The Half Abortion: Only Keeping One Twin :(

[magog704]

Its the one getting killed but its not the victim?? The mother is for having that baby tresspass?

i think when people get abortions late term they should pull them out and see if they survive or not so we get a nice data set for when a person is a person. then you add in some standard deviation safety factor, then you see whatever that gestation period is and call that a person.

premature birth assistance will vary from person to person based on insurance so early personhood will be a function of family income.

[Metalhead44]

6. Some mothers did not want to jeopardize their education.

7. Some did not want to jeopardize their careers.

women logic.

Why would your career/education not be jeopardized if you had one child as opposed to two?

[Rambo26]

I always thought if you had twins surely you can make tonnes of money putting them through scientific research and chit

[magog704]

I always thought if you had twins surely you can make tonnes of money putting them through scientific research and chit

finally a miscer with a functioning brain. repped.

[Gayford]

Ibthewrongbrotherdied.

[woodsmash]

I would never allow my wife abort a twin if we had one and if i had a wife

[Poon_Handler]

BRB I have to pay for 18 years for her "choice"

No you share the expenses of raising a child that you both willingly brought into the world. If you don't want a kid use a contraceptive, abortions are not birth control.

[rattler280]

I really don't care if people have abortions because it doesn't effect me whatsoever.

That being said I really hate when people use the argument "well they are poor and would have had a **** life anyway, probably just be a wellfare piece of ****"

One of my best friends growing up lived in social housing, his mom was a hooker and father was a drug dealer that was around 10% of the time.
He is now a successful mechanic and one of the nicest most genuine people I know. I doubt he would have wanted to be aborted.
****er makes more money than me and i'm from an upper-middle class household with a mother and father who were always there for me lol.

[Metalhead44]

It's cost more to take care of two children as opposed to one. Derp.

Lol at all the emotions running wild in this thread.

Aborting the baby won't effect the other child one bit. He wouldn't know anything.

The article mentions those points in a way that suggests it would harder to pursue an education/further your career if you have 2 children,when the reality is if you had one child you'd wouldn't be able to NOT jeopardize your education/career.
This is a philosophical argument not an emotional one.Should a parent be able to decide which child is more worthy of life?In the article one women decided to abort a boy because she already had one,is this not gender based/selected abortion?

[Metalhead44]

No you share the expenses of raising a child that you both willingly brought into the world. If you don't want a kid use a contraceptive, abortions are not birth control.

A women can/not get an abortion thats her choice
a MAN can't relinquish parental responsibility because the women has a "choice"
Why the man be punished for the failure of the female to make a choice that doesn't effect him?

[MrBrosephStalin]

Sad to see how most people view the subject of abortion from a purely partisan viewpoint instead of through a humanist lens. Everyone is out to validate their own beliefs and party system by any means necessary. I'm undecided about my stance on abortion. At the moment I would say I am pro choice, but I have increasingly been softening my stance. That doesn't mean I'm going to become a pro lifer, but it means that I can see that there are good arguments for and against abortion. If it was a clear cut decision we wouldn't be having this discussion, and our country wouldn't be so divided on the issue.

Two thought patterns really made me see the pro life argument more clearly. One, that life is a right according to our founders. If life is a right, and abortion is killing what is in essence a human life, you can see the conflict here. Secondly, I thought about what the child's life would lead to if they were not aborted. It just really moves me thinking that an aborted child could have went on to live a long, meaningful life. One that changed the lives of everyone around them, brought them happiness, and even possibly changed the world. The moments that are lost and will never be made is what saddens me I guess.

Still don't know my position on this issue, but one thing that bugs me is when ideologues use the term 'A woman's right to choose' or any of the other various interchangeable phrases. It should not be the woman's right to choose, it should be the parent's right to choose. I boggles my mind at how some support the feminist viewpoint that the mother should be the one who has the right to make the choice and not the father just because she has to carry the baby. The woman should not have the only say, nor should it be that the man should have the only say, but both parents.

[Turbomunkey]

This is not surprising. Once a barrier is broken people are going to take it to the next level inevitably. That is why people are so intent on standing their ground on issues. You will see it occur in other "hot topics"

Gay marriage will soon be legal, before long you will see people wanting to marry multiple partners. People will want to marry animals and inanimate objects.

Welcome to life

[Metalhead44]

Yes a parent should be able to decide which child to abort. Abortion is 100% the women's choice. It's her body her decision.

look at the boy to girl ratio in china and reconsider your position.

Yes a parent should be able to decide which child to abort. Abortion is 100% the women's choice. It's her body her decision.



A man isn't carrying the kid in his stomach for 9 months. So it's not his decision at all. It her body, not his, not yours.

not saying it isn't,all i'm saying is because the women made the choice to not have an abortion.The man shouldn't be required to be financially liable for the child,the child he DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE.

[MrBrosephStalin]

A man isn't carrying the kid in his stomach for 9 months. So it's not his decision at all. It her body, not his, not yours.

Strong feminist position brah. She should have thought about that before getting dicked. It is half the man's child and both parties should make the decision together.

[Metalhead44]

I'm aware of the boy to girl ratio in China(Who isn't?). It doesn't change my position one bit. You shouldn't be able to force a Woman to keep a kid she doesn't want.

either abortion both babies or abortion neither(if you have a boy and girl).This is a social issue that will effect population growth patterns and cause a shortage in male dominated professions(blue collar).

[FortyDegreeDay]

It's pretty grotesque that you get to see a 'replicate' of the fetus that was aborted. See the other child smile, laugh and play. Not sure if I could live with that.

[biggoron]

Gonna be a pretty big sausagefest in China if they start aborting only girls.

[notorius1]

S

Strong feminist position brah. She should have thought about that before getting dicked. It is half the man's child and both parties should make the decision together.

Her choice to engage in consensual sex is none of the governments business. Whatever results of that engagement is none of the governments business. Personal medical issues like abortions are not government business. Family planning matters are none of the governments business.

[MrBrosephStalin]

S

Her choice to engage in consensual sex is none of the governments business. Whatever results of that engagement is none of the governments business. Personal medical issues like abortions are not government business. Family planning matters are none of the governments business.

? I didn't mention the government. I'm a pro choice libertarian lol. Not sure what you are trying to get at. You should have the right to do practically anything that you want, as long as you do not infringe on another's rights. The debate in question is, is the unborn child life? Does it have rights then? Life is a right in our country. If it is indeed life, then you can see how abortion conflicts this. Either way, I think ending the at least potential life of a child is a much more serious decision then some make it out to be. Both parties have feelings and interest in the child and both should consent for an abortion. It is unfair that a women would be able to end the future life of a child without the say of the man, and vise versa. Taking responsibility for your actions is a libertarian thought. This is a simple matter if you are partisan and unwilling to see both sides of the argument, but if you humanize the situation you can see how very serious it is and how it can or can not be legally permissible as to whether the unborn child has the right to life. Again, I'm pro choice, but I can objectively see the viewpoint of both sides. I may change my stance in the future, not sure.

[notorius1]

? I didn't mention the government. I'm a pro choice libertarian lol. Not sure what you are trying to get at. You should have the right to do practically anything that you want, as long as you do not infringe on another's rights. The debate in question is, is the unborn child life? Does it have rights then? Life is a right in our country. If it is indeed life, then you can see how abortion conflicts this. Either way, I think ending the at least potential life of a child is a much more serious decision then some make it out to be. Both parties have feelings and interest in the child and both should consent for an abortion. It is unfair that a women would be able to end the future life of a child without the say of the man, and vise versa. Taking responsibility for your actions is a libertarian thought. This is a simple matter if you are partisan and unwilling to see both sides of the argument, but if you humanize the situation you can see how very serious it is and how it can or can not be legally permissible as to whether the unborn child has the right to life. Again, I'm pro choice, but I can objectively see the viewpoint of both sides. I may change my stance in the future, not sure.

The unborn kid is alive but it does not have/deserve rights. The right to life does not apply to the unborn simply because it isnt an independent or autonomous being. No person has the right to use someone else's body without permission.

Either way, I think ending the at least potential life of a child is a much more serious decision then some make it out to be.

Not really. The being hasnt experienced life at all and wont miss anything. End it and get on with your life.

It is unfair that a women would be able to end the future life of a child without the say of the man, and vise versa. Taking responsibility for your actions is a libertarian thought.

The man deserves no input as to what someone else does with their body. Regardless if he donated one sperm cell or not, his emotional investment is greatly outweighed by the physical, mental and emotional toll it takes on the female.

Taking responsibility for your actions is a libertarian thought.

Abortion is a way for people to make sure they have kids when they are ready. Its irresponsible to create financial obligations that you cannot meet by yourself.

This is a simple matter if you are partisan and unwilling to see both sides of the argument, but if you humanize the situation you can see how very serious it is and how it can or can not be legally permissible as to whether the unborn child has the right to life.

Its only serious to people who have interest in restricting personal freedoms. Imposing a ban on abortion would require infringement on the woman's freedom of government intrusion and privacy rights. I have no moral qualms permitting people to kill an organism that isnt independent simply because the sentient female has stronger, countervailing rights.