Is this a specious argument for pro-abortion?

@Foofie,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

To criminalize abortion
is to effectively repeal the 13th Amendment
and to re-authorize slavery.

David

Foofie wrote:

So, how was abortion once a crime, and there still was the 13th Amendment?

So far as I 'm aware,
no argument in support of freedom of abortion was raised upon that theory.
If an argument is not litigated, if it is not considered,
then decisions will be made in its absence,
at least UNTIL someone raises it. Yes ??

David

0 Replies

My pro-freedom argument is RADICAL.

If an animal, e.g., a fox or a cougar breaks into a woman 's home,
she has a perfect right to remove him or to have him removed by her assistants.

If a burglar breaks into her home (human burglar),
she has an equal right to have him removed therefrom,
regardless of his future well-being, the same as the animal.
My point is that a woman has 1OO% autonomy over
rejection of unwanted intruders from her human body, her home.

I argue that a woman 's moral right to autonomy over defense
of her body is absolute against both HUMEN and non-humen (e.g., worms).
Her freedom applies against any form of life, human or not.

If a guy climbed up on her back and demanded that she carry him around
for the best part of a year, she 'd owe him NOT any fraction of a nanosecond of assistance,
neither on her back, nor inside her gut. If that 's bad for the parasite,
that 's his tuff luck.

David

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

I'm not disagreeing with you. I also think the US is waaaaay to uptight when it comes to sex and nudity.
I have traveled all over the world, and the US is the worst. In most countries, nudity is considered no big deal, and its no big deal with me.
If you have something I have never seen before, I will throw a rock at it.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

My pro-freedom argument is RADICAL.

It is so RADICAL Dave that it is weightless. No traction. No political influence. A mere noise. Softer than a wet fart. Not even significant enough to send for an ambulance. Harmless. Like a daisy in an Alpine meadow.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I ask again: "What in your opinion is the offense against the fetus that abortion presents?"

I don't recall you asking me that question Frank. Will you link where you did please? If you can't then you have performed a dirty trick. You have given A2Kers the impression that I failed to answer this important question and I have not, to my knowledge, been asked it.

Had I been asked it I would have answered that I was a "fetus" once myself and that had a pair of pincers grabbed a hold of me at 26 weeks, no days, no hours, no minutes, no seconds and no microseconds after my old man shot his load, I would have considered it a diabolical liberty to be dragged out in pieces down the same channel I was pushed up. I assume you would too.

So knock off your infantile tricks with me old chap. Use them on those who know no better eh?

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Whether pregnancy termination results from a spontaneous abortion, i.e. a miscarriage, or a medical procedure, it is the interruption of a biological process that prevents the development of a human being.

A spontaneous abortion is a natural event and cannot, not even remotely, be compared to a medical procedure designed to exterminate a life.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

That's because you're way too timorous to start a sentence with 'And.'

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

I believe that such people are choosing to substitute religious dogma, or fantasies regarding some future potential, for the actual biological reality of the state of fetal development that is being interrupted with an abortion.

I am on my own here ff. Where have I mentioned religious dogma. Why don't you **** off and argue with those who have instead of sneakily pretending I have.

I have not mentioned religious dogma.

Your ridiculous arguments in the service of a disgusting money-making racket are pathetic.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

Quote:
Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5096900)
Quote:
I ask again: "What in your opinion is the offense against the fetus that abortion presents?"

I don't recall you asking me that question Frank. Will you link where you did please? If you can't then you have performed a dirty trick. You have given A2Kers the impression that I failed to answer this important question and I have not, to my knowledge, been asked it.

I would never do that to you, Spendius...or to anyone else for that matter. Here is the link:

http://able2know.org/topic/197045-3#post-5096491

Quote:

Had I been asked it I would have answered that I was a "fetus" once myself and that had a pair of pincers grabbed a hold of me at 26 weeks, no days, no hours, no minutes, no seconds and no microseconds after my old man shot his load, I would have considered it a diabolical liberty to be dragged out in pieces down the same channel I was pushed up. I assume you would too.

Actually, if that had happened, I doubt either of us would have "thought" about it at all. Immature brain and all that.

Quote:

So knock off your infantile tricks with me old chap. Use them on those who know no better eh?

Okay. But will you actually answer the question?

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

That's because you're way too timorous to start a sentence with 'And.'

I can clutch my .44 revolver securely,
when I begin each sentence, if I wanna.
Can u say as much ???????

1 Reply

@Foofie,

Foofie wrote:

That is why abortion should be a crime.

As I have stated before. If you make abortion illegal all you will end up doing is shifting where the crime happens. Women will still seek to get abortions. You can't prevent this demand. Absolutely nothing would prevent this demand. Some women will die and be taken advantage of by poor doctors. You ultimate still end up with thousands of deaths. Instead of babies, they are women. So you don't solve anything by making it illegal.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

My pro-freedom argument is RADICAL.

Actually, I don't see your argument, at least the way you've voiced it in the context of the present discussion, as being all that radical--unless someone thinks the freedom to have autonomy over one's own body is a radical idea.

We can withhold the consent to have medical procedures, or treatments, imposed on our bodies for the very same reasons.

It might actually clarify the abortion issue for some people to think of it as an act of self defensive. For many women, that's exactly what it is on an emotional level.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

I have not mentioned religious dogma.

I never said your particular beliefs were based on religious dogma.

But I do think that your according a partially, inadequately developed, fetus the status, and stature, of a "human being" is based more on fantasies and hypotheticals about potential development, rather than on the actual biological reality of the sort of "life" that fetus represents, and the actual biological reality of what is removed from the woman's body with an abortion.

And I do think we will never agree on that issue.

I am curious whether, given your thinking on the matter, you oppose abortion in all instances.

Do you oppose abortion in the instances, and for the reasons, I mentioned in a previous thread? I'll repeat those here.

Quote:

And you are also failing to look at the wide range of reasons that women seek abortions for unwanted pregnancies, even beyond instances of rape. Knowledge that she is carrying a fetus with a severe genetic disorder, such as Tay-Sachs disease, or a fetus with a profound birth defect, might be among those reasons. The serious physical risks of pregnancy--severe hypertension, diabetes, eclampsia--particularly for a woman who has had such medical problems during previous pregnancies, or for an older woman who has become pregnant toward the end of her reproductive years, might be another reason to choose the option of abortion. And selective abortion, to prevent too many multiple births, and to increase the viability of the remaining fetuses, can be a routine procedure when pregnancy results from in vitro fertilization, where multiple fertilized eggs are implanted in order to increase the probability of a successful pregnancy.

Should a woman be forced to bear a child she knows will have Tay-Sachs disease--where the child will begin to deteriorate at about 6 months, becoming blind, deaf, unable to swallow, atrophied, and paralytic, before death finally occurs, generally before the age of four? Why put the child, as well as the parents, through that horror if it can be prevented by interrupting the pregnancy? Do you oppose abortion in that instance?
In the case of selective reductions, to prevent too many multiple births, after in vitro fertilization, where some fetuses are eliminated in order to help insure the survival of the other fetuses, would you oppose that as well? And, if so, on what basis?

I'm also curious whether Foofie opposes abortion in those instances also.

1 Reply

@Foofie,

You guys should talk to some women in China. Abortion is so common and it isn't even a politically conflicting subject. Women admit they have abortion in their past as if it was nothing more than a visit to the dentist. Then again they have overpopulation problem and weird government propaganda, which I wonder how it's coming along with the movement of sexual revolution that started about a decade ago.

You wanna hear something funny, when I asked a kid about my same age where babies come from, he said until 12 years old he was taught to believe it came from rocks, as in the rock splits and a baby comes from it. Similar to how the western kids are given the common story of storks bringing in babies. LOL

1 Reply

@Foofie,

There is no movement that is "pro-abortion". That suggests an encouragement to abort. That is why it is called "Pro-choice". I know a girl who was conceived from a rape. She was not made aware of this fact until well into her adulthood. Children generally want to know that they are conceived voluntarily and deliberately. Those who are not (including those who are adopted) end up with psychological problems especially with commitment and abandonment. Some people simply cannot and would not ever have an abortion. Some who have an abortion experience guilt, regret and sincerely wish they had not made the decision to abort. It's a very, very personal and individual experience. We cannot prevent 100% of unwanted pregnancies (rape for ex.). No matter how good the adopted parents of a child are there is always a hole that never gets filled due to the "abandonment" of the birth parents. If I had been adopted I would feel so horrible knowing that my mother I grew inside abandoned me for any reason because I would love my mother and would never want to be a burden. I do know several people who were adopted at birth that are very psychologically disturbed. Thousands live happy and fulfilling lives on the other hand. Becoming pregnant during a rape is the only way to understand why you might want to abort. Unless of course you are very, very empathetic.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I don't need to.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Quote:

So you don't solve anything by making it illegal.

You do. You avoid the official approval. Prostitution is illegal. But women will be prostitutes. It can't be prevented. Some women will die and be damaged by it. They will seek the "back streets". They will be taken advantage of and not just by doctors.

Are you in favour of legalising prostitution? All the arguments you make apply to prostitution. And to drug use.

Why is it not a woman's free choice to be a prostitute? Or to have four 18 year old footballers round for a bit of fun when the husband and kids are away?

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Are you in favour of legalising prostitution? All the arguments you make apply to prostitution. And to drug use.

Spend you mean to tell me all this time and you never read my posts on the topic of prostitution or drugs?

I am in favor of both being legal. If we made prostitution legal, women would probably stop walking the streets because businesses would open. (essentially brothels). The women can be regulated, checked for diseases and the guys can be monitored so the women are not harmed.

As it currently is, women who prostitute themselves are at the mercy of their customers. There are thousands of prostitutes who are murdered because they don't have a safe environment to work in.

Not only that but man women look for pimps for a sense of protection and often times get wrapped up in drug use because these guys know that addictions fuel prostitution. Get them hooked on a drug and they will keep turning out customers which makes them more money. If prostitution were legalized it would be much safer for everyone including the clients. Because std and aid testing could be mandatory.

As far as drugs go. I think all of them should be legalized. Once you do this businesses like liquor stores would open up to provide drugs to the community. They would become more safe and cleaner. Drugs like crank would go away because they are inferior products. People would much rather have cocaine. The price would also drop if it were legal. You would also take money out of the hands of thugs and gangsters who create a lot of street violence. The reason there are gang violence is almost always related to drug selling turf.

If you legalize drugs many crimes including property crimes would reduce or completely go away because the price of drugs would dramatically come down and be more affordable. This is something that many people don't understand. The reason drugs are expensive is because there is a high risk involved in trafficking them. To make it worth their time and risk, they need to make more money for it. As soon as they are legal the price would drop because there is no risk.

Not only that but the war on drugs would go away. Cops will stop dying in drug related raids. Tax money can be spend on drug abuse education instead of paying to try and keep dealers off the streets.

spendius wrote:

Why is it not a woman's free choice to be a prostitute? Or to have four 18 year old footballers round for a bit of fun when the husband and kids are away?

It should be their choice.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Sorry Frank-- the previous post had slipped by my attention. Time zones. I would have been in the charp pit at the time and on resurfacing the thread had moved on.

I think my answer was reasonable but I also think the offence is against womanhood and femininity. And I think those involved know that which is why the practice is surrounded by secrecy, veils and shame.

Did you notice the word "entire" in my post relating to whether anyone dare ask their parent/s whether they had debated whether to off them. If I was 20 now I think the question might enter my head. Would it not yours if you was 20? And if so would you ask?

2 Replies

@firefly,

Those sorts of problems ff are rare and very difficult. I don't feel qualified to adjudicate on them. I would never condemn a woman or her doctors for having an abortion in such trying circumstances.

I'm talking about "convenience store" abortion and the situation in China Atom Blitzer mentions where abortion is a routine method of rejecting responsibility for self chosen activities.

It would never have entered my head as a young man to ask a woman if she had had an abortion. If I was young now it certainly would enter my head. And if I was informed that she had had an abortion all my interest in her would vanish on the instant.

1 Reply

Is this a specious argument for pro-abortion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know