|
Post by Kizzume on Oct 7, 2007 4:14:49 GMT -5
Until there is technology that can freeze embryos (to be able to be used later by them or someone else) that can be available to everyone, I think women should have the right to get an abortion.
I think abortion is wrong, but I think it's necessary to have it legal because of the ramifications of if it was made illegal.
|
|
|
Post by Hackfest on Oct 14, 2007 22:37:40 GMT -5
I just hope that the ramifications of having it be illegal aren't always so.
|
|
|
Post by Kizzume on Oct 14, 2007 23:29:57 GMT -5
I agree--and once technology is at a better point, those ramifications will no longer be so.
|
|
|
Post by jq on Oct 15, 2007 1:25:32 GMT -5
I'll agree that I dislike abortion. In fact, it bothers the hell out of me. I believe the best way to lower abortion rates however is in education (contraceptives) and especially, in making adoptions easier. I'd even be willing to have some sort of program which gives women a tax write-off if they adopt a baby out instead of having an abortion.
|
|
|
Post by Kizzume on Oct 15, 2007 1:44:50 GMT -5
Well, then there'd be people having babies just to get tax writeoffs, and that's not good either....
But I'm sure there could be something.
I think people should get more tax writeoffs when they adopt (IN) kids. Sure, some would be just trying to get tax writeoffs, but how much money can you actually save when trying to raise kids? It can eat up your money pretty quickly.
But then, that doesn't help the issue of abotion.
I still think technology is going to change things significantly.
|
|
|
Post by treehugger on Oct 24, 2007 23:06:08 GMT -5
OK, I'm shipping over a couple of quotes from the "Hi, there!" thread so as not to derail the introductions there. First, a quote from Hackfest: Well, first up, I don't see a fetus as a "someone;" I see it as a "something".....until it's born. I view a fetus as a potential "someone," should the woman choose to continue with the pregnancy. The death penalty is wrong for a lot of reasons. First of all, it's never been proven to be a deterrant. States that have the death penalty have higher murder rates than states that do not. Also, according to the Innocence Project, over 200 prisoners convicted of violent crimes have later been exonerated on DNA evidence. Many of those were death row inmates. What if we'd 'zapped' an innocent person? How do we say "oops!" to the family members? In addition, the death penalty is meted out unfairly. What state you live in, what color your skin is, what kind of genitalia you have, and how much cash you have to spend on legal counsel all factor in to whether or not you get the death penalty. None of those things should matter - yet they do. Check the statistics. I actually believe in stiffer sentences for violent crime and I don't believe in getting out early on "good behavior." However, I don't believe in state-sanctioned killing to punish people for killing either. We 'cause' a lot of things throughout our lives, Hackfest. Human beings are flawed creatures; we screw up. Sometimes often. However, making a mistake doesn't give anyone the right to take away one's right of choice over their personal medical decisions. What gives a court the right to force a woman to remain pregnant against her will? Women are human beings. We're not ambulatory incubators. We have a right to choose whether or not we want to be, or remain, pregnant. Plus, outlawing abortion isn't going to stop abortion. It's only going to remove access to safe abortion. "Back alley" abortion clinics will continue to butcher women who simply don't want to have children. OK, now I want to respond to this second quote from Ess2s: I am indeed quite 'militant' in my stance that women own their bodies. I battled a lot of prejudice, oppression, and misogyny growing up and I'm not about to put up with it my adult life. However, I always try to be respectful of others opinions providing (and this is the qualifier, for me) that they do not try to make their opinion apply to me. In other words, if someone hates abortion and doesn't believe in abortion, then I respect their right to not have an abortion. Nobody should be forced either way. There was a story in the news recently where the parents of a teenage girl were prosecuted for trying to force their daughter to get an abortion. I find that horrific and incredibly wrong. The choice belongs with the pregnant girl and nobody else. If she wants to continue with the pregnancy, she should certainly be allowed to. As for me "living my life the way I want to," I'm not going to be getting pregnant anytime soon. I'm a middle-aged lesbian who has been with my partner for almost 22 years. However I'm a longtime supporter (25+ years) of women's rights, including a woman's right to choose. We can certainly debate this issue - however, I request that we discuss the issue.....not my "attitude." I'll never attack either of you personally; it's not my style. I ask the same of you. I would, however, enjoy a spirited debate on this subject. Feel free to respond.
|
|
|
Post by Kizzume on Oct 24, 2007 23:35:11 GMT -5
Good post. What I do wonder, however, is how you would feel about the subject of abortion if the technology was available to freeze embryos and/or fetuses that could be donated to a bank. Would you still think abortion was acceptable at that point when it would no longer be a necessary thing if that person no longer wanted a baby growing inside them?
|
|
|
Post by treehugger on Oct 25, 2007 0:55:54 GMT -5
Good post. What I do wonder, however, is how you would feel about the subject of abortion if the technology was available to freeze embryos and/or fetuses that could be donated to a bank. Would you still think abortion was acceptable at that point when it would no longer be a necessary thing if that person no longer wanted a baby growing inside them? If a fetus/embryo could be frozen and donated elsewhere, I would be against abortion. The issue, with me, is ALL about bodily autonomy (and our right to make decisions about our bodies). If the fetus could be removed from the pregnant woman's body and be kept viable to gestate elsewhere, then I'd be all for it.
|
|
|
Post by Kizzume on Oct 25, 2007 1:02:16 GMT -5
Then we are in complete agreement. Cool.
|
|
|
Post by Ess2s2 on Oct 25, 2007 1:42:41 GMT -5
Treehugger, I agree with 99% of your post in reference to me. The only thing I take issue with is your interpretation of the word "attitude," which I meant in the neutral sense and you seemed to interpret in the accusatory sense. I am only clarifying, I do not wish to explore the matter--which is unrelated to this discussion--further.
I wholeheartedly disagree with your definition of a fetus. It is a "someone" at the first sign of brain activity. Which is classically accepted to begin near the end of the embryonic stages of development. Of course, the legal definition is after the point of viability, meaning after the point at which the fetus can be delivered and be able to survive and develop autonomously. By your definition given to Hackfest, a baby isn't someone until after it passes through the birth canal into this world. This rationale negates all the things that happen in the womb in the late stages of pregnancy such as fine and gross motor control, hiccups, urination, defecation, blinking, thought, pain response, and yes, emotion.
Allow me to be absolutely clear: I do not disagree with a woman's right to choose. I may vehemently disagree with many of the reasons why a woman would get an abortion, but I still support the choice, as long as it is informed, and all other options have been carefully considered. I take serious issue with women getting abortions out of the sake of convenience, or as an afterthought to irresponsibility. This next sentiment constitutes a line unto itself.
Abortion is not birth control. Ever.
I notice there is a caveat to the current argument involving the wish for technology to be able to put unborn fetuses in cryogenic stasis. I will ignore this argument for the simple fact that it does not deal with the reality of now. The fact is abortion is an equasion with two outcomes, either the abortion is performed and the unborn child dies, or the abortion is...aborted, and the pregnancy is carried to term. As of now and for the foreseeable future, there are no viable embryo banks. And, as the current science has shaped abortion laws and sees the effective cutoff of a legal abortion at 13 weeks (right around the time the embryonic period ends and the fetal period begins). It is during this time the abortion is a moral choice for the person carrying it.
There are those who believe life begins at conception, and there are those who believe life begins at birth. I do not agree with either of those camps, and I believe that at this point in time, science and law has struck the best possible balance in an ultimately flawed system.
In all truth, I would also like to see an end to abortion, but I am unfortunately too much of a realist to ever see that happening. In fact, I think that as time passes, we will see more abortions, as young people engage in unprotected sex at younger and younger ages, and who are naive or uninformed as to the pressures, dangers and responsibility of sex, pregnancy and parenthood. I also think pure stupidity plays a key factor. As I do NOT think each person is a beautiful and unique snowflake, when in fact tons of people are just flakes, and altogether too many people are slush.
I am of the opinion that more than 75% of all abortions are needless procedures done in the interest of convenience of the mother to be, and that a little bit of forethought could have prevented the entire sad situation. Call me a romantic if you will, but I pine for a time when people exercised personal responsibility, and didn't use after-the-fact remedies to offload the blame and responsibility of a poor choice or lack of forethought.
I apologize for the length of this post, I have a tendency to be overly verbose when a simple summation would suffice. So how's this: My 9th grade life sciences (read: sex ed) teacher ended his semester long course with us with this parting shot, "If you can't risk a baby or a disease, keep it in your pants."
Just my opinion, fire away.
|
|
|
Post by Kizzume on Oct 25, 2007 3:38:26 GMT -5
I like that kind of verbosity. Great post.
|
|
|
Post by Hackfest on Oct 25, 2007 14:30:22 GMT -5
Yeah, I highly doubt that a simple summation would have covered that as well. I have a rebuttal posting for Treehugger's response, but I', busy right now, I'll get to it later.
|
|
|
Post by jq on Oct 26, 2007 4:32:02 GMT -5
This is one of the liberal issues I just struggle to identify with. I have discussed the subject with Treehugger before, and I think she makes some very good points from her perspective; the most effective point (in my opinion) that she gave was that statistically, most abortions are very early. And she gave a valid reference, too. That put me at some ease.
I will also have you all know that according to a very recent study, abortion is EVERY BIT as prevalent in countries where it is illegal as countries where it is legal. The only difference is that more money goes into organized crime when it is illegal, (rather than to legitimate practices.)
And for a variety of reasons I myself believe in keeping it legal if done early.
However, having said that, I am not fan of abortion. In fact, it bothers me. A lot. And while I would disagree with some as to the method at which it should be prevented (law,) I still believe we should do everything in our power to reduce it. The way I think we should prevent it is nothing groundbreaking. Put simply, I believe we should invest in contraceptive education, finding ways to eliminate poverty (studies show that poor people have a bigger issue with unplanned children than rich people,) and find ways to make adoption an easier process. That doesn't mean we should lower the standards for who can adopt, but simply, make it affordable.
I believe the only place I would disagree with a conservative on this concept would simply be the method at which we should try and shrink abortions. In concept, this is a conservative issue I agree with; that abortions are a sad and terrible thing. Just as I believe in human rights, and animal rights, I also believe that when a baby is conceived, it has rights too, and they shouldn't be denied. I am aware of the argument that it isn't a baby, but rather, a fetus. I am not impressed, nor do I buy it, and nor do I think it is a buyable argument outside of convenience. We aren't speaking terminology here, and we aren't lawyers arguing frivolous details of law; this is a heartbeat and a brain we are talking about ending.
I think it should stay legal for a variety of reasons, but at the same time, I feel we must find ways to make the number of abortions consistently shrink. We must maintain women's bodily rights while providing incentives for them to make the right choice-- keeping the baby.
|
|
|
Post by Hackfest on Nov 1, 2007 1:06:26 GMT -5
Alright, here we go. First up, Treehugger, you said that you don't see a fetus as a "someone", but a "something". I see them as a someone based on several key things. 3 Weeks after Fertilization The eyes and spinal cord are visible and the developing brain has two lobes. 4 Weeks after Fertilization The heart is beating. The portion of the brain associated with consciousness (the cerebrum) and internal organs such as the lungs are beginning to develop and can be identified. 7 Weeks after Fertilization Muscles and nerves begin working together. When the upper lip is tickled, the arms move backwards.[16] The portion of the brain associated with consciousness (the cerebrum) has divided into hemispheres. 9 Weeks after Fertilization More than 90% of the body structures found in a full-grown human are present. The medical classification changes from an embryo to a fetus. This dividing line was chosen by embryologists because from this point forward, most development involves growth in existing body structures instead of the formation of new ones. The preborn human moves body parts without any outside stimulation. 10 Weeks after Fertilization All parts of the brain and spinal cord are formed. The heart pumps blood to every part of the body. The whole body is sensitive to touch except for portions of the head. The preborn human makes facial expressions. 12 Weeks after Fertilization Electrical signals from the nervous system are measurable. After an abortion, efforts to suckle will sometimes be observed. Taste buds are functional. The preborn human will swallow more amniotic fluid if a sweetener is added to it. The grip is strong enough to hold onto an object that is moving up and down. If born and given specialized care, the survival rate is more than 80%. At this stage, according to the Supreme Court's rulings in "Roe vs. Wade," "Doe vs. Bolton," and "Planned Parenthood vs. Casey," a pregnant woman can abort to preserve her health. One example from Roe vs. Wade of what may be considered harmful to a mother's health is the " stigma of unwed motherhood." Here's some pictures of the "something". Let's call a spade a spade. I post these because I CAN NOT stand it when people sugar-coat for convenience. You say that "women are human beings" and should not be forced based on that fact. These are human beings too. You also say that "Plus, outlawing abortion isn't going to stop abortion. It's only going to remove access to safe abortion." as if that were a true statement. Really?! It will ONLY REMOVE ACCESS TO SAFE ABORTION? It won't DRASTICALLY reduce it? Come now, that's silly. As far as the death penalty thing, I'm all for hard labor instead of the easy way out.
|
|
|
Post by Kizzume on Nov 1, 2007 1:13:12 GMT -5
Those kinds of pictures are always very sobering and very difficult to look at.
Hackfest--how do you feel about the cases when the mother would die if the baby got bigger? How about the cases where there's less than a 1% chance that the baby will be able to live outside the mother? Should that baby be forced to grow in the mother, only to die when it comes out?
What about the cases of rape? Someone has to not only deal with the rape, but deal with their body being deformed, possibly having to be sliced open with a C-Section by a situation that was forced upon them?
Those are the real issues that get me going. I honestly could deal with laws that make it illegal to use abortion simply as birth control. I could deal with it--I don't like the idea because I know that lots of hangers would then get used as birth control, but I could deal with it.
|
|