Topic: Abortion should be banned. - page 5. (Read 2007 times)

You know that political leaning has nothing to do with this issue. Don't you?

I am a conservative, pro-free-market capitalist, anti-religion, pro-guns, pro-choice, feminist, and humanist. 

Who told you men are pressuring women?  Other men?

Talk to women.  Do you know what happens to a woman's body during pregnancy?  For most, it is not a walk in the park.

If anything, the stance for or against abortion is driven by religious indoctrination.  It is about controlling women's rights as all Abrahamic religions are ("women shall be quiet and must obey men").

Men who pass these laws think they are 'punishing' women who have sex before marriage, not realizing that there are married couples
who want to abort their pregnancies.

The legislation should be driven by science, not a religious delusion.

Biology tells us that only women can get pregnant. However, it is often the case that men are pressuring pregnant women to get an abortion because they want nothing to do (including financially) with the baby.

If radical, far-leftists were serious about "my body, my choice, they would make it illegal for men to pressure women to get abortions for unwanted babies. This is not the case, leftists, celebrate late-term abortions, and encourage women to cede the choice to get an abortion to leftist men who wish to avoid responsibility to pressure women to get an abortion.

It serve for good and bad purpose, let's not lie to our selves

Abortions until viability is a decision only the mother should be taking.  Science tells us that viability is around 22-24 weeks.

If you want to be on the side of caution, make the laws allowing all abortions until 16 weeks, or thereabouts.

Restrictions on abortions implicitly discriminate against women.

Imagine if states had different laws against receiving cancer treatments based on the size of your prostate.  Some states would allow treatments as soon as the cancer is detected, others will say that your prostate has to be larger than 4 inches.  Most men with prostate cancer will be prevented from receiving their treatment in that state.  The laws would discriminate against them without explicitly stating that men are prevented from receiving their cancer treatment.

There are many abortions performed when the fetus would have been able to survive if it had been delivered rather than aborted. These abortions are the most clearly wrong. With advancements in medical technology, viability outside the womb has become increasingly earlier in pregnancy over time.

Restrictions on abortion are not prohibiting women from receiving abortions based on their sex.

By that argument, an egg cell does not have a 0 percent chance of survival either. It will also survive if it meets the right conditions in the womb.

If you then claim that an unfertilized egg cell isn't a human but a fertilized egg cell is, the only different between the two is that it has gone from 23 single chromosomes to 23 pairs of chromosomes. If that is your criteria, then that means a skin cell is also a human.

Your cut off is entirely arbitrary. A ball of cells is not a human being.

That's just not true. They can sense their environment, they can react to stimulus such as bright lights, pain, or skin to skin contact, they can communicate that they are hungry or tired, etc. A fetus before the limit of viability cannot do any of that because it does not have a functioning cerebrum.

I've already addressed this. Being temporarily unconscious is not the same as having no capacity for consciousness because your brain has either died or doesn't exist.

You are nitpicking from the statement in every comment box... try to tie all of your arguments into one long essay, then the statements he gave will make sense to you as it is continuation and not repetitive.


As he, Oeleo, already said "A person without brain function even under medical equipments are both medically and legally dead, or having no life by any means. Similarly, a zygote that has no brain function are both medically and legally dead or no life at all."


We stick with the physiology and not about the consciousness. A person's brain doesn't stop functioning even when he's asleep, therefore he is alive.

Because it goes in circles and was already refuted in my earlier comment.

A fetus does not have a 0 percent chance of survival, inaccurate. A fetus will survive as it continues development in the womb and then post birth.

A skin cell does not differentiae into a full human being, a zygote does. And as I've mentioned, it is less cruel to abort a zygote than it is a 9 month old fetus in the womb.

Consciousness doesn't even exist for babies post birth. No one remembers being a one month old. No one remembers any feelings or emotions as one month old. The brain is so under developed, with so little neurons, there is no complex thoughts. A baby at one month old could die without knowing it, or being aware of it. Do you begin abortions post birth because the baby is so young and would not remember or even comprehend being killed? Consciousness isn't any good metric to determine when human life becomes valuable. Human life is human life with or without consciousness.

If it were, why would it be a tragedy if someone passed away in their sleep? Why would it be a tragedy if everyone in this world passed away in their sleep tonight? No pain, you won't be aware of it, and you were consciousness for it either. For the same reason why abortion is unethical. You deprive someone the privilege and experience of human life.

This comments gave the most valid points and you guys just disregard this for what?, to pretend you didn't see a thing and continue with the debunked argument... what a loser

Your proposals sound like those of a complete psychopath, but I do agree that deadbeat men who impregnate women and run away from their responsibilities should be held to account.




I agree with these terms. No quarter should be given to deadbeats who spread their seed without accountability especially the seed of imbeciles. There is a flipside to this though for promiscous women who cheat on their husbands and abandon their families. They too should face repercussions

+1

I'd limit men's reproductive age to 25-40.  Every man over 40 should undergo a permanent vasectomy.

This would solve more problems than one.

AND

Abortions until viability should be a choice. The government should pay for all abortions until 26 weeks of pregnancy.  

Instead of banning abortion, we should make vasectomies compulsory for all males at age 14. They are reversible, so once a man has proven he is responsible enough to have kids, and raise them, we should allow him to reverse it.

Humans say it is a human right not to be excluded from medical procedures based on sex.  Not allowing women access to medical procedures is discrimination.

Science says when a fetus is viable based on the study of human developmental biology.

Just because you don't understand how not to discriminate against people, doesn't mean discrimination must be legislated.

It is not a slippery slope as you think it is.  

I just gave you the logic. I don't want abortion outlawed, so it's myself that doesn't care, along with plenty others. Celebrating abortion becomes the slippery slope, it didn't used be like that, but radical activists have a profound ability of taking moderate concepts and shifting them into radical philosophy. And who says it's a "human right," exactly? Who says it's nonviable? A fetus is viable, it (he/she?) will eventually turn into a born human being that functions. You still have your abortions, nothing stopping anyone.

So what?  Who cares? That life is not viable so it does not matter if it is human life or not.

Why are you ignoring human rights to medical procedures?  But insisting on preserving non-viable human life?

Why?  I really want to know the logic behind it.  Who brainwashed you?

And humans with a 0% chance of survival due to lack of higher brain function are both medically and legally dead.

A zygote is no more a human life than a skin cell.

You don't need to be conscious, but you need to have the capacity for consciousness. Adults without the capacity for consciousness are declared dead. Fetuses without the capacity for consciousness are not yet a life.

Again, viability does not define human life. Viability refers to chance of survival.

The start of human life begins at the formation of a zygote.

What you might define as "living" begins a philosophical discussion, not a scientific one, so there are reasonable disagreements and subjective interpretation.

Do we consider living to be sentient or conscious? If that were the case, that means we are are no longer alive while sleeping?

A human life is still human life even if it is not sustainable without the mother's womb. Abortion is ending human life.

If someone on a ventilator still has higher brain function and still has a possibility of survival, then that person will receive full medical treatment.
If someone on a ventilator has been declared brain dead, then that is no longer a viable life (despite their heartbeat) and will have medical treatment withdrawn.

If a fetus has higher brain function and has a possibility of survival when they are born, then they will receive full medical treatment.
If a fetus has no higher brain function and will not survive even with advanced medical equipment, then it is not a viable life.

Living cells start at conception. A human life, by definition, cannot start until there is enough brain development to sustain consciousness, which is around 26 weeks.

Well if Google says so, it must be true! You have holes in your logic - viability does not define a human, that's the point.

Is someone on a ventilator not human because they are not viable with advanced medical equipment? Why bother saving anyone's life in the hospital if their life is dependent on medical equipment to bring them back to viability? Why would it be a tragedy if someone were to die in their sleep, not knowing they would have ever lived. It's because they would have missed out on the experiences of life.

Life starts at conception, not at viability. Abortion after the fetus is developed is cruel. I am not against outlawing abortion, it's celebration in modern times though is disgusting.

The limit of viability is around 24 weeks. The nervous system developments necessary for feeling pain do not occur until the 26th week.

There are people living without a heartbeat through Ventricular Assist Devices, and there are hearts beating away inside brain dead people. A heartbeat is a poor indicator of a viable life.

QFT.