.

2) Any rational person would vehemently disagree with you in the scenario you've given. If the nurse injects the needle into you and you tell her to stop and that you no longer want to go ahead, absolutely no one can pin you down to the table and take that blood from you anyway, even if the consequence is that the recipient will die.

Let me guess, you call yourself a "small government conservative". Lulz

1) actions have consequences. you have to take responsibility for your actions

2) you're incorrect - rational people can formulate opinions and their own level of morality. and you continue to use an argument that you're somehow more rational and/or intelligent. Many doctors, including devout Liberals refuse to perform abortions. I personally know two who were adamantly pro-choice until they performed their first abortions, respectively. They said the experience was terrible and they would never perform another unless it was going to cause the death of the mother.

[BrocepCurls]

1) actions have consequences. you have to take responsibility for your actions

The act of having sex does not subsequently relinquish you of your right to bodily autonomy. End of, case closed.

2) you're incorrect - rational people can formulate opinions and their own level of morality. and you continue to use an argument that you're somehow more rational and/or intelligent. Many doctors, including devout Liberals refuse to perform abortions. I personally know two who were adamantly pro-choice until they performed their first abortions, respectively. They said the experience was terrible and they would never perform another unless it was going to cause the death of the mother.

Yes, and any rational person who supports basic bodily freedoms/autonomy (unless you are trying to argue that that isn't a rational position to hold) would not agree that a doctor can strap you down to the table and take a part of you despite your conscious protests. I'm amazed that we're even having this so called debate

[Cleveland33]

The act of having sex does not subsequently relinquish you of your right to bodily autonomy. End of, case closed.

No it doesn't. But it does not give you the right to end another life either.

Yes, and any rational person who supports basic bodily freedoms/autonomy (unless you are trying to argue that that isn't a rational position to hold) would not agree that a doctor can strap you down to the table and take a part of you despite your conscious protests. I'm amazed that we're even having this so called debate

You're right. But once you have freely begun the process and the line is in, the doctor does not have an obligation to remove that line. In fact the doctor, under do no harm, would have the obligation to stop you from removing the line. Stop and think for a second without using the emotion that has crept into your line of thinking.

[RedRusty]

Do you support abortion legality after a baby is viable? Which is something that is becoming increasingly early in a pregnancy.

Point of viability is 24 weeks. That definition hasn't changed.

[rdwire88]

Still cant believe people think murdering babies is okay regardless. lol

[MoeBettuh]

Point of viability is 24 weeks. That definition hasn't changed.

I'm not following along too closely, but hasn't it? I mean, wasn't it 28 weeks before and 24 now? Again, I'm not following along too closely, but I seem to recall listening to a podcast that indicated or outright said that it used to be considered 28 weeks.

[Griggz]

Men have one option when they knock up a woman: Pay child support until the kid is 18 years old.


Is anyone surprised that people choose a terrible choice like this from time to time? Is this a consequence of their choice? Yes. But women have the option to pull out without thinking twice about the man's opinion.

Extremely hypocritical.

[Cleveland33]

you look at a 24 week fetus and tell me that isn't a child...I don't know what to tell you

[JoshSP1985]

Point of viability is 24 weeks. That definition hasn't changed.

Never? It has been 24 for a while but all it takes is an advancement in medicine such as a viable artificial womb and that takes another jump.

[PlanoLifter]

For all those opposed to abortion in this country - I propose abortion be banned when, and only when, those opposed to abortion become financially responsible for the raising of children who would otherwise be aborted. Put your money where your mouth is.

[PlanoLifter]

Still cant believe people think murdering babies is okay regardless. lol

Still can’t believe you refuse to stop being emotional and don’t understand the definition of murder.

[vickissick07]

For all those opposed to abortion in this country - I propose abortion be banned when, and only when, those opposed to abortion become financially responsible for the raising of children who would otherwise be aborted. Put your money where your mouth is.

Oh look, a liberal pushing personal responsibility off onto other people.

This is new and exciting.

[PlanoLifter]

Oh look, a liberal pushing personal responsibility off onto other people.

This is new and exciting.

The simple fact, a fact that clearly goes over your head, is that should abortion be banned resulting in children whose parents can’t support them, you, i, and every other tax payer will be supporting and paying for the raising of said children. Banning abortion has consequences. Think.

[Cleveland33]

The simple fact, a fact that clearly goes over your head, is that should abortion be banned resulting in children whose parents can’t support them, you, i, and every other tax payer will be supporting and paying for the raising of said children. Banning abortion has consequences. Think.

no kidding and Roe v Wade was most likely one of the biggest contributors to the reduction in crime in the 90s.

That doesn't make it ok

[knightofday]

Exactly my thought when I read the story.

So him having to be on the hook for 18+ years in financial child support is okay because she chose to keep the baby, but if she doesn't want it, no repercussions or consequences.

This is what burns me up as a man. I agrre with you fully

A female can take multiple precautions to ensure that she NOT get pregnant. Said precautions are: 1) tubes tied - if she doesn't ever want to have kids 2) birth control + 3) make sure he wears a condom + 4) morning after pill for possible scares.

That combo would prevent 99% unwanted pregnancies. Abortions would not be needed. Ever.

I agree with this line of thought 1000%. Where is HER responsibility? Well, the man didnt use protection or pullout and she didnt want the baby either (but refused to take precautions that would entirely prevent the situation) its all HIS fault. The fuk? Women have SOOO many options to avoid pregnancy, men have 1. But somehow the man is faulted or looked at almost 100% of the time...

[vickissick07]

The simple fact, a fact that clearly goes over your head, is that should abortion be banned resulting in children whose parents can’t support them, you, i, and every other tax payer will be supporting and paying for the raising of said children. Banning abortion has consequences. Think.

I never said I was for 'banning' abortion. Go ahead and quote where I said that, champ.

Maybe abortion should be regulated like you kooks want guns regulated. Maybe you shouldn't be able to go and get one just because you want to. Maybe an income check should be done to ensure you can support a child.

Guess what? Abortions aren't free. Guess who is paying for those? Those same tax payers you're talking about.

[PlanoLifter]

no kidding and Roe v Wade was most likely one of the biggest contributors to the reduction in crime in the 90s.

That doesn't make it ok

I would like us as a society to increase the availability of real and useful sex Ed and increase the availability of cheap or free birth control. That will help reduce the need for abortion.

As abhorrent as I find abortion I find that society is better off with legal abortion (and abortion will happen whether legal or not). You may not find that okay, and that is a valid view, as is my view that allowing abortion while minimizing the need for it is okay. We will have to agree to differ - I don’t think we will change each other’s mind.

[BrocepCurls]

No it doesn't. But it does not give you the right to end another life either.





You're right. But once you have freely begun the process and the line is in, the doctor does not have an obligation to remove that line. In fact the doctor, under do no harm, would have the obligation to stop you from removing the line. Stop and think for a second without using the emotion that has crept into your line of thinking.

I treat patients every day IRL and this is literally not how anything works in the medical field. Provided they have mental capacity, if they want to get up and leave halfway through a procedure, then the most I can do is try and convince them why that would be harmful and not in their best interests. If they still choose to leave that's their decision and they are responsible for any consequences. I can't get security to hold them down while I finish the procedure, and it shouldn't take someone in the profession to have to tell you that either.

Besides, you're now arguing something completely different. You're talking about the potential harm to the donor if they stop the procedure, when you first were telling us about a foricible obligation to the recipient (which no matter how much you REEEE, does not exist). Can you even keep track of the garbage arguments you're throwing out here?

[rdwire88]

Still can’t believe you refuse to stop being emotional and don’t understand the definition of murder.

Not being emotional, I also have no sympathy for people who terminate their own child because they are selfish..lol

Obviously, murder means the unlawful attempt of killing someone. Just because it's law to abort doesnt make it right though.

Slavery was law back in the day, does that make it right?

Still though, murder/killing whatever, you are still ending a life with force.

Abortion is word shielded by its true meaning..

Like, "taking without permission" means "stealing".

[PlanoLifter]

I never said I was for 'banning' abortion. Go ahead and quote where I said that, champ.

Maybe abortion should be regulated like you kooks want guns regulated. Maybe you shouldn't be able to go and get one just because you want to. Maybe an income check should be done to ensure you can support a child.

Guess what? Abortions aren't free. Guess who is paying for those? Those same tax payers you're talking about.

You don’t read very well. I never claimed that you were for banning abortion. Nor am I for gun regulation. You really are batting 0 here. Put the phone down, take a deep breath, and come back when your emotions are not getting the better of you.

Ideally no one should have a child until they can support it. But humans being humans we both know that that utopia does not exist.

Abortion is cheaper, even when paid by tax payers, than is the raising of a child to adulthood. But you already knew that. It comes down to societal cost and it seems that the societal cost of raising unwanted children is much higher than the societal cost of abortion.

[CaliSuperSport]

Still can’t believe you refuse to stop being emotional and don’t understand the definition of murder.

Feticide is a legal matter. But for some reason is accepted in the sphere of abortions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unborn...f_Violence_Act

The government considers a "child in utero" to be a human being. A child in utero being: "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."

I'm guessing because the feticide is voluntary by choice of the mother. But there's a reasonable expectation that fetus will become a baby.

[PlanoLifter]

Not being emotional, I also have no sympathy for people who terminate their own child because they are selfish..lol

Obviously, murder means the unlawful attempt of killing someone. Just because it's law to abort doesnt make it right though.

Slavery was law back in the day, does that make it right?

Still though, murder/killing whatever, you are still ending a life with force.

Abortion is word shielded by its true meaning..

Like, "taking without permission" means "stealing".

I accept that you find abortion wrong. I dislike it too but I find society better off for it. Glad you now realize it’s not murder.

[acrawlingchaos]

Your damn opinion about abortion not considered as murder is just that, its an opinion not a fact.

What a coincidence, your damn opinion about abortion being murder is just that, it's an opinion, not a fact.

Abortions are performed in the second and some case the third trimester. It's not just a small fetus cell.

My opinion on why I would set the limit to 20 weeks was already stated. I also never called it a mass of cells. I said before 20 weeks a fetus is more akin to a low level organism. If you're going to use my words against me, try using the actual words I use instead of this dishonesty.

If you actually look at the statistics, 90 something percent of all abortions occur due to selfishness rather over rape, incest, or medical reasons. In 2018, over 860,000 abortions have been commited so abortions commited because of selfish reasons is significantly greater than any other reason.

Cool.

There shouldn't be a line of opinions about murder/abortions. If you feel you have a opinion about it then you are psychotic and should just join some cult.

"My body, my choice" JUST LOL at this statement..

What about the babies choice and their personal freedoms and individual rights? Just because they have the inability to speak because they are babies doesn't mean they do not have these natural born rights.

If you believe abortion is okay, then you're against your own Constitution of personal liberty.

There's that self righteous indignation I was looking for. Because my opinion differs and is based on biological markers, I'm a psychotic cultist. If you have to resort to insults... LOL.

*sips coffee

*chugs Mountain Dew.

[RedRusty]

I'm not following along too closely, but hasn't it? I mean, wasn't it 28 weeks before and 24 now? Again, I'm not following along too closely, but I seem to recall listening to a podcast that indicated or outright said that it used to be considered 28 weeks.

Definitions of what is considered full term vs near full term have changed, I believe, but I thought POV was the same. Could be wrong.

[RedRusty]

Never? It has been 24 for a while but all it takes is an advancement in medicine such as a viable artificial womb and that takes another jump.

Agree, it could easily change tomorrow. I'm not going to say it has never changed, but I think it's been 24 for a bit.

[rdwire88]

What a coincidence, your damn opinion about abortion being murder is just that, it's an opinion, not a fact.

My opinion on why I would set the limit to 20 weeks was already stated. I also never called it a mass of cells. I said before 20 weeks a fetus is more akin to a low level organism. If you're going to use my words against me, try using the actual words I use instead of this dishonesty.

Cool.

There's that self righteous indignation I was looking for. Because my opinion differs and is based on biological markers, I'm a psychotic cultist. If you have to resort to insults... LOL.

*chugs Mountain Dew.

ending a life of a innocent child and you being okay with it will result in insults coming from me. get used to it chump

[knightofday]

Exactly my thought when I read the story.

So him having to be on the hook for 18+ years in financial child support is okay because she chose to keep the baby, but if she doesn't want it, no repercussions or consequences.

A female can take multiple precautions to ensure that she NOT get pregnant. Said precautions are: 1) tubes tied - if she doesn't ever want to have kids 2) birth control + 3) make sure he wears a condom + 4) morning after pill for possible scares.

That combo would prevent 99% unwanted pregnancies. Abortions would not be needed. Ever.

I accept that you find abortion wrong. I dislike it too but I find society better off for it. Glad you now realize it’s not murder.

I agree with you. Not a fan of it, but coming from the city of STL I 100% think it is a net positive and VERY much needed in this country. I have seen soo many woman (growing up) crank out numerous kids (just for benefits) and raise them like chit or not at all, like animals left to fend for themselves. Mom is inside getting high and eating that good food she bought with her EBT card, small children playing in the dark street at midnight (dam it make sme mad thinking back) Thats soo wrong, innocent kids who never had a chance left to fend for themselves, groe up to be addicts and criminals ;(

If it was outlawed there would be millions and millions more foster kids, criminals, and just plain unlcuky kids/people floating around all over the country :/

[rdwire88]

I agree with you. Not a fan of it, but coming from the city of STL I 100% think it is a net positive and VERY much needed in this country. I have seen soo many woman (growing up) crank out numerous kids (just for benefits) and raise them like chit or not at all, like animals left to fend for themselves. Mom is inside getting high and eating that good food she bought with her EBT card, small children playing in the dark street at midnight (dam it make sme mad thinking back) Thats soo wrong, innocent kids who never had a chance left to fend for themselves, groe up to be addicts and criminals ;(

If it was outlawed there would be millions and millions more foster kids, criminals, and just plain unlcuky kids/people floating around all over the country :/

I wouldn't let a irresponsibile horrible parent become a dictated discussion on whether it should result in a termination of a child.