Topic: So, let's talk about that new abortion law... (Read 694 times)

Lol,

1) Why is it impossible to know that the sperm has impregnated the lady so early? As you yourself said that there is such a new technology that can make a man pregnant like a woman, I wonder why we can't detect pregnancy early with such advanced technologies that we need to wait late term to know a raped lady is pregnant.

2) A unique life simply means a life that prioritises its own life and is no longer an egg+sperm. You are factually incorrect when you are saying that "as long as its in womb, the fetus continues to develop hence there's no ending point hence it can be aborted." No, my sir, the fetus develops into a child when it is inside the womb, the fetus doesn't suddenly becomes a child miraculously when it is taken out of the womb. Calling a 8.5 month old fetus as a parasite and that parasite automatically becomes a human being once out of womb is an absurd idea. Parasite huh? So an unwanted new born baby can be aborted because it will be a parasite to parents by taking their resources and money?

3) Well, I would love to live in an orphanage rather than be killed in womb. Again, the conditions of child care (I don't like to call them orphanages) can be improved. And, actually many millions of parents do adopt kids. So just by looking at some orphanages if you agree to kill in womb, thats really not a great decision I would say

4) If homosexuals would want to adopt, then, why not? Am pro-lgbt and their rights

5) I am not talking about a potential life here. Comparing a 8.5 month/late-term baby in womb to sperm/egg is absurd. Masturbation is okay, pill is okay. I never opposed them. This is just a pro-choice tactic to paint all who disgrees with abortion as dumb.

6) So, I can just consider murder as taking away life out of clump of cells, then why will I be regarded as a criminal? And as you said, pro-choicers believe that a 6/8 month old fetus isn't a child, this validates my point further. If you consider a 8.5 month fetus as nothing but egg+sperm, then I really don't know how to move forward with the argument because a 8.5 month old fetus is almost a new born baby and it isn't a clump of cells. If you believe a person can abort a 8.5 month fetus because of any reason they like, what stops you from supporting the murder of  new born baby for the exact same reasons? Technically, biologically and morphologically, they are the same.

7) I made my stances on abortion clear. So did I make my stances on pills and contraceptives clear : I support the use of pills and contraceptives.

i am pro choice, women should have the freedom to be strong independent and free individuals,

there are actually technologies out there under development which allow men to reproduce without women.

women should have freedom to pursue their dreams careers. like politician, warlordess  , presidentess etc.

all those pro life, anti abortion, anti same sex marriage are in the end just money printing central bankers and other capitalists, that want to "educate" human money earning cattle to deliver profit and value to their fucked up currencies they create, for their individual private wealth gain.

Though I understand the idea, it's impossible because you can't know if the sperm has impregnanted the lady so early.
Then what is your definition of "unique life of its own"?
When the female and male gamete met? When they start multiplying? When you vaguely recognize the shape of a bean? When the eyes appear?

The reason people support late term abortion is because as long as it's in the womb, the foetus is constantly evolving in something more complex and more complete. There is no possibility to define an objective limite saying "before it's a foetus and you can abort" and "after it's a baby and you can't abort". As long as it's in the womb, it's a foetus, not a living thing. It's by definition a parasite sustaining on its host. You can get rid of a parasite if you wish.
yeah, all those empty orphanages 

Some people would like to adopt yes. But orphans are more numerous than possible parents.
Now grant homosexuals the right to adopt and... Maybe you can reach an adoption demand high enough to sustain the unwanted pregnancies? Don't know.
Problem is that you talk about a potential life.
Pills is destroying potential life, condoms are taking potential lifes. Masturbation is taking potential life.

Potential isn't a valid argument or else you have to apply it everywhere.
What you don't understand is that NOBODY says that. Anyone pro choice simply consider that a 6 months old foetus is just a foetus, not a human being. So abortion is not murder, it's just a chirugical operation to remove an internal parasite. Nothing wrong with that.
Which is fine as long as you're consistent and consider you should also ban pills and condoms as they take away potential lifes.

Well articulated argument against the recent abortion laws: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqS4qFc_I6A

country of that law into the title!

learn to use language so its useful and helpful not confusing.

and time+ressources draining

for example

So, let's talk about that new abortion law from france

Yep, I am arrogant for expecting you to reply to the topic of the thread located in the title. Not my thread BTW, but you are smart, you know that already right? I guess it is my fault you didn't bother reading the thread which is literally about "my" abortion law, which you came here to post about not even bothering to read the thread. It is arrogant of me to expect you to discuss the topic of the thread. Lets talk about the rare endangered narwhal instead.

you should be sorry that you are to stupid to write text according to priority, so people can use your "text" efficiently.

you are here in an international forum, where people from all over the world meet, you have to point out which court even in the headline of this topic, which you didnt.

you have enoguh space in your text in your headline to actually add a countryname or cityname to it. so the audience knows what you are talking about.

but you didnt this looks to me more like a sign of arrogance as if everyone is supposed to care about "your" abortion law.

I am very sorry you are too stupid/lazy to read what is already there.

if you want people to respond to your "topic" then write it appropriately, i cant see anywhere which court in which country decided what exactly.

i just asked a simple question which court in which country. and you didnt bothered to answer a simply question, meaning for me you are just rambling with your thread.

when you discuss laws, and legislation write in first sentences

court name, country name, date, decision etc.

thats how discussions about laws always are being held.

Just go away if you aren't going to bother reading the thread or commenting on its actual subject matter.

this topic started in a way that it is not clear what the legislation is.

Completely no difference, my point still stands. If someone wants to do it, it's not up to the government to stop them. I wouldn't do it for moral reasons, regardless of the age, although, like I said, if the life of the woman was on the line I wouldn't think twice. The life of the mother should always come before the life of an unborn child, regardless of the stage of development it is in.
And what if the child is disabled and fully developed, you might ask? I'd say it's up to the doctor. They were taught not to do harm and they should be able to refuse to abort a developed pregnancy if they see that it's more of a mother's fancy than a necessity.

If only there was a convenient thread filled with discussion you could read to answer all of your questions...

which abortion law? which country?

my oppinion is fixed, the problem is that women have to carry the financial burden of raising children, if thats the case they should have freedom to do an abortion

So does anyone have anything to say about THE NEW ABORTION LAWS WHICH ARE THE ACTUAL TOPIC of discussion?

since women are being forced upon all social responsibility of what comes out of their stomach they should be able to decide that themselves.

Yeah but what about the NEW abortion laws this whole thread is about?

I'm against the law and authority telling people what to do with their own bodies, therefore I believe abortion should be legal, just like suicide is. It shouldn't be morally accepted though, and a young woman who gets pregnant and decides to kill the child, because she still wants to have fun, should be treated like human trash and shunned by the society. Every action has consequences. If you murder someone, don't expect a kind word and a pat on the back.
I'm against abortion morally, and wouldn't agree if my woman wanted to do it (unless the pregnancy would endanger her life, or the child was brain dead), but I wouldn't stop someone else from doing it. It's their choice and their life.

I will only support abortion in rare cases and when it is highly needed. It is because there is exactly some random situations in which we feel the need to do it. An example that is in my mind is when the mother and child are both in danger during pregnancy and the only last resort is to give up the unborn baby.

Now when we do talk about fvcking without thinking that being pregnant is really going to happen wil be the fvcking reason to abort a child is just fully bullsh*t. Not because you were given a feedom to decide it makes you right or not being liable for it. That is why we have laws to follow 

I disagree, I guess even a rape victim won't abort the baby if she really have the heart, regardless of what had happened to the mother it's still unjust to kill the baby and don't let him live and isn't his fault, anyway. Just let the baby live.


Of course, this will be case to case basis and as what baddecker said, it's medical circumstance.