Abortion
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 01:00:29 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Abortion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Poll
Question: What's your stance on abortion?
#1
Abortion should be legal and federally funded
 
#2
Abortion should be legal, but not federally funded
 
#3
Abortion should not be legal and should not be federally funded
 
#4
Other (please specify)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 106

Author Topic: Abortion  (Read 9489 times)
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: August 24, 2012, 11:25:24 PM »

From a pure negative rights standpoint, the woman has a right to defend herself against lethal trespassers. Assuming the woman's life is not at stake, the woman is merely entitled to remove the trespassers from her property. Unfortunately, technological constraints make this a virtual death sentence for the trespassers, thus making it a highly unethical action to undertake.

From a practical standpoint, preventing a woman from marooning her fetus would be unenforceable, as it would require all women with miscarriages to prove their innocence.

I see no reason why the government should fund any abortions, and IMHO it is asinine to propose such unless the woman's life is at stake. What other elective procedures should your neighbors be forced to pay for?

I see Option 2 as the least objectionable choice.
Logged
Link
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,426
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: August 25, 2012, 02:45:26 PM »

I see no reason why the government should fund any abortions...

Babies on welfare.
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,821


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: August 25, 2012, 02:56:53 PM »

That's why abortion should be legal. There's no definitive truth to when life begins, it's totally up to interpretation. One person can't legislate their subjective beliefs over another when not everyone believes in the truth they campaign for.

If you want to take the "we don't know which side is right and wrong" approach in this case there is a tremendous disparity in the consequences of each outcome; if it's not a person then outlawing it is forcing a woman to endure nine months of labor, but if it is a person then we're murdering 800,000 people a year.

Which may involve a girl being forced to give birth even though it may kill her, or force a woman to forgo chaemotherapy or life saving drugs as it may harm the 'unborn'. Women's lives can be at stake if society wishes to infringe on her body.
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: August 25, 2012, 05:55:52 PM »

I see no reason why the government should fund any abortions...

Babies on welfare.

Seems to be more an argument against welfare than an argument for eugenics.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: August 25, 2012, 09:42:47 PM »

Flush 'em. And encourage dumb young women to do so. But that'll never happen because the government can't make more money for its members without population growth, so babies will continue to be softly encouraged.
Who decides which young women are dumb?  Or are you assuming that about all of them?

A vast majority, yes. Most young people are stupid, especially when it comes to a perspective on responsibility. Having a child as a teenager or even a little older strikes me as reeking of poor decision-making for a number of reasons.

It's probably horrible of me, I know, but I have a tendency to groan every time a teenage girl's first thought when she finds out she's preggers is not "well, off to Planned Parenthood."  I experienced this somewhat first-hand with my idiot cousin who I really don't care about at all.

I love how it's pro-lifers who are considered "condescending."

Well, I never said I'd legally mandate that all teens who get pregnant abort.

Not the point. You and fezzy support people getting abortions because you consider most young women to be idiots, and those who give birth to be irresponsible.  My opposition to abortion is not based in any way on disparaging beliefs about anyone, but on my belief in protecting young human lives.  It is not a matter of hating or not respecting women, as is so often baselessly claimed.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: August 25, 2012, 10:01:29 PM »

From a pure negative rights standpoint, the woman has a right to defend herself against lethal trespassers. Assuming the woman's life is not at stake, the woman is merely entitled to remove the trespassers from her property. Unfortunately, technological constraints make this a virtual death sentence for the trespassers, thus making it a highly unethical action to undertake.

From a practical standpoint, preventing a woman from marooning her fetus would be unenforceable, as it would require all women with miscarriages to prove their innocence.

I see no reason why the government should fund any abortions, and IMHO it is asinine to propose such unless the woman's life is at stake. What other elective procedures should your neighbors be forced to pay for?

I see Option 2 as the least objectionable choice.

That's actually the most objective way to look at it. If you are not your own private property (and thus possess the right to exclude others from it), you are not a person and the state can only commodere that property (I assume against judgement that any competent person with a human uterus is a "person") and alienate the associated property right with Eminent Domain (in this situation, if the state were to make abortion a crime, they would have to compensate all whose property rights would be alienated). Eminent Domain's requirement of a "public purpose" could be made even if a fetus cannot be proven to be a person because of some other "public purpose".  However, there could be said to be a "neccesity" to prevent another from being harmed, but generally this sort of exception is used in a tangible national emergency such as a war or a disaster, not some allegded en masse moral failing. (You can't just break into a bakery because you are starving) Therefore, a fetus, if its a person, could be considered someone who will starve if they do not burglarize the grocery store.

I probably missed some steps, but this is pretty much the jist of it. You can't just force someone to personally keep someone else alive against their will is the point...so, in a way, "personhood" laws actually elevate embryos and fetuses above a born person....then again, whether to protect the community from the "lawlessness" if aborting a fetus is killing a person, or from the mere offensiveness and psychological welfare of those who believe it is if it isn't, the state can "compensate" from women the easement for the fetuses...provided a "fair market value" can be made, otherwise forcing a preganat woman to give birth would be illegal taking or involuntary servitude or "slavery".

Then again, there is the point that abortion cannot be proven as easy as someone using or possessing illicit substances or committing some form of sodomy (illicit sexual activity).  ie you can find people who heard someone buy sex or you can find the dope residue in some guys' car...if someone is all the sudden was not pregnant, then pregnant and then not pregnant, you can't priove anything, right? Maybe it was a miscarriage, maybe someone mobster or pharmacist came to her house with coat hanger..maybe she just threw herself down the stairs..
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: August 25, 2012, 10:55:24 PM »

If you are not your own private property (and thus possess the right to exclude others from it), you are not a person
There's a few unstated assumptions there (most notably that a person can be considered property).
Logged
Free Palestine
FallenMorgan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,022
United States
Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -10.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: August 26, 2012, 02:05:15 AM »

Flush 'em. And encourage dumb young women to do so. But that'll never happen because the government can't make more money for its members without population growth, so babies will continue to be softly encouraged.
Who decides which young women are dumb?  Or are you assuming that about all of them?

A vast majority, yes. Most young people are stupid, especially when it comes to a perspective on responsibility. Having a child as a teenager or even a little older strikes me as reeking of poor decision-making for a number of reasons.

It's probably horrible of me, I know, but I have a tendency to groan every time a teenage girl's first thought when she finds out she's preggers is not "well, off to Planned Parenthood."  I experienced this somewhat first-hand with my idiot cousin who I really don't care about at all.

I love how it's pro-lifers who are considered "condescending."

Well, I never said I'd legally mandate that all teens who get pregnant abort.

Not the point. You and fezzy support people getting abortions because you consider most young women to be idiots, and those who give birth to be irresponsible.  My opposition to abortion is not based in any way on disparaging beliefs about anyone, but on my belief in protecting young human lives.  It is not a matter of hating or not respecting women, as is so often baselessly claimed.

Oh, it's not because I think most young women are idiots.  I just think that it's idiotic to ruin your life at like 14 or 16 or even 21 because you believe that the thing growing in your uterus that looks like a lizard is a person.

Despite what the wishy-washy pro-choicers might say, there are women who don't care about fetuses, who don't have to chug a fifth of whiskey and be dramatic over the decision to abort.  I know that if I were a woman, and I got preggers, I wouldn't think twice -- off to Planned Parenthood, for me.
Logged
後援会
koenkai
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,265


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: August 26, 2012, 02:18:06 AM »

There is simply no moral argument that can sway me into supporting abortion. This includes the ill Violinist, largely because I think I would have a moral obligation to stay connected, at least if the Violinist was related to me.

At the same time, considering the type of person who would get an abortion would also likely raise children with similar attitudes and character as them if they had not gotten that abortion, hey, legalized abortion is pretty damn useful.
Logged
Free Palestine
FallenMorgan
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,022
United States
Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -10.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: August 26, 2012, 02:33:54 AM »

\At the same time, considering the type of person who would get an abortion would also likely raise children with similar attitudes and character as them if they had not gotten that abortion, hey, legalized abortion is pretty damn useful.

Pro-choice people often stay pro-choice even after they pop out larvae, you know.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: August 26, 2012, 10:21:32 AM »

Not the point. You and fezzy support people getting abortions because you consider most young women to be idiots, and those who give birth to be irresponsible.  My opposition to abortion is not based in any way on disparaging beliefs about anyone, but on my belief in protecting young human lives.  It is not a matter of hating or not respecting women, as is so often baselessly claimed.

Those are two very separate things. I oppose excessive abortion restrictions mostly because I think legislating subjective morality is absurd and overreaching, and I don't think anyone benefits from outlawing abortion. All I'm saying beyond that is I think very young girls having kids because no one taught them about sex and then refused to allow them to get rid of it is shameful and irresponsible. I don't blame them for getting pregnant or keeping the baby, they just don't know any better and shouldn't be expected to have to make such a difficult decision based on what someone else has already decided for them (i.e. the government or their ignorant parents). I blame their parents for refusing to have them educated about their bodies and exposing their children to the nonsensical demands of American Christian society. The disrespect for women is in the lack of trust society places in them by telling them they don't know what's right for their own health or what's right morally. All women should be encouraged to seek professional help at their doctor or Planned Parenthood, but that's been demonized by an overzealous, politicized religion complex. My beliefs beyond that point are just my hopes for their futures; Baby-less and educated. No one can force that though, and I don't expect anyone to.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: August 26, 2012, 10:27:41 AM »

If you are not your own private property (and thus possess the right to exclude others from it), you are not a person
There's a few unstated assumptions there (most notably that a person can be considered property).
Not a person, but one body of a person. Are you your own? If not, you are someone else's property.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: September 04, 2012, 08:18:08 AM »

Option 3.
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: September 13, 2012, 05:25:57 PM »

I agree with abortion rights on a practicality sense, but that does not mean I think it's a good thing.  Therefore... legal but not federally funded, except in the instances of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother.  If it was accidental, sorry, but society shouldn't pay for this kind of -up.  There are an enormous amount of cheap, reasonable ways to prevent unwanted pregnancy.  This obviously creates a problem for a woman who took serious precautions (birth control, condoms, etc.) but got pregnant anyway... but this problem is too rare and problematic to legislate. 

Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: September 16, 2012, 12:45:04 AM »

If you are not your own private property (and thus possess the right to exclude others from it), you are not a person
There's a few unstated assumptions there (most notably that a person can be considered property).
Not a person, but one body of a person. Are you your own? If not, you are someone else's property.

I am my own in the sense that I exist as myself, but I do not own myself in the sense of being property.  To own something as property I must objectify it. Why would I want to objectify myself?
My body is not something I can separate out from myself and turn into a chattel, since it is fundamental and integral to every aspect of my existence.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,503
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: September 16, 2012, 09:50:05 AM »

It's quite telling that 53% (as of now, with 70 votes cast) of this supposedly left-wing forum do not support federal funding for abortions.  
Logged
Goldwater
Republitarian
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,039
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: September 16, 2012, 10:09:45 AM »

It's quite telling that 53% (as of now, with 70 votes cast) of this supposedly left-wing forum do not support federal funding for abortions.  

Although, looking at it from another perspective, 73% of this forum supports legalized abortion.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,503
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: September 16, 2012, 12:33:20 PM »

It's quite telling that 53% (as of now, with 70 votes cast) of this supposedly left-wing forum do not support federal funding for abortions.  

Although, looking at it from another perspective, 73% of this forum supports legalized abortion.

So we support a woman's right to have an abortion (within limits) -we just don't want to pay for it. 
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: September 16, 2012, 02:52:19 PM »

Pro-Choice, no federal funding.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: September 17, 2012, 01:50:27 PM »

If you are not your own private property (and thus possess the right to exclude others from it), you are not a person
There's a few unstated assumptions there (most notably that a person can be considered property).
Not a person, but one body of a person. Are you your own? If not, you are someone else's property.

I am my own in the sense that I exist as myself, but I do not own myself in the sense of being property.  To own something as property I must objectify it. Why would I want to objectify myself?
My body is not something I can separate out from myself and turn into a chattel, since it is fundamental and integral to every aspect of my existence.
Well, maybe not but someone can and wants to and may someday. Remember, what the state has given, it has the power to take away.
Logged
Spanish Moss
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 395
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: September 21, 2012, 08:37:38 PM »

Considering my general political paradigm, this is the one issue where I'm unconventional.  It's constantly a struggle for me.

I was, at one point, against abortion in all cases except if the mother's life is at risk (because I believe it is self defense, and that should be a right).  But I've come to a position where I consider myself pro-life and pro-choice at the same time.

It seems to me that outlawing abortion won't really prevent it to any meaningful degree, but will cause many more women to die - meaning more death and suffering (if someone has studies showing otherwise, or that agree, I'm welcome to new information).  Either way, I believe the greater focus should be on contraception, and that contraception should be free and very easily available, and that sex education is critical in schools.  I feel to reduce abortion and reduce death - that is the very best approach.

And no, I'm not anti women.  Half of those killed in abortion are female, so on that I'd say I'm pro-women.  Not to mention Susan B. Anthony was strongly against abortion... and people aren't claiming she was anti-woman.
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: October 03, 2012, 09:28:44 AM »

From conception, the baby is biologically human and genetically distinct from it's mother. Therefore it is a human being and should be treated as such. I would support abortion in cases where the mother's life is at stake, but it's really irrelevant given that those cases are such a small percentage of abortions.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: October 06, 2012, 05:09:36 PM »

Considering my general political paradigm, this is the one issue where I'm unconventional.  It's constantly a struggle for me.

I was, at one point, against abortion in all cases except if the mother's life is at risk (because I believe it is self defense, and that should be a right).  But I've come to a position where I consider myself pro-life and pro-choice at the same time.

It seems to me that outlawing abortion won't really prevent it to any meaningful degree, but will cause many more women to die - meaning more death and suffering (if someone has studies showing otherwise, or that agree, I'm welcome to new information).  Either way, I believe the greater focus should be on contraception, and that contraception should be free and very easily available, and that sex education is critical in schools.  I feel to reduce abortion and reduce death - that is the very best approach.

And no, I'm not anti women.  Half of those killed in abortion are female, so on that I'd say I'm pro-women.  Not to mention Susan B. Anthony was strongly against abortion... and people aren't claiming she was anti-woman.

and don't forget what overturning Roe and eventually making abortion a crime would do to the prison population....I mean, you would think that would prevent most abortions, but does the War on Drugs do anything to prevent drug addiction or abuse? ...and now perhaps a large fraction of prisoners are drug offenders. At least banning abortion would end the gender gap in prisons.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: October 08, 2012, 12:41:56 AM »

Considering my general political paradigm, this is the one issue where I'm unconventional.  It's constantly a struggle for me.

I was, at one point, against abortion in all cases except if the mother's life is at risk (because I believe it is self defense, and that should be a right).  But I've come to a position where I consider myself pro-life and pro-choice at the same time.

It seems to me that outlawing abortion won't really prevent it to any meaningful degree, but will cause many more women to die - meaning more death and suffering (if someone has studies showing otherwise, or that agree, I'm welcome to new information).  Either way, I believe the greater focus should be on contraception, and that contraception should be free and very easily available, and that sex education is critical in schools.  I feel to reduce abortion and reduce death - that is the very best approach.

And no, I'm not anti women.  Half of those killed in abortion are female, so on that I'd say I'm pro-women.  Not to mention Susan B. Anthony was strongly against abortion... and people aren't claiming she was anti-woman.

and don't forget what overturning Roe and eventually making abortion a crime would do to the prison population....I mean, you would think that would prevent most abortions, but does the War on Drugs do anything to prevent drug addiction or abuse? ...and now perhaps a large fraction of prisoners are drug offenders. At least banning abortion would end the gender gap in prisons.
most people who support making abortion a crime do not support throwing the mother in prison. they would charge the abortionist.
Logged
General White
Vegetaboi
Rookie
**
Posts: 183
United Arab Emirates


Political Matrix
E: 6.45, S: 2.75

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #74 on: October 08, 2012, 02:03:01 AM »

Option 3. All Abortions should be banded.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.068 seconds with 13 queries.