Should we legalise abortion?

Villain

I left this debate because people began debating whether abortion is right or wrong.

The thread title simply asks whether it should be legalised or not it does not ask whether people are in favour or against abortion, IMO there is two seperate arguments here.

Given we'r discussing this on the net I'm sure some people here are resident in countries where this is legal.

My argument earlier in the thread was that Irish women are having abortions in very large numbers, there having them away from the support structures which are here.

The Corinthian rightly argued that we should not simply legalise it because it is legal elsewehere, but I think theres more reason for it be legal than that.

I think if we legalised abortion here we would be able to offer more support to women, more counciling and then perhaps convice some women to look at adoption. I know I can't say this with any degree of certianity but its my belief.

Perhaps we could address the topic at hand instead of getting bogged down in when a foetus become human etc.

MrPudding

Originally posted by irish1

I think if we legalised abortion here we would be able to offer more support to women, more counciling and then perhaps convice some women to look at adoption. I know I can't say this with any degree of certianity but its my belief.

This is a idea that I actually posted earlier. Unfortunately some people can’t get past the “child murderer” argument long enough to look at anything else in any kind of rational way.

MrP

smalltalker

Originally posted by irish1
I think if we legalised abortion here we would be able to offer more support to women, more counciling and then perhaps convice some women to look at adoption. I know I can't say this with any degree of certianity but its my belief.

I think this is a good and positive attitude, but I don't think adoption will ever be taken up by great numbers of women. I think women are well aware of the option of adoption, it's just that thousands of them every year "vote with their feet" and have abortions instead.

Perhaps the reason is that it involves carrying the child for 9 months, having everybody know - work colleagues, parents - that you are going through an unwanted pregnancy with all the (possibly) unasked-for attention and unsolicited advice from family, friends, etc., then the trauma of giving birth to the baby and giving it up, possibly spending the rest of your life worrying about it or feeling guilty etc.

I am by no means suggesting that this is every or even any woman's experience of adoption. And I know I haven't shown the positive side (for other people). In fact, I'm really just summarising why I would never consider going through it. I just imagine that I am not alone.

As to abortion - I used to do the semantics but not any more. It's a human being from conception, and I'm prepared to curtail his or her right to life in the womb because I believe that a human being's (in this case, a woman's) right to bodily integrity is, in certain circumstances, more important.

There, I've said it. No more intellectual dishonesty for me (I accuse myself, not others here).

Originally posted by MrPudding
This is a idea that I actually posted earlier. Unfortunately some people can’t get past the “child murderer” argument long enough to look at anything else in any kind of rational way.

MrP

why should they if thats their belief?
It's as equally valid a rationalle as yours.
I'm not so sure myself whether I'd use the murder tag,it's extreme.
But I do pose the question that no one has yet in my years on this planet been able to answer for me in relation to abortion, and its the central difficulty that I have with it...

If you can abort a foetus at 11 weeks but not at 13 weeks and assuming that most foetus's by nature if left alone will end up being an adult human life...the abortion is essentially taking the decision that that foetus has no right to become an adult whereas the 13 week old one can.
The same applys wherever you set your limit 24 vs 26 weeks etc.
I could not in all conscience get my head around reconciling that with being right.

MrPudding

If you agree with abortion, which I do, then there has to be a cut off point. I think that even the most hardcore supporter would agree with that. For me this is the hardest point. What is the cut off? I don’t know.

When it come to this I place the responsibility in the hands of the medical professionals. Naïve it may be but they really should be the people best suited to deciding when an abortion is and is not appropriate.

The difference between my views and the pro-lifers is that I can see their side and in some cases agree. I do not agree with abortion in all cases and at all times. As I have said I would like abortion to be legal here but have a full support service available so women are fully aware of options available and have the support locally to make the right decision.

I think that women do not use the services available here because they no an abortion is not an option. If they go to England not a lot of effort is made to talk them out of it.

In short, I would prefer if abortions did not happen but, I do not think we should stop someone who knows exactly what she is doing and exactly what she wants from having one. For me the rights of the mother out weigh the rights of the blob of cells/mini-human/possible hero/possible misscarriage/possible reason of death of the mother due to complications/loved child/potential parent/possible end of mothers life cos she now has a child to look after.

MrP

Originally posted by MrPudding
If you agree with abortion, which I do, then there has to be a cut off point.

Not necessaraly,why shouldn't the cut off point be at the moment of birth for abortion? It's the same difference except that the clump of cells looks more like what appears in a family photo.
As we cannot ask the unborn specifically if it feels pain at 20 weeks, we cannot know for certain if it does.
I'm sure I was hurt as a baby after being born by any number of things too but I don't remember that pain

For me the rights of the mother out weigh the rights of the blob of cells/mini-human/possible hero/possible misscarriage/possible reason of death of the mother due to complications/loved child/potential parent/possible end of mothers life cos she now has a child to look after.

You should replace that word possible with [ in all probability and then you will see my difficulty with the idea of attaching more rights to the born than the unborn.
Of course thats just the way I look at it, it doesn't mean it's cast iron but no one has been able to convince me otherwise so far...

Trebor

just like to ask a question of those in the know.

can you remove the foetus and freeze it? or put it in another womb?
if so why don't all the pro-life females offer up their bodies to carry the foetus to term and then they can give it up for adoption or take care of it. thus no need for abortion. if this is not possible then i would be pro-choice

Zulu

Originally posted by Earthman
Not necessaraly,why shouldn't the cut off point be at the moment of birth for abortion? It's the same difference except that the clump of cells looks more like what appears in a family photo.
As we cannot ask the unborn specifically if it feels pain at 20 weeks, we cannot know for certain if it does.

Hear, hear - that's the point exactly.
IMO, contraception is there - and lots of it.
If it fails, there's the morning after pill.

Abortion is killing a human. Because that human resides inside the womb is beside the point. Because the young human (I use that term for a reason) can't communicate, some people feel that it's ok to kill him/her.
It boils down to convenience. Is it convenient to have a child - no - ok, then kill it.

Trebor

Originally posted by Zulu
Hear, hear - that's the point exactly.
IMO, contraception is there - and lots of it.
If it fails, there's the morning after pill.

how can you possibly know if it fails? not all contraception is like a comdom where you can see straight away if it fails.

Zulu

Originally posted by Trebor
why don't all the pro-life females offer up their bodies to carry the foetus to term and then they can give it up for adoption or take care of it. thus no need for abortion. if this is not possible then i would be pro-choice

Absolutly ridiculous! :rolleyes:
Why should "pro-life women" be responsible for the mistakes of others?
Why don't the women who want an abortion, carry the child they are responsible for the term of pregnancy, and then offer it for adoption after birth?

(perhaps because they know it'll be very hard to break the parent child bond; perhaps because it's not convenient; perhaps because they don't want to look fat)

Zulu

Originally posted by Trebor
how can you possibly know if it fails? not all contraception is like a comdom where you can see straight away if it fails.

If your that worried - be more responsible. Use condom + pill + another!
Chance of the pill failing are quite slim. Couple that with the chance of actually conceving, slimmer again. Throw a condom into the equation....

You could win the lotto - COULD

Trebor

Originally posted by Zulu
Absolutly ridiculous! :rolleyes:
Why should "pro-life women" be responsible for the mistakes of others?
Why don't the women who want an abortion, carry the child they are responsible for the term of pregnancy, and then offer it for adoption after birth?

(perhaps because they know it'll be very hard to break the parent child bond; perhaps because it's not convenient; perhaps because they don't want to look fat)

all i am trying to say is that people have abortions and they will not change their mind however if someone volunteered to carry the foetus to them it would still be one trip to the clinic.

Zulu

Originally posted by Trebor
all i am trying to say is that people have abortions and they will not change their mind however if someone volunteered to carry the foetus to them it would still be one trip to the clinic.

What? A lot of women suffer tremendous guilt after abortions and would gladly change there choice given the option.
Councelling and education are the solution. Why are these people having abortions?

MrPudding

Originally posted by Zulu
Hear, hear - that's the point exactly.
IMO, contraception is there - and lots of it.
If it fails, there's the morning after pill.

Abortion is killing a human. Because that human resides inside the womb is beside the point. Because the young human (I use that term for a reason) can't communicate, some people feel that it's ok to kill him/her.
It boils down to convenience. Is it convenient to have a child - no - ok, then kill it.

I thought that if conception had taken place then the morning after pill was effectively a chemical abortion. But if you are OK with that Zulo then fine.

You also say that aborting is killing a human. I say, that is your opinion and you are perfectly entitled to it. I happen to not have the same opinion as you. And there is no point in using the terms him/her in very early pregnacy, the correct term would be "it."

MrP

MrPudding

Originally posted by Zulu
What? Why are these people having abortions?

Because tha is what they have decided that that is the correct course of action at that particular time in their lives.

You are in no postion to judge them. They have made a difficult decision as is and should be their right.

MrP

Originally posted by MrPudding
I thought that if conception had taken place then the morning after pill was effectively a chemical abortion. But if you are OK with that Zulo then fine.

Well you see the thing there is , it's an unknown,so in my view quite acceptable.
However once it is known that there is a foetus, then I'd need someone to deal with my question posed earlier and sadly no one has been able to solve it for me and untill they do,I'm erring on the side of caustion and holding the view that abortion cannot be reconciled with what I would consider either right or fair.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by smalltalker
As to abortion - I used to do the semantics but not any more. It's a human being from conception, and I'm prepared to curtail his or her right to life in the womb because I believe that a human being's (in this case, a woman's) right to bodily integrity is, in certain circumstances, more important.

There, I've said it. No more intellectual dishonesty for me (I accuse myself, not others here).

I find I have made the mistake of examining this question with the following assumptions:

1. All humans are equal, and
2. The right to life supercedes all other rights.

Before someone jumps on me with the usual “quality of life” arguments, I’m saying that I should not have made either of those presumptions, as it meant that too much emphasis was being placed upon the fetus being human or not. If either of those two is erroneous, then the status of the fetus may frankly be irrelevant.

Oh, and smalltalker, you’re probably the most rational, or at least intellectually honest, person in this thread. On which point...

Originally posted by MrPudding
When it come to this I place the responsibility in the hands of the medical professionals. Naïve it may be but they really should be the people best suited to deciding when an abortion is and is not appropriate.

Complete abdication of responsibility. Cute. I like that.

You are in no postion to judge them. They have made a difficult decision as is and should be their right.

Actually, neither are you in a position to judge them and in ascribing them the right to abortion you are in effect doing just that.

Originally posted by irish1
I think if we legalised abortion here we would be able to offer more support to women, more counciling and then perhaps convice some women to look at adoption.

How would we be able to offer more support to women, more counseling and then perhaps convince some women to look at adoption? Do you think women don’t bother having any counseling before going to abroad? Or perhaps the quality of counseling would somehow magically improve? Seriously.

I know I can't say this with any degree of certianity but its my belief.

I see... Cogito ergo est?

Perhaps we could address the topic at hand instead of getting bogged down in when a foetus become human etc.

It’s a little difficult not to consider the ethical or moral dimension to an issue when arguing on it’s legality. It is, after all, one of the major foundations of law.

Zulu

Originally posted by MrPudding
I thought that if conception had taken place then the morning after pill was effectively a chemical abortion. But if you are OK with that Zulo then fine.

Pregnancy isn't confirmed at this stage. It's is feared.

Originally posted by MrPudding
You also say that aborting is killing a human. I say, that is your opinion and you are perfectly entitled to it. I happen to not have the same opinion as you. And there is no point in using the terms him/her in very early pregnancy, the correct term would be "it."

Well "it" happens to be human life. If a couple were trying for a child and conceived, doubt very much they would refer to him/her as "it". If the pregnancy was at a later stage and the sex confirmed, would you still refer to the child as "it"? When do you feel comfortable referring to the child in human terms?

Originally posted by MrPudding
Because tha is what they have decided that that is the correct course of action at that particular time in their lives.

...so it is about convenience then. "Your life isn't convenient to me" - thats a valid reason for ending a life?

Originally posted by MrPudding
You are in no postion to judge them. They have made a difficult decision as is and should be their right.

As you said - I'm entitled to my opinion ....unless it's judgemental???
I'm sorry, but your logic is confusing me. Please explain.

MrPudding

Originally posted by The Corinthian

Complete abdication of responsibility. Cute. I like that.

Yeah, I know. I do that a lot. You know like when I fly somewhere, I don't want that responibility, I let the pilot do the flying. Makes sense to me. Let the person who has had a bit of training and might know a bit more about the subject make the decision.

I really don't see any thing wrong with that. I don't lecture OBGYNs about "woman stuff" and they don't try to fix servers. Works well for me.

MrP

The Corinthian

Originally posted by MrPudding
Yeah, I know. I do that a lot. You know like when I fly somewhere, I don't want that responibility, I let the pilot do the flying. Makes sense to me. Let the person who has had a bit of training and might know a bit more about the subject make the decision.

Does the pilot decide your destination for you too?

Maybe you should buy a house because an estate agent recommended it.

Or shoot that prisoner because your superior officer ordered you to do so.

Feeling absolved?

MrPudding

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Does the pilot decide your destination for you too?

Maybe you should buy a house because an estate agent recommended it.

Or shoot that prisoner because your superior officer ordered you to do so.

Feeling absolved?

I decide my destination myself as far as I can. Of course I can't fly somewhere if there is no airport. But when it come to the flying I leave that to the professionals.

If I went to an estate agent and gave him all my requirements for a house and he then, based on my requirements and circumstances, recommended a house I may very well buy it. After all why did I go to him and tell him what I wanted in the first place?

The officer one isn’t really applicable. As far as I am concerned the foetus, up to a point is OK to be aborted. I do not know what that point so I defer to the superior knowledge of medical professionals. If an officer told me to shoot a prisoner that is different. I know that this is a fully sentient human and shooting them is murder. That is not to say I would not do though, hard one to answer unless you had experienced it.

Are you fully responsible for everything that happens to you? Do you do everything yourself? Maybe I am naive but sometimes I do think that it is better to take advise from professionals.

MrP

The Corinthian

Originally posted by MrPudding
Are you fully responsible for everything that happens to you? Do you do everything yourself? Maybe I am naive but sometimes I do think that it is better to take advise from professionals.

I am not morally responsible for everything that happens to me, but I am morally responsible for my actions and my choices. If I make an immoral choice, then I am responsible for it. That I was advised or even ordered to take it does not absolve me from the choice, it remains immoral independent of the advice or order.

Naïve is not the word I would use for you.

MrPudding

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Naïve is not the word I would use for you.

OK. What word would you use?

My using the opinion of medical professionals is not me attempting to shift blame.

If I need to make a decision about something and I do not know enough about that subject I will look for information and seek advise. Are you criticising me for this? It seems like a sensible way to do things to me. It has nothing to do with morals. For me an abortion is not an immoral choice.

Are you actually saying that if someone is unsure of something they should not seek information and advise?

And where exactly did I say that I was not morally responsible for my actions? I don’t believe I did say that.

MrP

The Corinthian

Originally posted by MrPudding
It has nothing to do with morals. For me an abortion is not an immoral choice.

So you say, yet you have yet to propose a cogent argument to back this up. The very fact that we are debating this proves that it is a moral question, be you for it or not.

Are you actually saying that if someone is unsure of something they should not seek information and advise?

But that’s not what you said. You said “I place the responsibility in the hands of the medical professionals. Naïve it may be but they really should be the people best suited to deciding when an abortion is and is not appropriate.”

You did not say that you sought their advice; you said you sought their decision and that such a choice should be their responsibility. Allow someone to make a decision for you and it absolves you from moral responsibility. It was their decision after all - you were only following orders.

BEAT

In response to the original poster (because I cant be arsed to read and debate with 8 pages of rants)

I believe the choice should be given. Everyone should have a choice, no matter what.

I personally would not kill my child...but who am I to infringe my beliefs and opinions on others and thier situations?

isolde

Originally posted by Rev Hellfire
You miss the point, it is actually a black and white thing. Either you believe you are dealing with a human life from the beginning in which case it is murder, or else you don't believe a human life in which case all is fine.

I believe that it's not a human life. I believe it's a bundle of cells at this point. I don't know when the cut-off point is, I don't know when it becomes human. I don't know for sure what we're dealing with but I prefer to believe that it's not a human, because it has just struck me that smalltalker is right:

Originally posted by smalltalker
As to abortion - I used to do the semantics but not any more. It's a human being from conception, and I'm prepared to curtail his or her right to life in the womb because I believe that a human being's (in this case, a woman's) right to bodily integrity is, in certain circumstances, more important.

Whereas I don't believe it's a human being from conception, if it was proven tomorrow that it is a human being... to be honest I wouldn't change my mind on the issue. I would still be pro-choice and if I became pregnant next week, I would still strongly consider terminating the pregnancy. I honestly don't know if it's a human being or not.. but to be totally blunt.. it doesn't really make a difference to how I feel.
(cue my god what a selfish bitch posts..*shrugs*)

Originally posted by MrPudding
When it come to this I place the responsibility in the hands of the medical professionals. Naïve it may be but they really should be the people best suited to deciding when an abortion is and is not appropriate.

Unless I am interpreting this wrongly, you mean cut-off point at which an abortion should not be performed? In that case, I can see your point. I mean someone has to decide the point at which an abortion should not be allowed..?

Originally posted by Zulu
IMO, contraception is there - and lots of it.
If it fails, there's the morning after pill.

It doesn't always work. I wish people would rid themselves of the idea that it's only slappers having one-night stands who have abortions. That's extremely naive, extremely.

Anyway, sorry, I should get back on topic..

Originally posted by irish1
Given we'r discussing this on the net I'm sure some people here are resident in countries where this is legal.

Abortion is legal in the country I live in but I'm an Irish citizen.

Originally posted by TheCorinthian
How would we be able to offer more support to women, more counseling and then perhaps convince some women to look at adoption? Do you think women don’t bother having any counseling before going to abroad? Or perhaps the quality of counseling would somehow magically improve? Seriously.

On the issue of counselling, imho people don't get enough counselling either before or after the decision for 2 reasons: 1.) because counselling is not compulsory in all cases.. I can't say for certain that it is not compulsory in the UK but know that it isn't in the Marie Stopes centres, so I would venture to say that there is no law requiring it.. and 2.) basically Irish girls are terrified that people will find out about it. The only way they end up getting counselling when they come back is if they basically seek it out themselves. The legalisation of abortion might therefore deal with this.


~isolde

Trebor

would any of the pro-lifer's be willing to do what i suggested? take the foetus from the women who is about to have it aborted and impregnate themselves or partner in order to give the foetus a chance at life? if not, why?

What? A lot of women suffer tremendous guilt after abortions and would gladly change there choice given the option.

sorry my post came out wrong i ment to say term not them. and if what i suggest were to take place then they would have the option of tracking down the child later on in life so it would ease their guilt.

monument

Originally posted by MrPudding
This is a idea that I actually posted earlier. Unfortunately some people can’t get past the “child murderer” argument long enough to look at anything else in any kind of rational way.

If that is so how aimed at people who think it is “child murderer” it's twisted logic.

As legalising abortion to people who think in that way would be like legalising what is currently seen as murder to offer more support to the murders.

monument

Originally posted by BEAT
In response to the original poster (because I cant be arsed to read and debate with 8 pages of rants)

I believe the choice should be given. Everyone should have a choice, no matter what.

I personally would not kill my child...but who am I to infringe my beliefs and opinions on others and thier situations?

If you had read the last eight (or whatever) pages you should have seen that ‘you’ or ‘I’ is not important.

However, if an abortion is wrong, if it is seen as murder, society and state have a responsible to stop it. Just like the state has a duty to protect the health of people through measures like the smoking ban.

I can’t see how one can see it as wrong to hurt another life and still think people should be allowed to do so.

BEAT

Well monument to answer your question...
I do not feel it is necessary to foce my opinions on other people like some :rolleyes:

Because it isnt for you or me to say what is right or wrong, in the end if they are wrong they will be dealt with accordingly when the time has come.

I will not be drawn into an argument with you, this is a topic that will come up time and again and nothing you or I will say will make matters any better.

So good day to you,


I said Good Day.