Question to self described "pro-life" posters
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:36:49 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Question to self described "pro-life" posters
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Poll
Question: ?
#1
Option 1
 
#2
Option 2
 
#3
Not "pro-life"
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 67

Author Topic: Question to self described "pro-life" posters  (Read 2407 times)
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 23, 2016, 10:39:51 AM »

In the light of what is going on in my country.

Option 1:
Abortion should be allowed in such exceptions as rape/incest or danger to mother's life and health

Option 2:
Abortion should be banned entirely, even in cases of rape/incest and danger to life and health
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2016, 10:42:50 AM »

I can understand (but disagree strongly) those arguing abortion should not be provided "on demand", but I completely fail to understand why a woman should be forced to give a birth after being raped or to basically commit suicide when abortion is required for health reasons. I wonder how can anyone defend this.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2016, 10:51:20 AM »
« Edited: September 23, 2016, 12:57:01 PM by Phyllis Dare, Secret Agent »

I think danger to the mother's life or health should be understood to be an objectively more acceptable reason to abort than circumstances of conception (at least, if one's reason for being pro-life genuinely is believing that the conceptus is a person with rights rather than just a roundabout means of punishing women for having sex). Voted option 1 but I don't think it's great to conflate these things.
Logged
15 Down, 35 To Go
ExtremeRepublican
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,659


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 5.57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2016, 10:58:19 AM »

The unborn baby is a innocent bystander to the crimes of rape and incest and must be protected.

The "save a woman's life" exception is a false equivalency.  http://liveactionnews.org/abortion-ever-necessary-save-life-mother/
Logged
Dereich
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2016, 11:12:50 AM »

I've never liked that danger to the mother is always tied to the exception for rape and incest. It muddies the pro-life argument by treating those children as somehow less necessary to save than "normal" children. Children can't be blamed for the evils of their parents and a wrong on the mother doesn't somehow justify wronging her innocent child.

The medical exception makes a lot more sense. As long as doctors aren't intentionally killing the child when less deadly methods could be used to guarantee the mother's health I don't think there's any problem with necessary procedures to save the woman's life that happen to kill the child.

Voted option 1 (moderate hero)
Logged
Grand Wizard Lizard of the Klan
kataak
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,922
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2016, 11:17:26 AM »

Well, for me allowing abortion in case of rape is some modern sort of eugenics. Disgusting similarly to any male or female who is so degenerated to rape anyone.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2016, 11:24:59 AM »

I've never liked that danger to the mother is always tied to the exception for rape and incest. It muddies the pro-life argument by treating those children as somehow less necessary to save than "normal" children. Children can't be blamed for the evils of their parents and a wrong on the mother doesn't somehow justify wronging her innocent child.

The medical exception makes a lot more sense. As long as doctors aren't intentionally killing the child when less deadly methods could be used to guarantee the mother's health I don't think there's any problem with necessary procedures to save the woman's life that happen to kill the child.

Voted option 1 (moderate hero)

That's basically the RCC's stance, right?
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2016, 11:27:48 AM »

Well, for me allowing abortion in case of rape is some modern sort of eugenics. Disgusting similarly to any male or female who is so degenerated to rape anyone.

So, being forced to reproduce under this scenario is somehow less disguisting?
Logged
Sprouts Farmers Market ✘
Sprouts
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,749
Italy


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: 1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2016, 11:33:22 AM »

Where is the only the first half option. Had to vote option 2 because No means No. If there are exceptions, then your position is meaningless. You lose the moral cause. I understand if you are choosing between two lives, but if forced to choose between these two options, one results in a whole lot less people dying (and an equal number, likely in the single digits, to the ideal).
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2016, 11:37:56 AM »

Where is the only the first half option. Had to vote option 2 because No means No. If there are exceptions, then your position is meaningless. You lose the moral cause. I understand if you are choosing between two lives, but if forced to choose between these two options, one results in a whole lot less people dying (and an equal number, likely in the single digits, to the ideal).

I'm not a great Fan of The West Wing, but I can't help but be reminded of this quote from one episode: "Every once in a while, every once in a while, there's a day with an absolute right and an absolute wrong, but those days almost always include body counts. Other than that, there aren't very many un-nuanced moments" 
Logged
Grand Wizard Lizard of the Klan
kataak
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,922
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: September 23, 2016, 11:45:25 AM »

Well, for me allowing abortion in case of rape is some modern sort of eugenics. Disgusting similarly to any male or female who is so degenerated to rape anyone.

So, being forced to reproduce under this scenario is somehow less disguisting?


Abortion isn't going to un-rape anybody, and child created form rape isn't unworthy to live because of that.
Logged
Clark Kent
ClarkKent
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,480
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2016, 11:45:39 AM »

Abortion should be allowed if it is the only way to save the mother's life.
Logged
Santander
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,849
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: 4.00, S: 2.61


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2016, 11:46:56 AM »
« Edited: September 23, 2016, 12:06:23 PM by Santander »

On one hand, there is an ancient right to self-defense, even when the attacker is not culpable. Personhood is a metaphysical concept, and there are a range of views on fetal personhood within even conservative branches of Judaism and Christianity. I am inclined to believe that abortion is not murder because the fetus is not an independent entity from its mother, meaning that we can justify trying to balance between the woman's rights to life and self-defense and the rights of the unborn.

On the other hand, life is really about souls rather than bodies. If you believe that all human souls are tainted by original sin, it is justified to oppose all abortion, because it is preferable for the baptized mother to meet her creator than it is to abort the fetus and condemn the unbaptized unborn to eternal damnation. This is something that I find hard to ignore, and I could see myself ending up on this side of the issue one day.

I lean towards the first option right now, but I respect both sides and would support any measure that reduces the number of abortions, regardless of whose idea it is or its constitutionality.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2016, 11:53:06 AM »

Well, for me allowing abortion in case of rape is some modern sort of eugenics. Disgusting similarly to any male or female who is so degenerated to rape anyone.

So, being forced to reproduce under this scenario is somehow less disgusting?


Abortion isn't going to un-rape anybody, and child created form rape isn't unworthy to live because of that.

That's right, abortion isn't going to un-rape anybody. A victim will live with the trauma of the rape forever (I don't know how it is to get raped and I honest to God would never want to know, but we all can at least comprehend this is something terrible), so forcing her to deliver only deepens scars. It's like rubbing a salt on the wound.

I just don't see how being essentially forced to give birth against your will after being forcibly impregnated is in any way acceptable.

I don't see "eugenic" comparison as fitting too. A rape victim can choose to give birth, and it should be personal decision.
Logged
NeverAgain
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,659
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: September 23, 2016, 12:05:12 PM »

lol, pro-choice (literally sane, ff).
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: September 23, 2016, 12:14:50 PM »

Well, for me allowing abortion in case of rape is some modern sort of eugenics. Disgusting similarly to any male or female who is so degenerated to rape anyone.

So, being forced to reproduce under this scenario is somehow less disgusting?


Abortion isn't going to un-rape anybody, and child created form rape isn't unworthy to live because of that.

That's right, abortion isn't going to un-rape anybody. A victim will live with the trauma of the rape forever (I don't know how it is to get raped and I honest to God would never want to know, but we all can at least comprehend this is something terrible), so forcing her to deliver only deepens scars. It's like rubbing a salt on the wound.

Tbf aborting also deepens scars a lot of the time. I don't know which is more common; a lot of studies have been done of this but they're invariably done with an incredibly obvious agenda one way or the other.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: September 23, 2016, 12:22:09 PM »

Option 1. Frankly, I really don't care if Roe vs. Wade is overturned. It is up to God, not me, to judge a woman for having an unnecessary abortion (which is a very small percentage of abortions in my opinion).
Logged
Grand Wizard Lizard of the Klan
kataak
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,922
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: September 23, 2016, 12:26:04 PM »

Well, for me allowing abortion in case of rape is some modern sort of eugenics. Disgusting similarly to any male or female who is so degenerated to rape anyone.

So, being forced to reproduce under this scenario is somehow less disgusting?


Abortion isn't going to un-rape anybody, and child created form rape isn't unworthy to live because of that.

That's right, abortion isn't going to un-rape anybody. A victim will live with the trauma of the rape forever (I don't know how it is to get raped and I honest to God would never want to know, but we all can at least comprehend this is something terrible), so forcing her to deliver only deepens scars. It's like rubbing a salt on the wound.

I just don't see how being essentially forced to give birth against your will after being forcibly impregnated is in any way acceptable.

I don't see "eugenic" comparison as fitting too. A rape victim can choose to give birth, and it should be personal decision.

As abortion will not un-rape anyone also will not un-mother, such woman will be just mother of dead child. Out of the religious arguments fetus is the first stadium of human life (I am not biologist but as far as I know it has it own DNA variation) and although is fully dependent on its mother also already born children are. I fully understand your point of view but in my opinion thwarting human being life at the beginning without giving any chance to live it if there is no risk that pregnancy will danger mother life is not morally acceptable.

And in this moment as I am pretty sure this argument will come up sooner or later, I am that type of anti-abortionist that thinks we should focus on preparing good environmental, social and economic conditions for potential mothers and fathers rather than making Jarosław Kaczyński heavy breathing (because clearly he is not happy with all that legal acts projects, both of them and not only that liberal will be stopped) with next anti-abortion legal acts which will not solve the problem (abortions will go underground or nach West) and to be pro-life mean to not only respect all human beings on all stages of their life but also make their lives livable. And I am also not biggest fan of Ordo Iuris initiative to be clear, at least in this moment and while Polish courts work as they work.

http://lewicowo.pl/regulacja-urodzin-a-klasa-robotnicza-robotnicze-towarzystwo-sluzby-spolecznej-na-posterunku/

And I agree with that Interbellum period text from aligned with PPS magazine, that:

Dla wszystkich wrogów regulacji urodzeń i środków ochronnych przeciw ciąży my, kobiety pracujące i niezamożne, mamy tylko taką odpowiedź:
Stwórzcie takie warunki życia, w których każda kobieta mogłaby z radością urodzić i wychować swoje dziecko. Jeśli tego nie potraficie, milczcie!


(From Polish: For all opponents of birth regulation and contraceptives, we working and poor women, have only such answer:
Create such life conditions, in which every women could happily birth and raise up child. If you can't, be quiet.)
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: September 23, 2016, 12:34:43 PM »

Interesting question Kalwejt.

How are we defining 'health'? In Canada abortion from 1969-1988 was illegal except for cases where the mother's life or health was in danger. 'Health' included mental health and was routinely abused by friendly physicians.

The rape issue is a non-starter. I'm not inclined to punish someone for the crimes their father committed. The state should care for children in such cases if the mother doesn't want them or provide ample support if she decides to raise them.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: September 23, 2016, 01:02:36 PM »

Interesting question Kalwejt.

How are we defining 'health'? In Canada abortion from 1969-1988 was illegal except for cases where the mother's life or health was in danger. 'Health' included mental health and was routinely abused by friendly physicians.

That's a pickle. Defining health in clear legal terms may be difficult. I'm generally lukewarm, at best, about the "mental thing" issue, given how many abuses occurred, especially when abortion/sterilization was compulsory under eugenic laws (and eugenics is something I have very hard time overlooking when talking about Swedish Social Democrats.) I can't say I have an easy answer here.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here we approach a gray area what any of us considers as "beginning of the life". In my opinion, an embryo or fetus at early stages can't be consider "life", with no developed nervous system, consciousness or ability to survive on it's own. A potential life, yes. But so is a stem cell or even a semen. Thus, I don't believe we can talk about punishing something that does not exist yet as life for others' action.

Generally I'd prefer to have as little abortions as possible and if a woman that undergo a rape decided to give birth (whether to keep the child or give away for adoption) I'd be impressed, but, again, I don't feel it any more moral to force someone to even more relive trauma of what is a dastardly act. Nathan makes a good point that abortion may be a scarring experience on it's own, and that's why I'd like to see as few abortions as possible, but I don't feel to have an absolute answer to impose on the others. In my opinion that approachment leads to even more unwarranted abuse.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: September 23, 2016, 01:08:16 PM »

http://lewicowo.pl/regulacja-urodzin-a-klasa-robotnicza-robotnicze-towarzystwo-sluzby-spolecznej-na-posterunku/

And I agree with that Interbellum period text from aligned with PPS magazine, that:

Dla wszystkich wrogów regulacji urodzeń i środków ochronnych przeciw ciąży my, kobiety pracujące i niezamożne, mamy tylko taką odpowiedź:
Stwórzcie takie warunki życia, w których każda kobieta mogłaby z radością urodzić i wychować swoje dziecko. Jeśli tego nie potraficie, milczcie!


(From Polish: For all opponents of birth regulation and contraceptives, we working and poor women, have only such answer:
Create such life conditions, in which every women could happily birth and raise up child. If you can't, be quiet.)

Interesting find. And is touches something that I find despicable: namely attitute showed by some who yell "abortion is murder, protect unborn life" while showing complete indifference to all the hurdles a mother and a child must face once the latter is born. Such people calling themselves "pro-life" are a joke.
Logged
Grand Wizard Lizard of the Klan
kataak
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,922
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: September 23, 2016, 01:13:47 PM »

http://lewicowo.pl/regulacja-urodzin-a-klasa-robotnicza-robotnicze-towarzystwo-sluzby-spolecznej-na-posterunku/

And I agree with that Interbellum period text from aligned with PPS magazine, that:

Dla wszystkich wrogów regulacji urodzeń i środków ochronnych przeciw ciąży my, kobiety pracujące i niezamożne, mamy tylko taką odpowiedź:
Stwórzcie takie warunki życia, w których każda kobieta mogłaby z radością urodzić i wychować swoje dziecko. Jeśli tego nie potraficie, milczcie!


(From Polish: For all opponents of birth regulation and contraceptives, we working and poor women, have only such answer:
Create such life conditions, in which every women could happily birth and raise up child. If you can't, be quiet.)

Interesting find. And is touches something that I find despicable: namely attitute showed by some who yell "abortion is murder, protect unborn life" while showing complete indifference to all the hurdles a mother and a child must face once the latter is born. Such people calling themselves "pro-life" are a joke.


100% agree.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,072
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: September 23, 2016, 01:23:43 PM »

Opt. 1
Logged
DavidB.
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,612
Israel


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: 4.26


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: September 23, 2016, 01:26:11 PM »

I think danger to the mother's life or health should be understood to be an objectively more acceptable reason to abort than circumstances of conception (at least, if one's reason for being pro-life genuinely is believing that the conceptus is a person with rights rather than just a roundabout means of punishing women for having sex). Voted option 1 but I don't think it's great to conflate these things.
I totally agree.

Am pro-life (though I think abortion should be legal up to 8 weeks, so some would consider that to be "pro-choice"...) and voted option 1 without a doubt (not allowing abortion if the mother's health is in danger is absolutely insane), but I don't think the circumstances of conception should matter.
Logged
VPH
vivaportugalhabs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,682
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -0.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: September 23, 2016, 01:47:59 PM »

Option 1, and it should be legal until 20 weeks.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« 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 0.065 seconds with 14 queries.