Should a foetus have the right to life?

Loafing Oaf

Deleted User wrote: »

Basically the vote was to remove any constitutional rights for a fetus inside the mother's womb up to the time of birth. That's why I voted no. If it had retained some rights I would have voted yes.

Sure you would:rolleyes:

uptherebels

Ironicname wrote: »

I'm curious to find out from pro abortion people, when exactly is it ok to allow abortion?

Is it 12 weeks? If so what about 12 weeks and one day?

Is it anytime until birth? If so, why would it not be acceptable to "abort" a premature baby?

I'm not talking about legality,but where does your moral compass point?

When is a baby a baby in your opinion?

What pro abortion people? I've yet to meet someone who is pro abortion
A premature baby has been born and has protections so why are you asking about "aborting" it.
Most people would say up to viability, before that it's up to the woman and her doctor.

splinter65

uptherebels wrote: »

Desperation? The only desperation I see is those that have lost control of women and don't like it.

“lost control of women” oh what a load of absolute bollox.
You all seem completely exasperated that the other 700000 didn’t just disappear. Tough.

Plumbthedepths

splinter65 wrote:

This “move on†business smacks of such desperation from the pro abortion people. What specifically do you mean when you say “move on� You know you sound like a parent who has told a child that they can’t go to the circus and that there will be no more discussion about it? Why do you think you can decide that a conversation is over?

Desperation?are you stupid? You do know the result right?

Loafing Oaf

splinter65 wrote: »

You all seem completely exasperated that the other 700000 didn’t just disappear. Tough.

Well the 49.99% who voted no in the divorce referendum didn't 'disappear' the day after the referendum, but the overwhelming majority of them ceased to pursue that 'cause' in any active way. Same is happening with abortion, if not quite so definitively.

Ironicname

Plumbthedepths wrote:

Just look up the present legislation, that answers your question.

I'm not looking for a legislative answer.

Faugheen wrote:

And piss off with the 'pro-abortion' nonsense. Just because I'm pro-choice does not mean I like abortions.

Ok. Absolutely no need to be abusive. But you are pro choice, meaning you are "pro necessitating the ability to have an abortion". Just because you don't like the term and it is more palatable for you to phrase it differently, doesn't change what it is.

uptherebels wrote:

What pro abortion people? I've yet to meet someone who is pro abortion A premature baby has been born and has protections so why are you asking about "aborting" it. Most people would say up to viability, before that it's up to the woman and her doctor.

I know that's what most people would say. I'm asking what they think.

I'm asking a moral question, not a legal one. If someone who agrees with the possibility of late term abortions, surely the killing/termination of that foetus/clump of cells/baby is comparable to the killing/termination of a premature baby? Or is it the physical act of the cutting of the umbilical cord that qualifies the child as being alive?

I'm not asking for a legal definition, I specifically asked when, morally, people who would normally advocate for the right to abort (aka pro abortion *sorry if that makes you sad), decide that abortion shouldn't be allowed.

I'm genuinely interested in hearing other people's rationale.

uptherebels

splinter65 wrote: »

“lost control of women” oh what a load of absolute bollox.
You all seem completely exasperated that the other 700000 didn’t just disappear. Tough.

Exasperated? Nope try again. I don't care what the 700,000 do. We live in a democracy so their thoughts on the issue are now irrelevant to me.

Hannibal_Smith

splinter65 wrote: »

“lost control of women” oh what a load of absolute bollox.
You all seem completely exasperated that the other 700000 didn’t just disappear. Tough.

So what is it you want? Another vote?

Ironicname

uptherebels wrote:

Exasperated? Nope try again. I don't care what the 700,000 do. We live in a democracy so their thoughts on the issue are now irrelevant to me.

That's an attitude that really sums up why dialogue around controversial or contentious subjects are rarely fruitful.

Other people's opinion, especially ones that are contrary to ones that you hold are useful and can be extremely relevant.

To completely dismiss people because more people think a different way is pretty much mob mentality.

True democracy would be letting people decide on legislation, but not completely abandoning dissenting voices and labeling them as irrelevant.

uptherebels

Ironicname wrote: »

I'm not looking for a legislative answer.



Ok. Absolutely no need to be abusive. But you are pro choice, meaning you are "pro necessitating the ability to have an abortion". Just because you don't like the term and it is more palatable for you to phrase it differently, doesn't change what it is.



I know that's what most people would say. I'm asking what they think.

I'm asking a moral question, not a legal one. If someone who agrees with the possibility of late term abortions, surely the killing/termination of that foetus/clump of cells/baby is comparable to the killing/termination of a premature baby? Or is it the physical act of the cutting of the umbilical cord that qualifies the child as being alive?

I'm not asking for a legal definition, I specifically asked when, morally, people who would normally advocate for the right to abort (aka pro abortion *sorry if that makes you sad), decide that abortion shouldn't be allowed.

I'm genuinely interested in hearing other people's rationale.

Why do you think what people say is different to what they think?
I haven't mentioned anything about legality. A premature baby is the same as an adult.

notobtuse

Biologically, it is clear that a fetus is life. If the fetus continues to grow, it must be alive. From the moment of conception the embryo grows through cellular reproduction. Human beings reproduce to continue their species. The fetus is not part of any one human, it is a complete and independent human organism... different than the mother and father.

Ironicname

uptherebels wrote:

Why do you think what people say is different to what they think? I haven't mentioned anything about legality. A premature baby is the same as an adult.

Because it has been my experience that people will tailor their opinions so as not to feel the wrath of a vocal minority.

You can see that trump was losing by a country mile on most polls, yet when it came to the anonymity of voting, he won.

So if a baby was in the womb for 8 months and born prematurely it has the same rights as an adult? Why does a baby that has developed identically for the indentical amount of time not have those rights just because they have not travelled through the birth canal? They surely can feel the same pain etc

Genuinely wondering how your mind works regarding this.

uptherebels

Ironicname wrote: »

That's an attitude that really sums up why dialogue around controversial or contentious subjects are rarely fruitful.

Other people's opinion, especially ones that are contrary to ones that you hold are useful and can be extremely relevant.

To completely dismiss people because more people think a different way is pretty much mob mentality.

True democracy would be letting people decide on legislation, but not completely abandoning dissenting voices and labeling them as irrelevant.

I listened before the vote, listened to the all the lies,misinformation, half truths and selective reasoning. The reason it is irrelevant now is because it is the same as before. So why would I pay heed to nonsense a second time?

uptherebels

Ironicname wrote: »

Because it has been my experience that people will tailor their opinions so as not to feel the wrath of a vocal minority.

You can see that trump was losing by a country mile on most polls, yet when it came to the anonymity of voting, he won.

So if a baby was in the womb for 8 months and born prematurely it has the same rights as an adult? Why does a baby that has developed identically for the indentical amount of time not have those rights just because they have not travelled through the birth canal? They surely can feel the same pain etc

Genuinely wondering how your mind works regarding this.

Trump lost the popular vote!
We only have abortion to viability, except for FFA so what abortion is happening at 8 months

Plumbthedepths

Ironicname wrote:

I'm not looking for a legislative answer.

Only one that counts.

Ironicname

uptherebels wrote:

Trump lost the popular vote! We only have abortion to viability, except for FFA so what abortion is happening at 8 months

He did indeed. But he won the election. The polls, funnily enough, were used as an indicator of who would win the election, not the popular vote. Absolutely pointless to exclaim that.

Again, I am not asking for people's opinion on the law as it stands, but on abortion in general. If you are pro abortion, at what specific point do you become anti abortion? Is it just a case of you only agreeing as the law sees fit or do you have any morals when it comes to abortion?

Ironicname

Plumbthedepths wrote:

Only one that counts.

Not at all. People's opinions are very important.

uptherebels

Ironicname wrote: »

He did indeed. But he won the election. The polls, funnily enough, were used as an indicator of who would win the election, not the popular vote. Absolutely pointless to exclaim that.

Again, I am not asking for people's opinion on the law as it stands, but on abortion in general. If you are pro abortion, at what specific point do you become anti abortion? Is it just a case of you only agreeing as the law sees fit or do you have any morals when it comes to abortion?

Then why use it as an example of people saying different to how they think?

I am pro choice. No it just happens that the legislation that was brought in was more or less how I would have put it myself.

Plumbthedepths

Ironicname wrote:

Not at all. People's opinions are very important.

Opinion is not law. The fact you describe anyone as pro abortion tells me straight away exactly what you are at. The majority who voted yes are pro choice. There is a difference which people like you refuse to accept.

Ironicname

uptherebels wrote:

Then why use it as an example of people saying different to how they think?

Because a lot of people didn't tell poll makers they were planning on voting trump as it was a socially unpopular opinion. But they voted for him anyway. That's why it was a valid example.

Plumbthedepths wrote:

Opinion is not law. The fact you describe anyone as pro abortion tells me straight away exactly what you are at. The majority who voted yes are pro choice. There is a difference which people like you refuse to accept.

Excuse me? Anyone who advocates that abortion should be available, is by definition, pro abortion. Why is that in any way controversial?

I'm not saying everyone who voted yes "loves" abortion but they are pro abortion being available.

And what am I "at"?

I'm trying to understand opinions by inviting people to tell me in an unfiltered way, when their opinion changes from abortion being an option, to abortion not being an option.

Nothing more, nothing less. If being asked a question makes you uncomfortable, then you are free not to respond.

And "people like you"? Funnily enough, you know the sum total of nothing about my opinion on the matter. Do you know why? You didn't ask.

uptherebels

Ironicname wrote: »

Because a lot of people didn't tell poll makers they were planning on voting trump as it was a socially unpopular opinion. But they voted for him anyway. That's why it was a valid example.
.

The people didn't vote for trump, the electoral colleges did. So they told the polls they wouldn't vote for him and they didnt. So it is not a valid example.

Ironicname

You are purposely being absurd. The options on the card were:

Republican: electors for President Donald Trump, vice President Michael Pence

Democrat: electors for president Hillary Clinton, vice president Tim Kane.

Along with the other parties and candidates.

The fact that you are willing to debate the merits (and completely obfuscate the reality of the electoral college) of trump's presidency yet aren't willing to answer the question of abortion becoming morally unviable is odd.

uptherebels

Ironicname wrote: »

You are purposely being absurd. The options on the card were:

Republican: electors for President Donald Trump, vice President Michael Pence

Democrat: electors for president Hillary Clinton, vice president Tim Kane.

Along with the other parties and candidates.

The fact that you are willing to debate the merits (and completely obfuscate the reality of the electoral college) of trump's presidency yet aren't willing to answer the question of abortion becoming morally unviable is odd.

I haven't obfuscated anything about the electoral college I also haven't said anything about the merits of trump's presidency!!!! u just seem to be imagining stuff in my posts.
Trump lost the popular vote, so you using Trump as an example of people saying and thinking different things is bewildering.
Ive already given my answers about abortion

Faugheen

Ironicname wrote: »

Because a lot of people didn't tell poll makers they were planning on voting trump as it was a socially unpopular opinion. But they voted for him anyway. That's why it was a valid example.



Excuse me? Anyone who advocates that abortion should be available, is by definition, pro abortion. Why is that in any way controversial?

I'm not saying everyone who voted yes "loves" abortion but they are pro abortion being available.

And what am I "at"?

I'm trying to understand opinions by inviting people to tell me in an unfiltered way, when their opinion changes from abortion being an option, to abortion not being an option.

Nothing more, nothing less. If being asked a question makes you uncomfortable, then you are free not to respond.

And "people like you"? Funnily enough, you know the sum total of nothing about my opinion on the matter. Do you know why? You didn't ask.

Fine, I would say you are against women having a freedom to make a choice about their own bodies, therefore you are in favour of controlling women.

See how your nonsense fits now?

I will never, ever be in a position where I will have to decide whether to keep or terminate my baby. Why should I be the one to tell someone to do what I say?

Ironicname

uptherebels wrote:

I haven't obfuscated anything about the electoral college I also haven't said anything about the merits of trump's presidency!!!! u just seem to be imagining stuff in my posts. Trump lost the popular vote, so you using Trump as an example of people saying and thinking different things is bewildering. Ive already given my answers about abortion

Ugh. If polls were to believed hardly anyone was going to vote for Trump (or people in the electoral college who represent him).

They did.

This shows that people weren't being honest when polled.

The reason being that supporting trump was social suicide. Even though people preferred him than Clinton, they were afraid to admit it.

I'm wondering about, and have a feeling that, the same thing comes into play when discussing something as divisive as abortion.

I'm asking if any people who would claim to be pro abortion socially would actually be uncomfortable with it when privately thinking about it.

And for those who do support the availability of abortions, when is the cut off point where they no longer morally support the right to choose.

It's not a "gotcha" question. It's a question.

Ironicname

Faugheen wrote:

Fine, I would say you are against women having a freedom to make a choice about their own bodies, therefore you are in favour of controlling women.

You could say that. But you probably shouldn't. You've not asked my opinion.

Faugheen wrote:

See how your nonsense fits now?

No.

Faugheen wrote:

I will never, ever be in a position where I will have to decide whether to keep or terminate my baby. Why should I be the one to tell someone to do what I say?

Cool. Dont. I wasn't asking you to. I was just asking for peoples opinions. You don't need to give yours. My post want solely directed at you. Yet you seem to be very adamant that you tell me that you have no opinion that matters.

Faugheen

Ironicname wrote: »

You could say that. But you probably shouldn't. You've not asked my opinion.

I don't recall anyone asking your opinion about people who are 'pro-abortion' but you went with that label anyway.

I will say you are pro-control. Because that's what it sounds like to me.

Ironicname wrote: »

Cool. Dont. I wasn't asking you to. I was just asking for peoples opinions. You don't need to give yours. My post want solely directed at you. Yet you seem to be very adamant that you tell me that you have no opinion that matters.

You weren't asking for people's opinions, you want to have an argument (hence using the term pro-abortion to describe those who are pro-choice) about the same issues that have been brought up time and time again.

im going to start referring to anyone using the term "pro abortion" as being "pro dead mothers"

lets get this debate *started*

Ironicname

Faugheen wrote:

I don't recall anyone asking your opinion about people who are 'pro-abortion' but you went with that label anyway.

I wasn't aware that I was meant to ask people if accurate descriptions were acceptable.

Faugheen wrote:

I will say you are pro-control. Because that's what it sounds like to me.

You are entitled to think that way. You are wrong though. I've actually held the hand of my (at the time) girlfriend as she had an abortion. I also have a daughter.

But feel free to judge me for asking a question.

Faugheen wrote:

You weren't asking for people's opinions, you want to have an argument (hence using the term pro-abortion to describe those who are pro-choice) about the same issues that have been brought up time and time again.

I specifically asked for people's opinions. I don't want to argue. You are free not to respond to me. I would actually prefer if you didn't interact with me anymore. Your posting style is aggressive and doesn't address any questions I have asked so it is counter productive as a discussion.

Pro abortion is also pro choice. It's like being offended that I called something an arse cheek instead of a buttock.

Im not going to worry about using a term you don't like.

Ironicname

Deleted User wrote:

I beg to differ. You have come here looking to misrepresent views, the "pro-abortion" label is fantasist stuff. Registered yesterday, with a dozen posts to your name. Pardon my scepticism.

Cool.

It's telling that more people are willing to berate me for using wrong terminology than actually answer any questions.

I'm not forcing anyone to respond. I just hoped people would so I could get different perspectives.