• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If anti-abortion, would you support other forms of population control?

Wan said:
Those things are certainly important, but I don't see why just because the unborn can't do those things (yet!) it means we get to kill it.
Click to expand...

The reason we get to kill it is because it is INSIDE OF AND ATTACHED TO a person's body. It is causing her a myriad of problems, some which could affect her for the rest of her life. It is causing/will cause her great pain and discomfort and could even kill her. Therefore, she gets to decide if it remains inside her or not.
 
Scrabaholic said:
The reason we get to kill it is because it is INSIDE OF AND ATTACHED TO a person's body. It is causing her a myriad of problems, some which could affect her for the rest of her life. It is causing/will cause her great pain and discomfort and could even kill her. Therefore, she gets to decide if it remains inside her or not.
Click to expand...

But being inside and attached to someone's body is not a crime. We shouldn't punish the unborn for it.
 
Scrabaholic said:
You said (bold is mine):



I replied:



YOU said to ship people who don't like your country's laws to a country more in line with their beliefs. There are people who do not like the fact that abortion is legal in the US. Should they be shipped to a country where it is not legal?

I don't know how to make it clearer. If you still don't understand, perhaps someone else can step in and explain it to you.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I got that part. Total non sequitur. no one argues abortion based on some other country's laws being better.
 
Wan said:
But being inside and attached to someone's body is not a crime. We shouldn't punish the unborn for it.
Click to expand...

It's not punishment. It's a woman deciding she does not want it inside of her body.
 
Lursa said:
Kinda random...unless you're making a joke of some kind.
Click to expand...

:) It was a joke. Just not a random one.


“Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae – in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. ​


-Ruth Bader Ginsburg



:shrug: :)
 
Scrabaholic said:
The reason we get to kill it is because it is INSIDE OF AND ATTACHED TO a person's body. It is causing her a myriad of problems, some which could affect her for the rest of her life. It is causing/will cause her great pain and discomfort and could even kill her. Therefore, she gets to decide if it remains inside her or not.
Click to expand...


Well obviously the baby is INSIDE OF AND ATTACHED TO a person's body. That is simply how the whole process works. It is not news to anybody that thats how babies are formed. The baby, or what you describe it as a sack of cells, grows into a human, if you didnt know. Which is just how you and me and everybody else that is alive and breathing was created. So what makes you think that aborting a baby is okay. People SHOULD NOT be doing what it takes to make a baby if they are not responsible enough to face a highly risked outcome. You are not wrong when you say a pregnancy can harm the mother but an abortion can harm the mother too. So to sit here and use that as a valid reason is absurd.
 
nat said:
Well obviously the baby is INSIDE OF AND ATTACHED TO a person's body. That is simply how the whole process works. It is not news to anybody that thats how babies are formed. The baby, or what you describe it as a sack of cells, grows into a human, if you didnt know. Which is just how you and me and everybody else that is alive and breathing was created. So what makes you think that aborting a baby is okay. People SHOULD NOT be doing what it takes to make a baby if they are not responsible enough to face a highly risked outcome. You are not wrong when you say a pregnancy can harm the mother but an abortion can harm the mother too. So to sit here and use that as a valid reason is absurd.
Click to expand...

From Pub Med :

The comparative safety of legal induced abortion and childbirth in the United States
CONCLUSION:
Legal induced abortion is markedly safer than childbirth. The risk of death associated with childbirth is approximately 14 times higher than that with abortion. Similarly, the overall morbidity associated with childbirth exceeds that with abortion.
Click to expand...


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22270271
 
Crovax said:
Wrong. The people who recklessly create unwanted children are the burden on society.
Click to expand...

Send women and men to a special prison for creating unwanted pregnancies, even if their birth control failed. That’ll learn’em, durn’em!

Once the little unwanted babies are born - create a baby draft that only pro-life advocates must register. Once registered, they’ll be assigned a number. Then numbers will be drawn to determine which lucky pro-lifer will receive a baby to raise until legal age. And sorry, no social assistance will be available to help raise these children.
 
nat said:
Well obviously the baby is INSIDE OF AND ATTACHED TO a person's body. That is simply how the whole process works. It is not news to anybody that thats how babies are formed. The baby, or what you describe it as a sack of cells, grows into a human, if you didnt know. Which is just how you and me and everybody else that is alive and breathing was created. So what makes you think that aborting a baby is okay. People SHOULD NOT be doing what it takes to make a baby if they are not responsible enough to face a highly risked outcome. You are not wrong when you say a pregnancy can harm the mother but an abortion can harm the mother too. So to sit here and use that as a valid reason is absurd.
Click to expand...

Gestation and delivery are many times riskier than legal abortion.

I don't care what it is, the woman has the right to have it removed from her body and I already stated why. It's HER body being put at risk. We do not prohibit lung cancer patients from having the tumour(s) removed from their lungs, even though the vast majority of them got there by the patient's own actions (smoking).

I have never called a zef a "sack of cells", so please do not lie about me again.
 
Removable Mind said:
Send women and men to a special prison for creating unwanted pregnancies, even if their birth control failed. That’ll learn’em, durn’em!

Once the little unwanted babies are born - create a baby draft that only pro-life advocates must register. Once registered, they’ll be assigned a number. Then numbers will be drawn to determine which lucky pro-lifer will receive a baby to raise until legal age. And sorry, no social assistance will be available to help raise these children.
Click to expand...

But first make them take the ones already in foster care.;)
 
Removable Mind said:
Send women and men to a special prison for creating unwanted pregnancies, even if their birth control failed. That’ll learn’em, durn’em!

Once the little unwanted babies are born - create a baby draft that only pro-life advocates must register. Once registered, they’ll be assigned a number. Then numbers will be drawn to determine which lucky pro-lifer will receive a baby to raise until legal age. And sorry, no social assistance will be available to help raise these children.
Click to expand...

Brilliant
 
Are you talking about population as in controlling the population or simply preventing unwanted pregnancy?
 
Removable Mind said:
Send women and men to a special prison for creating unwanted pregnancies, even if their birth control failed. That’ll learn’em, durn’em!

Once the little unwanted babies are born - create a baby draft that only pro-life advocates must register. Once registered, they’ll be assigned a number. Then numbers will be drawn to determine which lucky pro-lifer will receive a baby to raise until legal age. And sorry, no social assistance will be available to help raise these children.
Click to expand...

You're treating children as chattel here, and what you propose is punitive. Do we assign the children a number too?

It's also silly--unless, of course, one is not allowed to be pro-life if, say, 82 and in a nursing home or even beyond a reasonable child-rearing age.

But should we begin rounding up those who are pro-life and assigning them numbers now just in case?
 
nota bene said:
You're treating children as chattel here, and what you propose is punitive. Do we assign the children a number too?

It's also silly--unless, of course, one is not allowed to be pro-life if, say, 82 and in a nursing home or even beyond a reasonable child-rearing age.

But should we begin rounding up those who are pro-life and assigning them numbers now just in case?
Click to expand...

It seems to me many pro life people wish to treat women who have unwanted pregnancies as chattel. Some wish to force the women to gestate and give birth as if these women should punished because their birth control failed to work.

Perhaps the pro life people need to re-examine their desire to use the government force against women who want elective abortions before viabilty.

Choice allows any pregnant woman to follow her religious tenets or her conscience.
 
minnie616 said:
It seems to me many pro life people wish to treat women who have unwanted pregnancies as chattel. Some wish to force the women to gestate and give birth as if these women should punished because their birth control failed to work.

Perhaps the pro life people need to re-examine their desire to use the government force against women who want elective abortions before viabilty.

Choice allows any pregnant woman to follow her religious tenets or her conscience.
Click to expand...

:applaud Very well said, Minnie!
 
Cameron said:
My support of abortion rights is predominantly pragmatic. Unwanted children are a burden on society: our foster care and public schools systems are already underfunded and failing in many areas. Without proper care, such children are likely to grow up emotionally disturbed or with educational deficiencies or delinquent, imposing further burdens on society. I believe it was Freakanomics that posited that there was a correlation between Roe v Wade and the modern decrease in crime we have experienced since the 80s. Whether you believe that or not, it cannot be denied that dealing with children who are not wanted by their parents comes at a significant cost in an already overpopulated world.

Second, I simply do not feel that termination of a fetus — a small collection of human cells which in its earliest stages is far less complex than the trees we cut down at will or the flies we squash without a second thought, and which even in intermediate stages is still far less complex than animals we breed and slaughter for meet and clothing — is an inherently unjustifiable act.

But controversial as these opinions may be, and I know how passionately many will disagree, I am more curious to know what pro-lifers’ views are on the practical problems that anti-abortion policy presents. What alternatives policies would you support to control out-of-control population in a world where the need for human labor is becoming less and less critical, and yet more and more people are being born? Where overpopulation is already destroying our environment and creating friction between expanding cultures?
Click to expand...

The only out of control population problem are the Africans, Asians and Middle Eastern Radical Muslims...good luck controlling them.
 
nat said:
Well obviously the baby is INSIDE OF AND ATTACHED TO a person's body. That is simply how the whole process works. It is not news to anybody that thats how babies are formed. The baby, or what you describe it as a sack of cells, grows into a human, if you didnt know. Which is just how you and me and everybody else that is alive and breathing was created. So what makes you think that aborting a baby is okay. People SHOULD NOT be doing what it takes to make a baby if they are not responsible enough to face a highly risked outcome. You are not wrong when you say a pregnancy can harm the mother but an abortion can harm the mother too. So to sit here and use that as a valid reason is absurd.
Click to expand...

People have every right to enjoy sex. It's a wonderful thing, a great gift to share. Your opinion certainly should not be imposed on other women who would have to suffer the consequences to their lives, their health, their futures.

Most people...65%...do use contraception, it's just not 100% effective so accidents happen. Or what about couples that arent ready for kids yet? No sex in their marriage until they are ready?

A life is more than just breathing...some of us believe in quality of life over quantity.
 
nota bene said:
You're treating children as chattel here, and what you propose is punitive. Do we assign the children a number too?

It's also silly--unless, of course, one is not allowed to be pro-life if, say, 82 and in a nursing home or even beyond a reasonable child-rearing age.

But should we begin rounding up those who are pro-life and assigning them numbers now just in case?
Click to expand...

Demanding that women 'pay the consequences' for having sex and having to have the kid is punitive too. That's the popular pro-life saying, "she made her bed, now she has to lie in it,' or 'she has to pay the consequences for having sex,' all those reduce babies to 'punishment.'

To demand that a woman must remain pregnant against her will...by law or otherwise...is punitive.
 
minnie616 said:
It seems to me many pro life people wish to treat women who have unwanted pregnancies as chattel. Some wish to force the women to gestate and give birth as if these women should punished because their birth control failed to work.

Perhaps the pro life people need to re-examine their desire to use the government force against women who want elective abortions before viabilty.

Choice allows any pregnant woman to follow her religious tenets or her conscience.
Click to expand...

"Great minds" :)
 
Cameron said:
My support of abortion rights is predominantly pragmatic. Unwanted children are a burden on society: our foster care and public schools systems are already underfunded and failing in many areas. Without proper care, such children are likely to grow up emotionally disturbed or with educational deficiencies or delinquent, imposing further burdens on society. I believe it was Freakanomics that posited that there was a correlation between Roe v Wade and the modern decrease in crime we have experienced since the 80s. Whether you believe that or not, it cannot be denied that dealing with children who are not wanted by their parents comes at a significant cost in an already overpopulated world.

Second, I simply do not feel that termination of a fetus — a small collection of human cells which in its earliest stages is far less complex than the trees we cut down at will or the flies we squash without a second thought, and which even in intermediate stages is still far less complex than animals we breed and slaughter for meet and clothing — is an inherently unjustifiable act.

But controversial as these opinions may be, and I know how passionately many will disagree, I am more curious to know what pro-lifers’ views are on the practical problems that anti-abortion policy presents. What alternatives policies would you support to control out-of-control population in a world where the need for human labor is becoming less and less critical, and yet more and more people are being born? Where overpopulation is already destroying our environment and creating friction between expanding cultures?
Click to expand...

My support for abortion is not based on population control, so I cannot answer your question, especially without specific actual policy examples.
 
Cameron said:
My support of abortion rights is predominantly pragmatic. Unwanted children are a burden on society: our foster care and public schools systems are already underfunded and failing in many areas. Without proper care, such children are likely to grow up emotionally disturbed or with educational deficiencies or delinquent, imposing further burdens on society. I believe it was Freakanomics that posited that there was a correlation between Roe v Wade and the modern decrease in crime we have experienced since the 80s. Whether you believe that or not, it cannot be denied that dealing with children who are not wanted by their parents comes at a significant cost in an already overpopulated world.

Second, I simply do not feel that termination of a fetus — a small collection of human cells which in its earliest stages is far less complex than the trees we cut down at will or the flies we squash without a second thought, and which even in intermediate stages is still far less complex than animals we breed and slaughter for meet and clothing — is an inherently unjustifiable act.

But controversial as these opinions may be, and I know how passionately many will disagree, I am more curious to know what pro-lifers’ views are on the practical problems that anti-abortion policy presents. What alternatives policies would you support to control out-of-control population in a world where the need for human labor is becoming less and less critical, and yet more and more people are being born? Where overpopulation is already destroying our environment and creating friction between expanding cultures?
Click to expand...
Great question. My understanding of pro-life and christian stances includes opposition to birth control in any form except unlikely abstinence. Some only want to teach abstinence for sex ed. Some are pro nuclear family. They think women should be getting married and raising children predominantly as homemakers. It all adds up to somewhat reckless population growth.

I'm not with them on most of it so I cant truthfully answer your question. I cant think of any form of population control they'd support. The best answers go against some of the religions.

I'm down for compromise in a lot of stuff. Like 3rd and probably 2nd trimester abortions should be extremely difficult or illegal to do. If it's illegal, youd have to incentivize bringing the child to term and caring for it. That's another bs aspect of the religious right. They are often pro-birth but once the baby is born dont give a ****. If a single mother cant afford the baby what is supposed to happen? If they are a hot mess and cant find a husband to help care for the illegitimate child, what are they supposed to do?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom