I Love Abortion: Implying Otherwise Accomplishes Nothing for Women's Rights

I will explain it to you but I doubt you would accept it.

To put it simply. I don't believe an embryo, blastocyt, fetus or any is a human.. It's a potential human that given the right conditions will develop into human but just because it has that potential doesn't mean that it is.

It is like the analogy of is an acorn an oak tree? If I collect a lot of acorns am I felling down a forest?

Where does something pass from just being an unfeeling unthinking clump of cells to being a human I am not exactly certain but I would be willing to put restrictions on late term abortions and even second trimester abortions.

My biggest problem though with banning abortions though isn't so much a philosophical issue but a practical issue. Abortions will happen even if abortion is outlawed. They happened in the US when it was, they happen in countries now where abortion is outlawed. Would we rather have them done by underground medicine that puts more women lives at risk or done openly with the safeties and control of modern medicine?

Like those who identify themselves as "pro-life" ideally I would like to see a world where there are no more abortions, at the minimum it is a very stressful procedure that would be better avoided, but I don't think criminalizing it is the way to go. To end abortion we should be ending the reasons why women think they need to get them.

 

1. I can't suggest too strongly that a "fetus" is more valuable than an acorn. That's going to give Batman a conniption, I know.

2. Whether legal or illegal the end-result is the same for the fetal child-- death. I have no compunction against making abortion illegal... now there is a real choice for a woman to make: risk her own health on an illegal medical procedure or give birth to that fetal child. This is not the 1950s when unwed mothers were shamed. It would be a heroic thing to carry a child to term and give it over to an adoptive family-- just as it is cowardly and selfish to terminate it.

 

But how many more abortions happen because they're safe, convenient, and essentially free? A lot of people who disagree with your first point about a fetus not being a human would like to see abortion illegal because the total number of people harmed will likely be much lower.

 

I don't think you understand the analogy and/or trying to draw Batman Jones out but I will leave that for you two to sort out.

Your own statement shows that shame still is an issue when you use terms like "cowardly" and "selfish". That shows that rather than looking to have a positive discussion regarding practical ways to end abortion you are more focused on shaming and looking for legal sanctions. The fact is that abortions happen even when they are outlawed and like Prohibition I highly doubt returning to a situation where abortion is outlawed will end the practice.

 

I will agree with you that very likely much more abortions happen with abortion legal than illegal. I don't think there are statics out there regarding how much more but I will agree to the point. Just to note abortions aren't free.

The point about the illegality though is that they still will happen even if they are illegal but in a way that is much more dangerous for all concerned. As with the example of Prohibition almost always when something occurs outside of the law it is going to cause more problems than when it is legal and regulated.

Abortion is an issue that needs to be addressed on the basis of society as a whole. Just outlawing it won't end it. What though seems to be call from the "pro-life" side though is a strategy of shame, intimidation and outlawing rather than a strategy that addresses the reasons why women feel they need abortions.

According to recent data abortions and teen pregnancy are at record lows, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/08/us-teen-pregnancy-idUSTRE8171J020120208, so I would say the strategy of sex-education and increased access to contraception is working. I think if we continue with that along with policies that support single and poor mothers we can bring down abortion more. I would add to that reforming adoption laws in the US would help also.

 

I understand it; I just feel the need to point out the shortcomings of analogies because they don't extend to every detail. In your analogy, the acorn is not yet an oak so it doesn't deserve the protections of an oak. I get that. I've tossed a lot of acorns in my time but I've never felled an oak tree...

I don't prefer to focus the language that way but if you do the wrong or self-centered thing it is impossible not to be critical. There is no practical way to end abortion; it will take inspiration on the part of individuals to see value where it is hard to see and easy to dismiss.

 

There is no way to end a practice that people want to do. There are still thefts, murders, rapes, etc. That is not a legitimate argument, unless you would argue that murder should be legalized, lest we have a law that is not 100% followed. Whether or not abortions would be 100% eliminated should not be a consideration in whether or not they can be made illegal, because it is a silly standard that is not applied to any other action or substance.

 

I'm okay with legal abortions, but I think this woman is cookoo or writing to incite a response.

I consider 3rd trimester abortions to be selfish and irresponsible. 2nd trimester is on the borderline. I just want a little consideration to go in the abortionee's mind before she crosses into that grey area. Abort it as quick and soon as possible, or decide to give it up for adoption when things start to move inside you.

If that's misogynist then I'm a stupid stupid man.

 

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/AvF1Q3UidWM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Don't know if this has been posted, but this is awesome!

 

You have to weigh the considerations of the consequences of moving something underground versus having it legal and is a factor regarding whether to outlaw many things given that such substances or behavior will persists at some level. Prohibition is the classic example.

In the case of murder yes murders happen but whether legal or illegal murder is bad in all situations. In the case of abortion we know for a fact that when abortion was illegal many, if not most (again I don't know if there are statistics) ended up injuring or killing the woman. Being an underground procedure removes any legal safeguards to the procedure.

Granted that abortion opponents consider abortion to be equal to murder but it is obvious that our society as a whole does not. Society as a whole though considers murder (for specificity the willful killing of human being out of the womb) to be a crime.

In my opinion just because you feel that something should be legalized doesn't mean you should embrace it or even condone it but recognize that there are negative consequences to outlawing it.

 

So the question I ask is, what should be the cut off month for abortion?
1-2 months? 3-4 months? 5-6 months? 7-8 months? Or 9 months?

Your argument states that, for arguments sake, that if a woman decides that during labour she no longer wants the baby, and calls for an abortion...then she should be allowed to abort the birth of her child; oops, sorry foetus.

Just as the head is coming out, she cries out that she wants an abortion...what then?

When does aborting a birth become taking a life?

Answer this question please.

 

And should the father have a say in the matter, it is 50% his?