Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Bannasidhe

antiskeptic wrote: »

The argument is that with the aid of support services the various impacts on her have a chance of being diminished. And so the chances of her overcoming the various strands of the experience increase.

That you have no faith in the support services that could be brought to bear weakens your argument since no one is going to conclude, as you seem to, that support services can have no net beneficial effect

That is so vague as to be a complete non-answer.

What support services exactly do you mean?

What 'support' can diminish the fact of an unwanted pregnancy?

Where did I say counselling had no benefits? I said I was skeptical that any amount of support or counselling will help a woman or a girl just accept an unwanted pregnancy.

Your whole argument does seem to be that a rape victim who becomes pregnant should be convinced that **** happens and shut up and accept her fate.

Once again the lack of basic human compassion from those who claim to be pro-life astounds me.

Bannasidhe

The Mad Hatter

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What 'support' can diminish the fact of an unwanted pregnancy?

Abortion?

Bannasidhe

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Abortion?

That's what I think too but somehow I doubt that is what our antiskeptical friend has in mind.

antiskeptic

robindch wrote: »

Which suggests that people would be wise to avoid morally-absolutist worldviews.

You mean such absolutist views as morality residing in the eye of the beholder?

I'd agree in perhaps avoiding trying to justify them. But not at all avoiding holding such views nor avoiding attempting to have the consequences of that worldview hold sway in society.

antiskeptic

Bannasidhe wrote: »

That is so vague as to be a complete non-answer. What support services exactly do you mean? What 'support' can diminish the fact of an unwanted pregnancy?

In the case of thoughts of suicide, I would point to those services already established to deal with people with thoughts of suicide. Or do you suppose suicide-a-consequence-of-an-unwanted-pregnancy as falling outside the realm of that expertise??

Assuming you accept those services somewhat effective: there is a chance that the person considering suicide won't commit suicide. Thus we have an example of how an componant of the problem is overcome. By no means painless. Nor scarless. But overcome.

Which was my original point: there is a chance of overcoming a rape/pregnancyif not a guarantee of overcoming it

Where did I say counselling had no benefits? I said I was skeptical that any amount of support or counselling will help a woman or a girl just accept an unwanted pregnancy.

But there is a chance. And so (referring to my original point) we can weigh up:

a) a person having a chance, with help, of dealing with the desperate situation of pregnancy through rape

vs.

b) the no-chance of person overcoming being aborted



Opton a) is the best of all worlds for my worldview. From your worldview., option b) above is considered the best option because there is no person being aborted. We can conclude that both views seek the best of all worlds based on their view of what constitutes a person

Your whole argument does seem to be that a rape victim who becomes pregnant should be convinced that **** happens and shut up and accept her fate.

My view is that both the mother and the child are persons. And that abortion stampedes over one persons rights whereas support only partially stampedes over the others. Since there is less stampeding over rights in the second option, that's the best option. Which of course only makes sense when you consider mother and child persons. You view makes sense where the child isn't considered a person

Go to worldview, do not pass GO, do not collect £200.

Once again the lack of basic human compassion from those who claim to be pro-life astounds me.

An indignation sustained only by denying the personhood of the child. Maybe you're right on that but maybe you're wrong - you certainly have no means of knowing.

Forgive me if I don't see that indignation as standing on solid ground.

UDP

antiskeptic wrote: »

My view is that both the mother and the child are persons. And that abortion stampedes over one persons rights whereas support only partially stampedes over the others. Since there is less stampeding over rights in the second option, that's the best option. Which of course only makes sense when you consider mother and child persons. You view makes sense where the child isn't considered a person

A fetus is not a person because it relies on its host to live. Not allowing an abortion If a mother is suicidal because she is pregnant for whatever reason then you are stampeding on her rights. You are forcing her to put her life at risk and go through physical and mental pain for something she does not want to do. The Irish people agreed with this on a number of occasions.

The best outcome always is that everyone lives and has a happy life but unfortunately we do not live in such a black and white world.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

UDP wrote: »

A fetus is not a person because it relies on its host to live.

Is that a robust definition?

UDP wrote: »

Not allowing an abortion If a mother is suicidal because she is pregnant for whatever reason then you are stampeding on her rights.

Not necessarily and, again, this fixation with suicide is ludicrous. The Irish people have most certainly voted that a woman with a risk to life on grounds of suicide can have an abortion, if that abortion reduces the risk to life. But that doesn't meant that any woman requesting an abortion and stating herself to be suicidal will have access to abortion. She'll first have access to mental health professionals, as a threat of suicide suggests a degree of mental instability such that the woman may not have the capacity to make decisions at that time.
For a nominally atheist forum, there's a distinct lack of critical reasoning in play. Debate seems to be based on mob mentality, fueled by the logic of the last headline.

ShooterSF

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Is that a robust definition?Not necessarily and, again, this fixation with suicide is ludicrous. The Irish people have most certainly voted that a woman with a risk to life on grounds of suicide can have an abortion, if that abortion reduces the risk to life. But that doesn't meant that any woman requesting an abortion and stating herself to be suicidal will have access to abortion. She'll first have access to mental health professionals, as a threat of suicide suggests a degree of mental instability such that the woman may not have the capacity to make decisions at that time.
For a nominally atheist forum, there's a distinct lack of critical reasoning in play. Debate seems to be based on mob mentality, fueled by the logic of the last headline.

There are two issues here though, one whether we should look to change the current constitution and another what to do about it if we don't or until we do. There are too many people happy to let our government ignore the constitution which in turn makes a mockery of our so called republic just because they don't agree with parts of it. Pro life lobbyists are demanding that no abortions take place because of a risk to life by suicide when our constitution as it is understood requires it. So how exactly that law works is worth discussing and so too whether someone if they are pro-life are also you know pro-democracy.

JimiTime

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

For a nominally atheist forum, there's a distinct lack of critical reasoning in play. Debate seems to be based on mob mentality, fueled by the logic of the last headline.

Is this a surprise? We are reasonable and critical thinking etc is just a self-appointed status that many atheists have of themselves. I doubt many people outside the group would see them the way they see themselves tbh. Most I would think would see them as distinctly the opposite of what they call themselves. Certainly the mob mentality is plain. Or maybe its just my not so humble insight.

robindch

JimiTime wrote: »

Certainly the mob mentality is plain.

Yes, atheists and agnostics. Such dreadful herd-followers, aren't they?

Nodin

antiskeptic wrote: »

It can't do that even when it's born. It'll be a year before the child is living according to that definition of life vs potential

This kind of stuff goes on forever - arbitrarily deciding what life is and when it begins. If you can pluck criteria out of the air then so can I. No?

No.

Nodin

antiskeptic wrote: »

.........But there is a chance. And so (referring to my original point) we can compare a person having a chance, with help, of dealing with the desperate situation of pregnancy through rape and the no-chance of person overcoming being aborted

......

And if the "help" recommends an abortion...what then?

DB21

antiskeptic wrote: »

What? You mean play by the rules of your particular worldview?

Which was my original point: since worldviews can't be justfied (except in the beholders (and like minded individuals) eyes, discussion is pointless.

That's a no then? Oh well. Thanks for discussing the matter, as opposed to attempting to flee any debate on the matter.
















Oh, wait.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

And if the "help" recommends an abortion...what then?

Well the 'help' will be working to a very strict deadline.

'well Mz Rape Victim - we have oooohh 20 odd sessions of therapy to help you resolve your pregnancy issues and accept your fate so we had better crack on before you have no choice at all in the matter...not that you have much choice now haha.'

swampgas

antiskeptic wrote: »

Stupify wrote: »

If a rape victim chose to have the rapists child would the rapist have any rights to the child? Would he be able to prevent the girl from giving the baby up for adoption, would he have access rights to the child?

I could certainly see someone taking such a case. And in a mad, mad world, where anything can be redefined....why not?

Really???

You seem to have some empathy for the rapist, yet not so much for the victim. Supposing the rapist's baby was a girl, would you really be happy about the rapist looking to spend time alone with her? And do you think the mother should just put up with it and "move on" when he comes knocking on the door for his weekend of custody?

I don't think you're thinking this through very well. Either that or you're trying a bit too hard to get into the misogynist mindset.

Bannasidhe

swampgas wrote: »

Really???

You seem to have some empathy for the rapist, yet not so much for the victim. Supposing the rapist's baby was a girl, would you really be happy about the rapist looking to spend time alone with her? And do you think the mother should just put up with it and "move on" when he comes knocking on the door for his weekend of custody?

I don't think you're thinking this through very well. Either that or you're trying a bit too hard to get into the misogynist mindset.

Empathy for the rapists, empathy for the not even here yet. Empathy for women who do not want to be mothers - not so much.

Stupify

I don't think a lot of women would even bother to go to therapy sessions if they wanted an abortion.

There is a huge flaw in that even with abortions being given in Ireland on a case by case basis a woman can still just go to England if she is refused here.

Women can't have abortions in Ireland.
But they can have abortions.

Bannasidhe

Stupify wrote: »

I don't think a lot of women would even bother to go to therapy sessions if they wanted an abortion.

There is a huge flaw in that even with abortions being given in Ireland on a case by case basis a woman can still just go to England if she is refused here.

Women can't have abortions in Ireland.
But they can have abortions.

But it allows Ireland Inc to say 'we protect the unborn so we do.'

swampgas

Bannasidhe wrote: »

But it allows Ireland Inc to say 'we protect the unborn so we do.'

I wonder how much of the resistance to abortion in Ireland today is people simply not wanting to admit that they are wrong? Legalising abortion could be seen as a pretty embarrassing climb-down by anyone who has (up to now, anyway) been proud of Ireland as an allegedly special, fairer, more moral place than everywhere else.

The notion that they are wrong, and that actually the Irish system is treating women badly, is not the kind of thing I expect many people to embrace willingly, even with the evidence staring them in the face.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ah, yes. Why can't we all have understanding wives like Hillary.

Bannasidhe

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Ah, yes. Why can't we all have understanding wives like Hillary.

Because smart women don't marry losers I imagine.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

JimiTime wrote: »

Is this a surprise? We are reasonable and critical thinking etc is just a self-appointed status that many atheists have of themselves.

I suppose I do find it a bit of surprise. I'm not saying I'd be right in having such an expectation. But, just being honest, I would have thought that an absence of belief in a religion would be accompanied by a tendency to question other things, and a reluctance to accept statements at face value. So, yes, I am surprised to be wrong.

On the other hand, it's always a delight to be surprised.

Lingua Franca

What are you two having a circle jerk over now? I can't keep track.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Because smart women don't marry losers I imagine.

Only if they're entertaining.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvlE14cM-zk

Obliq

Lingua Franca wrote: »

What are you two having a circle jerk over now? I can't keep track.

They're saying there is an absence of critical thinking among atheists (in the main) because there are opinions up here that they don't share.

(From what I could gather)

Lingua Franca

Oh, I can see all the atheist bashing, just wondering what pretext they were using for it. What ever it was, it's long gone.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Obliq wrote: »

They're saying there is an absence of critical thinking among atheists (in the main) because there are opinions up here that they don't share.

(From what I could gather)

I expect that's what you gathered. From my perspective, it looks a bit more like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1fKzw05Q5A

Youtube's great. Particularly for people who relate more to images and energy than plot and character.

Obliq

Lingua Franca wrote: »

Oh, I can see all the atheist bashing, just wondering what pretext they were using for it. What ever it was, it's long gone.

Couldn't tell you. Seemingly, neither can GCU - see content of his post. Do you see anything there? Maybe he'll edit it and provide content.


Ah, there's something now....maybe it will enlighten us as to the finer points of thinking his way.

Lingua Franca

Yep, he edited. It made more sense when it was blank, to be honest.