[W:183]Let's have a real discussion about abortion

[Patriotic Voter]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

I suppose that ends the debate, everyone. Good job, Dayton.

Thank God Dayton finally admitted it. I always thought there is no way he ever will, even though that fact has always been crystal clear.

It does not make any sense. Sex education has been mandator statewide a long time, not just my school district, so I know all kids in Dayton learn everything about it.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

Simply trying to point out that in some matters doctors opinion regarding a medical issue cannot be trusted.

How does this ^^ relate to your assertion that “life and death decisions should be made as cold bloodedly as humanly possible”?

 

[Lursa]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

There you go. Good of you to restate Lursa and Blue Donkey's positions.

Not my position...please answer my question tho. Why didnt you?

Rale Bulgarian just reiterated it as well.

 

[Binary_Digit]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

After countless petty arguments that break down into personal attacks in almost every abortion thread, we are long overdue for real, constructive discussions here. That means no matter how you feel about every pregnant citizen's right to have a legal abortion, you must avoid letting emotions rule and totally ignore the facts. Emotions are great, but facts always come first. If your opinions are based on emotions, they are worthless because there are no facts to support them. Yes, I am talking to the anti-choicers here, but pro-choicers have to do their part too. On both sides, the rule is, "If you can't prove it, you're wrong."

With all of that said, let's begin. The United States Constitution is very clear that zygotes, blastocysts, embryos, and fetuses have no rights and all girls and women have the rights to privacy, bodily autonomy, and lifestyle choices. This can't be denied. Also undeniable are the definitions of murder and homicide, which have always been limited to killing born humans for malicious reasons in both English dictionaries and books about law. So the abortion debate is not about if the right to have abortions does exist, but everything else - sociology, biology, maternity, crimes, and personal finance.

I am neither for nor against. I have already declared that I find the premise of abortion being a juridical one and one about "baby vs fetus" rather misguided and counterproductive.

Abortion should not be a political issue. Handing over the right to regulate biological functions to the government will have disastrous effects on society. Whether it is a totalitarian ban on abortion or a State funded breeding program does not matter. Government should stay out of our bodies.

I think that Pro Choicers as well as Pro Lifers agree that it would be better if no one had to have an abortion. The goal should thus be to create a society where sexual responsibility is incentivised.

Philosophical abstraction about whether abortion is murder or self-defense can be fun, but such discussion should remain philosophical and never be politicised. Politicians who want to regulate abortion rights do not really care about the unborn. Some of them are just imposing their own religious beliefs on the rest of society and most of them are just after maximising their own power since they get a kick from controlling others. Pro Choice politicians are the same; they do not really care about "women's rights" as much as they lust for control.

Abortion is an individual choice and a medical subject. Thus it should be up to each individual themselves to make the decision and up to to each indivudal abortion clinic to set their own limits and rules.

I really do not understand why Americans are so obsessed with this issue. Considering the whole notion of individual liberty that the nation was founded on, it strikes me as rather bizarre that America is the Western country most obsessed with abortion. Of course, it probably has its roots in religion.

The way I see it, the entire abortion argument comes down to whether or not it's a person. Everything else is a distracting side-discussion. Pro-choicers argue it's my body while pro-lifers argue it's a baby's body. Pro-choicers argue it's a private medical procedure while pro-lifers argue it's murdering a child. Central to everyone's position is whether or not they consider it a person. This debate will continue to rage as long as people continue to disagree on that point. The emotions, straw manning, and name calling usually come out when that topic is abandoned in favor of the distracting side-discussions (you just want to control women, you just want to murder babies, etc.).

 

[Dacke]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

You are absolutely correct that pro-choicers want to reduce the number of abortions, starting with teaching girls and boys responsibility. It seems to me anti-choicers, despite saying otherwise, oppose mandatory sex education in public and private schools and health teachers preaching abstinence, not the parents.

Sex-ed is a failure and waste of both time and money. Teachers are not parents and should not be forced to take on the responsibility of parenting other people's children. Furthermore, there is - in my opinion - something highly perverted about the State teaching children about sex. It just makes me gag. Here in Sweden there are even talks of incorporate sex-ed as early as in kindergarten.

No student takes sex-ed seriously and most teachers are incredibly awkward and uncomfortable with teaching it.

But they are the same people who claim all it takes to prevent having unwanted pregnancies id doing what kids can't learn about without having the sex education at school. So who really wants kids to be responsible? It is hypocrisy on the anti-choice side, which also insists no contraception should be free or covered by health insurance.

Ye, there is this thing called puberty that cannot be controlled by any government no matter how powerful. Teenagers will get horny and with poor guidance, poor decisions will be made.

It would indeed be reasonable for Pro Lifers to be in favour of contraceptives and birth control, but amazingly enough many of them want these banned too. I figure this is because they simply cannot accept that some people are having sex for the sole sake of pleasure because their own religion tells them sex is for reporduction only. In this regard, they are Anti.Happiness which in extent means they are Anti-Life (because life is about maximising individual happiness).

Pro-choicers OTOH fully understand short of abstinence, only spaying and neutering are 100% effective, and abstaining from sex for life is wrong after some of those kids get married. So they always insist sex education needs to be mandatory and improved while making it clear that is only part of the picture to prevent unwanted pregnancies from happening.

If an unwanted pregnancy occurs anyway, who will be responsible for letting it happen? Evengelicals say the kids and government. Cathlics say the parents and gove4rnment. Pro-choicers say the teachers and government.

If an unwanted pregnancy happens, the woman and man it concerns can find the best solution for themselves by talking to each other and involving their families too. It is not that difficult.

 

[Dacke]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

The way I see it, the entire abortion argument comes down to whether or not it's a person. Everything else is a distracting side-discussion. Pro-choicers argue it's my body while pro-lifers argue it's a baby's body. Pro-choicers argue it's a private medical procedure while pro-lifers argue it's murdering a child. Central to everyone's position is whether or not they consider it a person. This debate will continue to rage as long as people continue to disagree on that point. The emotions, straw manning, and name calling usually come out when that topic is abandoned in favor of the distracting side-discussions (you just want to control women, you just want to murder babies, etc.).

I find such abstractions only to fulfill a purpose in philosophical debate. It is an especially interesting topic for Libertarians since NAP and Self-Ownership enters a very blurry greyzone.

Abortion, however, has no place in a juridical/political context. It is insane to hand over that power to the government.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

I find such abstractions only to fulfill a purpose in philosophical debate. It is an especially interesting topic for Libertarians since NAP and Self-Ownership enters a very blurry greyzone.

Abortion, however, has no place in a juridical/political context. It is insane to hand over that power to the government.

The debate about it being a person is also a legal one...and that is the one that actually affects it's availability to women.

 

[Dacke]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

The debate about it being a person is also a legal one...and that is the one that actually affects it's availability to women.

That is why I am saying it should not even be politicised in the first place.

 

[Dayton3]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

Thank God Dayton finally admitted it. I always thought there is no way he ever will, even though that fact has always been crystal clear.

It does not make any sense. Sex education has been mandator statewide a long time, not just my school district, so I know all kids in Dayton learn everything about it.

What do you mean "in Dayton"? I've never even been to Ohio if that is the city you're thinking about.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

That is why I am saying it should not even be politicised in the first place.

Canada stays out of it. There are no abortion restrictions there. And they make it work

 

[Dayton3]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

How does this ^^ relate to your assertion that “life and death decisions should be made as cold bloodedly as humanly possible”?

If doctors cannot be relied on to make unbiased decisions or give unbiased advice on matters of life and death, then obvious a cold blooded analytical methodology should be employed that stamps out as much emotional input as possible.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

That is why I am saying it should not even be politicised in the first place.

Hmm. I may agree but the issue is pretty well split between party lines. And because it's a highly emotional issue AND a legal one, that enables the easy (dishonest IMO) politicization in order to get votes AND attempt to change the law

 

[Lursa]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

If doctors cannot be relied on to make unbiased decisions or give unbiased advice on matters of life and death, then obvious a cold blooded analytical methodology should be employed that stamps out as much emotional input as possible.

Then who can?

And what criteria, if not medical criteria for that newborn, should they be using for the decision?

 

[Dacke]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

Canada stays out of it. There are no abortion restrictions there. And they make it work

Yup. Works pretty well where I am too. No politician even ever mentions it.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

If doctors cannot be relied on to make unbiased decisions or give unbiased advice on matters of life and death, then obvious a cold blooded analytical methodology should be employed that stamps out as much emotional input as possible.

By politicians? Nothing could be more biased

 

[cpwill]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

The way I see it, the entire abortion argument comes down to whether or not it's a person. Everything else is a distracting side-discussion. Pro-choicers argue it's my body while pro-lifers argue it's a baby's body. Pro-choicers argue it's a private medical procedure while pro-lifers argue it's murdering a child. Central to everyone's position is whether or not they consider it a person. This debate will continue to rage as long as people continue to disagree on that point. The emotions, straw manning, and name calling usually come out when that topic is abandoned in favor of the distracting side-discussions (you just want to control women, you just want to murder babies, etc.).

I wish I could like this post a hundred times. That is exactly correct.

 

[Dayton3]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

By politicians? Nothing could be more biased

politicians are predictable.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

politicians are predictable.

And completely biased. They serve interest groups. Would you like politicians to make medical decisions for you?

 

[Dayton3]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

And completely biased. They serve interest groups. Would you like politicians to make medical decisions for you?

As long as I get to choose the politicians, yes.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

The way I see it, the entire abortion argument comes down to whether or not it's a person. Everything else is a distracting side-discussion. Pro-choicers argue it's my body while pro-lifers argue it's a baby's body. Pro-choicers argue it's a private medical procedure while pro-lifers argue it's murdering a child. Central to everyone's position is whether or not they consider it a person. This debate will continue to rage as long as people continue to disagree on that point. The emotions, straw manning, and name calling usually come out when that topic is abandoned in favor of the distracting side-discussions (you just want to control women, you just want to murder babies, etc.).

The emotions come out when so-called pro-lifers (who I think are really anti-choicers) call abortion "murdering infants" despite the obvious fact no English dictionary calls it that. If they would stop playing those stupid word games, only facts would determine what is moral*because pro-choicers based their claims on factual information. It is a FACT that legally, embryos and fetuses are not people. It is a FACT that only born humans have any legal rights in the U.S. Constitution. It is a FACT that only born humans under a year old can be victims of infanticide. On the pro-choice side, emotions come into play when the argument is about why elective abortions must be legal, not just those that are medically necessary.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

As long as I get to choose the politicians, yes.

But you dont. You are only one vote. And now you want politicians to make your medical decisions. Pelosi. Schumer.



Careful what you ask for

 

[Dayton3]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

But you dont. You are only one vote.

don't try to limit me so much.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

If doctors cannot be relied on to make unbiased decisions or give unbiased advice on matters of life and death, then obvious a cold blooded analytical methodology should be employed that stamps out as much emotional input as possible.

You seem to not understand a doctor’s duty is to be biased. Rational, realistic, and logical too. A doctor must often consider his/her patient’s best interests beyond whatever their presenting medical condition is. That can include pain management, possible palliative care, quality of life issues, etc., and even counseling family members about available assistance for them, helping to care for their loved one.

Cold blood has no place in the medical community.

 

[vegas giants]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

don't try to limit me so much.

I see. You want 1000 votes. How very fascist

 

[weaver2]

Re: Let's have a real discussion about abortion

flat out lie

Good God are conservatives still telling themselves that in Virginia docs are killing newborns. For every idiot that posts "in the state of virginia,(sic) generally accepted to be part of the union, killing a baby that is born is now considered to be legal by the governor there." There are three people that understand the law and have told the idiot they are wrong. Why do they keep posting it.