I am just curious on people’s views on abortion. I personally am pro-choice. I believe it is someone’s body and there decision. Either way the U.S. should at least keep things straight, for example if a someone kills a pregnant women they get charged with two accounts of murder but if a pregnant women has an abortion nothing happens. This is a little two-sided in my opinion. I could even go into the sanctity of life, which in a lot of conversations goes hand in hand with abortion, which is all sorts of wrong in my opinion. What are others thoughts on this?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
@placid, even rape. As terrible as that sounds, I’ve seen the situations. While I don’t fully understand all of the feelings involved, I can appreciate the gravity of it. But that being said it is still for selfish reasons. That child did nothing to bring about that situation and while you can empathize more with a woman in that situation it is still selfish.
@mikeyw829, A lot of kids who would have been born but got aborted would have grown up in a less than idea environment, and when kids grow up like that they often end up being less than ideal people. Plus overpopulation is/ will be such a big problem that less people is not a bad thing.
I chuckle every time someone says “if you are pro choice then you also support murder, even if it it is only under certain circumstances.” No shit! But who says I don’t sometimes support murder. Some people should die. (Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer, Jerry Sandusky, Vlad the Impaler, Josef Mengele…)
I agree with GTVC on this one. @smalls, you call it selfish to ‘kill’ an unborn child. I call it selfish to let children grow up in certain environments (children who get molested, abused and rape by their parents), when you had the choice to spare them the misery by abortion. A medal has two sides.
@filipek, Well if its the parents doing the abusing, molesting, and rape, then whats to say they would abort the child anyways? Unless only people that are fucked up get abortions. Or unless we are handing out forced abortions.
What is an ideal environment for a child, and who’s to say there is one right environment for a child? Most of the children in the world are born into poverty. Should we eliminate more than half our population because it isn’t ideal?
@hollowinfinity, Alex it was just an example, it can be the uncle or aunt or brother or whoever. Furthermore, when you know your (yet unborn) child is going to have a one in a billion disease which will make normal life impossible and which will take 24/7 caring, why would it be so bad to do an abortion? I honestly find it more selfish, when you have the information of the disease upfront, to let the child be born. Not only it costs society a lot of money but also the parents, who lose their normal life.
And I am not talking about ideal environments, because that is not the issue in my opinion. Poverty does not necessarily mean a bad environment; I am sure there are children in poverty who are happier than some children in rich dome.
I am holding on to my first point: survival of the fittest. How cruel some things can be, nature is how it is.
I think abortion is not classified as murder because I don’t consider that child alive until they exit the womb and it should be a choice that individuals have the option to explore if some kind of accident/rape occurs.
@Filip I don’t think you can say that its even survival of the fittest in this case because its not as if though the baby has a chance or a way to fight back.
Good thing I don’t believe things operate on a ‘survival of the fittest’ basis.
I have a brother who is in and out of prison. You never know what he’s going to do. Should that mean that I should abort my child because I could be exposing the child to a bad environment? Also, if the parents themselves aren’t all together, maybe having a child is just the catalyst they need to get their shit together. And as far as the disease thing goes, that should be handled case by case, no over-ruling law on the subject. And if its 1/a billion, then chances are it won’t happen often so it can be handled case by case.
@nikola, you are right, but I am talking about cases where certain diseases can be found out during pregnancy, or when it is known that the baby will be born without arms, or for example siamese twins etc. I really believe that it is better to do an abortion in these cases (when the parents want to of course)
And I agree with your first point, it should be the choice of the parents whether they want an abortion or not.
Survival of the fittest is part of evolution, it is not something you can believe in or not, it just is like that. It is how nature works, the strongest survive, how cruel that may sound.
And I do not tell you what you should do, I only say that parents should be allowed to make the choices themselves whether they want an abortion or not.
Yes Nikola, so instead of letting them go through hell on earth, why not sparing them the pain?
And Alex, of course you can believe whatever you like, I did not mean to say that you cannot believe this, but it is how it is. Also part of evolution/nature is the fact that you need a male and a female in order to reproduce, and you can believe it or not, it is how it is.
The fittest is the one that can best adapt to the environment he or she lives in. When only the weakest creatures would reproduce, they would not survive, so the law of survival of the fittest has always been there. Why do you think homo sapiens survived and homo eructus or other species extinguished? Because homo sapiens was the fittest, so in my opinion this is an universal law you cannot argue about.
Thats just a fancy way to say there is a certain degree of chance, but perhaps there isn’t chance in the way we imagine. All the energy in the universe is the same thing, just in different forms. We can die, but you can’t eliminate the energy. There is good proof to show that we effect our realities on most every level. We can even create our realities. We could be the same consciousnesses that makes up all forms of life. You just don’t know. It makes sense to me, that the mind is more primary than matter. Primacy of consciousness. So anything that happens in the physical world, ie, chance, survival of the fittest, procreation, happened primarily in consciousness. Which goes back to the OP. No one has the right to take away consciousnesses from flourishing the way it was NATURALLY supposed to.
Humans play god too much for our own good.
I do not understand how what you say relates to survival of the fittest. What does chance has to do with this?
A greater/better consciousness would imply a fitter individual, and the law of survival of the fittest would hold on again, or do you mean something else?
OK, so suppose it is chance (I will not start a discussion whether chance exists or not, because we would go way too off topic) and a big part of the organisms living on the earth will die. But then again, the fittest (of the ones being left) will reproduce and survive, and evolution will take place. So the law would still apply in my opinion.
@filipek, You say that my statement is not a fact, but then you say what it actually is (but include that this is your opinion) and say you are not succumbing to cognitivve dissonance. This is your opinion. You are drawing a subjective line in an objective territory. You are taking life from another human being, whether they are cognitive, individuals, and still in the womb.
Murder is the intent of killing another human being. @Dylan, @filipek; Killing in self defense is murder, is it not? You intentionally kill someone, but for your own safety. In war you are a murderer. When you drunk drive and hit someone, you are not a murderer, it was not your intentions. When you get an abortion you very well know that you are killing the fetus – you are deciding the fetus’s fate.
Murder, filip, is dedicated to the human – human killing. I have killed millions of germs, thousands of bugs, and possibly dozens of animals unwillingly (or willingly!). I do not deny this. I have never killed, murderer, another human being.
@ijesuschrist, and again you state as a fact that a foetus is a human being, but again I have to disagree with you. Yes it is my opinion that a foetus is not a human being yet, so as is yours that it is.
I did not know that the word ‘murder’ can only be used in classifying the killing of another human being, so I take my words back about you and all of us being murderers.
I believe in the freedom to choose. I don’t believe a fetus has consciousness. It’s not something a person should do lightly, but I can think of a number of reasons a person would want to do it. “Stepping up” isn’t always an option. I would rather preserve my energies for dealing with the kids and people who are already here. And, like I always say, if you’re going to say, after a miscarriage or death, that it is “God’s will,” then God must be the biggest abortionist/murderer there is.