Your position on abortion

[Brambila]

If you are pro-life are their any exceptions where abortion should be legal?

If you are pro-choice are their any situtations where abortion should be banned?

there should be no limits on a womans choices.

If such a society existed where women could make endless choices, we'd have thousands of people killed every year. Ah yes, we already have that society!

I don't think that society should make any attempt to kill anyone, but rather to save another's life. War shouldn't be about killing our enemies, it should be about saving our lives- self defense. Capital Punishment shouldn't be punishment, it should be defending society from an evil, and discouraging crime. Similarly, if the mother's life is threatened, we shouldn't have a goal to kill the fetus, we should have a goal to save the mother. For instance, in etopic pregnancies where the fetus is stuck in the fallopian tube, the goal isn't to kill the fetus, the goal is to save the mother, and the fetus dies in the process.

[Brambila]

Moderately pro-life (at least that's how I see it...)

Basically, abortions after 18 weeks should be illegal (or at least discouraged) except for medical reasons... but at the same time efforts need to be taken to reduce the causes of abortions (anti poverty measures, better sex education, contraceptives made easily available etc)

I agree with your position almost 100% (I think I'd make it 20 weeks instead of 18, but that's starting to split hairs). However, I consider myself moderately pro-choice.

I still haven't seen anyone come up with a good rationale for why throwing people in jail would help matters; would that really be a more effective way to stop abortion than anti poverty measures, better sex education, and contraceptives made more easily available?

We have to get away from demonization of the other side on the abortion issue. The real question that divides pro-lifers and pro-choicers is the one I just stated, I think. We both want to make abortion happen less often, but pro-lifers prefer the direct approach of throwing people in prison, whereas pro-choicers prefer instead to make abortion less necessary.

We don't want to decrease abortion, we want to make it nonexistant! The same reason why we imprison people for murder, we imprison them for abortion.

[Brambila]

what about if the baby is born with a severe debilitating genetic condition where it is unlikely to live past age 2, and is expected to suffer greatly? Abortion is bad, and Roe V Wade should be overturned, but Brambila, Abortion cannot be made non-existant. In situations such as those Abortion is necessary.

Not as much anymore. With technological breakthroughs appearing every minute, the excuse to have an abortion to save the mother's life will soon be nonexistent.

My friend's brother was born with Cerebral Palsy, and they didn't expect him to live past the age of four- he simply didn't have the ability. That same kid is fourteen now, and although he does have retardation, he does NOT wish he was dead. You cannot kill somebody with the excuse that they will die anyway. Everyone is going to die. Nobody's going to live past the age of 200, but that doesn't give us the right to kill them. Sure, 2 years is very small, but isn't every single moment of life precious?

[Brambila]

Why are you pro-life, if you think the fetus is part of the mother's body?

[Brambila]

I can't imagine how anyone would allow late-term abortions in cases of rape or incest- the fetus is practically an infant, and can feel all the pain an infant can. I was holding my younger sibling when she was just born, and I got really emotional because I knew that she could legally be killed only hours before.

[Brambila]

The vast majority of abortions are done because the woman can't afford to keep the baby, not because she doesn't care about it. The great majority of women want to have the child, but do not want it to have to go without; they feel it is more cruel to make a child live in abject poverty, with the increased risks to society that may result from the child growing up poorly (increased risk of the child becoming a criminal or at the very least a drag on society overall more than an asset).

That's actually incorrect. There are a large amount of abortions that are done in cases where the couple can't afford children (21%), but about 70% of the cases are done in cases where the woman is young, doesn't want a child, is forced to have an abortion, etc.

[Brambila]

Strongly pro-choice with the serious exception of partial-birth abortions. I am somewhat undecided on that issue, though it should be legal if the mother's life is in danger.

And I honestly can't believe there are those who would ban abortion even in a case of rape because "it's not the child's fault". The woman has MONTHS before it becomes anything more than a clump of cells!

Thank you Arlen Specter.

That's about where i am as well.  I oppose partial birth abortion with life and health exceptions.  As far as I see it in the early stages, it's a clump of cells.  I don't know what the Catholic church/Evangelicals get all fussy about. 

There are many more born people worthy of being called "clump of cells" than a fetus.

Nym, sorry for the delay, I didn't know you responded... here's the link:

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

It's silly to say that teens or people who are not emotionally ready to have an abortion can't afford it. That's a petty assumption. If a teen girl were pregnant her parents would either force her to have an abortion or help take care of the child themselves. 

[Brambila]

At some point the fetus becomes a human being.  This point is clearly before the baby is born.

If we can make laws defining when a murder is premeditated, and when it isn't, and to what degree, and allow our government to slay its own citizens, go to war without the approval of the people, etc., then we can decide when a fetus is a conscious human being.  It's probably at about 7 months, but science could prove this.  It wouldn't be difficult.  After that point, all abortions must be illegal, because they become murder.

Science says that the fetus is a human being form conception. Since it has human DNA which defines the species, and it is a living being, it is a human being. That's not the question everyone's asking- the question is whether or not the fetus is a person.

[Brambila]

At some point the fetus becomes a human being.  This point is clearly before the baby is born.

If we can make laws defining when a murder is premeditated, and when it isn't, and to what degree, and allow our government to slay its own citizens, go to war without the approval of the people, etc., then we can decide when a fetus is a conscious human being.  It's probably at about 7 months, but science could prove this.  It wouldn't be difficult.  After that point, all abortions must be illegal, because they become murder.

Science says that the fetus is a human being form conception. Since it has human DNA which defines the species, and it is a living being, it is a human being. That's not the question everyone's asking- the question is whether or not the fetus is a person.

Bram, some people consider 'human being' the same thing as a person, and a non-sentient fetus composed of human cells not to be the same thing. It's POV and semantics. That's what he meant. He also did specify 'conscious'.

Good that you pointed that out. Yes, those people who say that "human being" is the same thing as a person are wrong, as they are two separate entities. Body and mind/soul. Physically, the fetus is a completely independent human being, just as distinguished from the mother as an infant.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

About a year ago I was working at a summer camp as a counselor, and two boy scouts (underaged) brought alcohol with them to camp. They got drunk on several occasions, and I told them that they should stop, or they were going to get into trouble. Since they were in my troop, I gave them a little break. However, at one point, the camp director was making camp inspections, and they asked me to hide their liquor. I said no, as it would be wrong for me to first of all possess the alcohol, and second of all help them hide. The camp director found them, and they were kicked out of camp, and almost kicked out of the boy scouts. Was I wrong for not helping them? Of course not. I was absolutely right in not helping them. I’m not going to help anyone to do something wrong. In your case, where murder was foolishly thought to be the only option, asking somebody to help them get an abortion was not only putting the young woman in moral jeopardy, but themselves in it as well. More so, the young woman and that person would be responsible for ending the life of an innocent human being, who by no one’s fault but the parent’s was conceived without preparation and because of it the mother/father thought it just to kill their own child. Now, I’m a Machiavellian as far as governments are run, but on moral grounds the ends do not justify the means. More so, the ends do not weigh out with the means.

[Brambila]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, it is. But keeping it legal is just an excuse to keep all abortion legal.

Abortion is a cruel crime that kills a living, individual, human being with no crime on it's life. 95% of abortions are done in cases of convenience, and only 5% are done becuase of rape, threat to the mother's life, and fetal impairment. That means that of the 3000 abortions done every day, only 150 are done because of those few cases.