Is anyone here pro-abortion until birth?

[Rabbitjb]

I also lean towards potential brain function development as the line, but we should lean very conservatively on this. Like you said first trimester, somewhere clearly before that development.

Of course the obvious counter argument is that brain function is constantly developing from conception, from the initial replicating DNA cells to the structures that enable those neural pathways.

A counter to the 'catastrophic brain injury' argument is, if the adult got the diagnosis of brain death but we predicted that within a few months there would be full recovery, would we still be okay with the killing.

I agree. 20-22 weeks is conservative as the cortex is still completely smooth at 22 weeks and cortical development is far later in pregnancy.

I see what you’re saying by potential for recovery, that puts an interesting ethical twist on the argument.

I continue however to take exception to the pro-lifer stance that potentiality for life overrides an actual human being’s domain over their own body. That decision should and must remain in the hands of the individual mother and their physician.

Pregnancy is not without risk, it places huge demands on a woman’s body and mind that do not end with childbirth, some risks are serious, some are long term, maternal death is not resigned to history.

[Omnivium]

but once you follow the problem through to the conclusion without emotion, pro life is the only morally and logically consistent stance

This. Conception is the only place to logically draw the line. Anywhere else is arbitrary

[Rabbitjb]

This. Conception is the only place to logically draw the line. Anywhere else is arbitrary

Really? Over 80% of fertilised ovum don’t make it. That’s not how fertilisation works.

Biology is arbitrary. There is no logic in saying a fertilised ovum is any line at all

[Witrebel]

In theory I can understand the claim that life starts at the first breath, but I personally think that argument breaks down when you consider the ability to induce labor sooner than "natural". Just defining life as the moment the breath is taken is not good enough for me. I think that from an ethics standpoint, the metric should be "when was the baby viable". So at what point would the fetus, removed from the womb, have a 63% or greater change of survival on its own. This of course gets messy when you start to include the miracle of modern medicine. Certainly that "viability" standard would be different today than it was 50 years ago due to our ability to provide life support. But to me, if a fetus is unlikely to survive in its current stage of development, then it can't be classified as a "baby". It is simply potential.

[isingmodel]

This. Conception is the only place to logically draw the line. Anywhere else is arbitrary

Are IVF clinics genocide centres?

[Omnivium]

Are IVF clinics genocide centres?

Nope, but abortion clinics are

[wesleysh21]

I support the ability to abort a child up to 5 years old

[isingmodel]

Nope, but abortion clinics are

IVF clinics dispose of hundreds of fertilised embryos for every patient. Why are they not genocide centres?

[tnel00]

To be fair those are extreme outliers, What if 99% are as described in the other post and only .001% end up as you described? still worth?

Yes

This. Conception is the only place to logically draw the line. Anywhere else is arbitrary

Anything else is an attempt to justify murder

Really? Over 80% of fertilised ovum don’t make it. That’s not how fertilisation works.

Biology is arbitrary. There is no logic in saying a fertilised ovum is any line at all

100% of people die. That's not an excuse to end life prematurely

[x-trainer ben]

Never heard of a *PRO* abortion person, just people who say the patient and doctor should make the decisions.

[Luc1fer]

I am, but not because you just don't want it.
I watched my dog kill one of it's litter right after birth. I've concluded she sensed a defect in the pup that made it unlikely to survive.
We have ultrasound and all kinds of other stuff nowadays and we've grown out of touch with nature, and our senses.
Not saying I could ever abort at any time, because emotions become involved, but being detached from the situation I'm not against it.

Up to what age are you not against a parent killing their child?

[Rabbitjb]

Yes



Anything else is an attempt to justify murder



100% of people die. That's not an excuse to end life prematurely

And here you are in the realm of religion and ethical debate but against basic biology and science when you try to determine “life” when no individual life can exist

Never heard of a *PRO* abortion person, just people who say the patient and doctor should make the decisions.

Exactly

[B.O.L.A.]

In theory, yes, but with the caveats below...

-Anyone performing or having one done can and should be publicly humiliated, fired, ostracized, boycotted, etc. Any form of punishment that doesn't violate their rights.
-Incentives for adoption should be allowed, including paying cash
-Restrictions should be lifted on birth control and early abortions

Think with those things in effect late terminations would be almost unheard of. No one wants to kill babies, no one wants to have a huge expensive and dangerous procedure. No woman would do this if they had already had tons of chances to cheaply and easily terminate it early on just by taking a pill, and if you can get paid for delivering the child, and if your public life is ruined by doing it.

[Rabbitjb]

In theory, yes, but with the caveats below...

-Anyone performing or having one done can and should be publicly humiliated, fired, ostracized, boycotted, etc. Any form of punishment that doesn't violate their rights.
-Incentives for adoption should be allowed, including paying cash
-Restrictions should be lifted on birth control and early abortions

Think with those things in effect late terminations would be almost unheard of. No one wants to kill babies, no one wants to have a huge expensive and dangerous procedure. No woman would do this if they had already had tons of chances to cheaply and easily terminate it early on just by taking a pill, and if you can get paid for delivering the child, and if your public life is ruined by doing it.

What about under 16s? Victims of rape? Those having abortions due to health difficulties in foetus or mother?

What about caring for the 100,000s children already in the woefully inadequate foster system

Once again late terminations are extremely rare, stats show something like 1% and generally due to health issues

But I agree free contraception and free access to early abortion consistently results in lower rates of abortion

[B.O.L.A.]

What about under 16s? Victims of rape? Those having abortions due to health difficulties in foetus or mother?

I'm sure there would be less ostracism, humiliation, firing, etc for them than those who do it on a purely elective basis.

What about caring for the 100,000s children already in the woefully inadequate foster system

Adoptive newborns are a higher commodity. There are actually a lot of barriers preventing them from being adopted.

Once again late terminations are extremely rare, stats show something like 1% and generally due to health issues

Yep, and they will be even more rare in the situation I described. Not sure you read my post carefully

But I agree free contraception and free access to early abortion consistently results in lower rates of abortion

Not free, per se. But free from restriction or interference from outside parties. People who make the contraceptives and early termination meds need to make money on it somehow.

[Rabbitjb]

Not free, per se. But free from restriction or interference from outside parties. People who make the contraceptives and early termination meds need to make money on it somehow.

No absolutely financially free

So that the poor, who have the highest rates of abortion, lack of prospects etc, can have equal quality of care

Contraceptive choice and anti abortion rhetoric never affects the wealthy

The US healthcare system is abhorrent to most other countries. Your people die for want of money for basic medicines

Edit: some States are doing right though. Colorado introduces free contraception available directly from pharmacies and sees a dramatic decline in rates of abortion

https://coloradosun.com/2019/10/21/c...re-the-reason/

[tnel00]

And here you are in the realm of religion and ethical debate but against basic biology and science when you try to determine “life” when no individual life can exist

Biology says life begins at conception

https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/a...yoquotes2.html

[Mr Beer]

^

Lots of things can be defined as 'life' or 'alive' but a single cell or tiny clump of cells isn't a human being and should have no human rights.

[Rabbitjb]

He has a semantic point, I was less than precise with my comment

Life vs “a human life”

Suddenly reminded of “The inner life of a cell” ..amazing series of animations of cellular structures, really worth a watch if you have a spare few minutes (would advise on mute cos the soundtrack is irritating as hell) https://xvivo.com/blog/the-inner-lif...ell-animation/

[monty097]

If a woman is raped and gets pregnant or there is a danger to the mother then go ahead and have an abortion.

Other than that tough chit, be more responsible if you don't want to end up with a baby in you.

[Rabbitjb]

If a woman is raped and gets pregnant or there is a danger to the mother then go ahead and have an abortion.

Other than that tough chit, be more responsible if you don't want to end up with a baby in you.

Childbirth as punishment for mistake, accident or lapse in judgement

Strong

[numberguy12]

Biology says life begins at conception

https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/a...yoquotes2.html

You are linking a Princeton pro-life organization's misunderstanding of what the debate is even about. No, a definition of what an embryo or zygote is from some medical textbook is not important to the issue at hand: whether, for example, a single-celled zygote is considered a human being (among other things, entitled to the same rights of, say, a born human).

Try to understand what this debate is even about.

If a woman is raped and gets pregnant or there is a danger to the mother then go ahead and have an abortion.

Other than that tough chit, be more responsible if you don't want to end up with a baby in you.

Strange statement. It's like you don't care at all about the embryo or fetus being "human life" or whatever, you just care about making it a "gotcha" moment for the woman. After all, if the fetus was really an innocent human life, you are killing this life simply because of past actions done by others which it was obviously not responsible for?

Without free will, the above gets even more muddled, as even with a woman choosing to have sex, the word "choose" here is rather meaningless. I realize the heart of your argument wants to get down to that choice factor- did the woman decide to have sex or not- but again, choice is not well-defined without free will (and I have yet to see a good argument for free will, but there seems to be many arguments and various evidence against it). Whatever the case, why would you then kill an innocent human life (from a pro-life perspective) because of something happening completely outside of its control? Where else in, for example, law, do you see this allowed, where you should be able to just kill an innocent human being because of actions of others? I cant think of any example.

[rocketfish]

one of my buddies told me they should have abortions up to they find out the gender so families can get the genders they want and not get screwed

[ThePoz]

I have to say I’m not necessarily until birth but I’m not sure exactly what trimester or weeks in I’m okay with. Certainly abortion is a far better option than being born into a broken home or to dysfunctional family. Though I’d say I would have to do a little research to say which trimester I agree with it up until. Thing is the earth is way overpopulated and we need a way to curb this problem from a multifaceted approach. As Dr William glasser says the most, or one of the most important factors in successfully raising a child is a functional relationship between the mom and dad.

You really think mom and dad not being a couple anymore is reason to kill a baby?

[ThePoz]

No, not up to birth. I don't know anybody who's OK with that

Women can be crazy especially when they're pregnant. Imagine if a couple breaks up while pregnant and she decides she really hates him and wants to hurt him emotionally.

[monty097]

Childbirth as punishment for mistake, accident or lapse in judgement

Strong

Killing a baby because of that mistake, accident, or lapse in judgement.

Strong

[monty097]

Whatever the case, why would you then kill an innocent human life (from a pro-life perspective) because of something happening completely outside of its control? Where else in, for example, law, do you see this allowed, where you should be able to just kill an innocent human being because of actions of others? I cant think of any example.

Because the 2 instances I mentioned are out of the woman's control as well, she can't control if someone rapes her and she can't control any life-threatening issues that might potentially arise from pregnancy.

The fetus dies anyways if the mother dies so if there is a life-threatening medical issue then may as well abort the pregnancy.

[Rabbitjb]

Killing a baby because of that mistake, accident, or lapse in judgement.

Strong

By definition not a baby until born

Terminating a pregnancy is not “killing a baby”, at most it is removing the potential for a human life to develop, see upthread for discussion points

[numberguy12]

Because the 2 instances I mentioned are out of the woman's control as well, she can't control if someone rapes her and she can't control any life-threatening issues that might potentially arise from pregnancy.

The fetus dies anyways if the mother dies so if there is a life-threatening medical issue then may as well abort the pregnancy.

Ignoring for the moment that you are glossing over the problems that arise without free will existing (without free will, nothing at the end of the day is "in someone's control")....I don't think your response here is answering my post really at all here. You are just repeating your stance that it all comes down to if they made the choice or not, which I already addressed.

[monty097]

Ignoring for the moment that you are glossing over the problems that arise without free will existing (without free will, nothing at the end of the day is "in someone's control")....I don't think your response here is answering my post really at all here. You are just repeating your stance that it all comes down to if they made the choice or not, which I already addressed.

Choice has nothing to do with what I was talking about, nobody chooses to get raped or have life-threatening health issues arise from a pregnancy.