|
On April 28 2011 11:28 Imres wrote:
So you don't see the difference between an human being and an human... and you think that a women hasn't the right to control her body, congrats!
Um what? Liberty is a mutual philosophy. Perhaps you should review Natural Law. No one has a right to kill another individual who is not a threat to your life or your property. Just because a woman doesn't want to be responsible, doesn't give her a right to extinguish anothers life. Sure, she has a right to evict and put the baby up for adoption, but not to kill.
|
On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:
You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property.
Not entirely true, and is entirely based on what state you live in. Florida for instance this is 100% not true.
|
I think this is reasonable. 20 weeks is about 5 months. A woman will miss 4 periods during this time, and there are plenty of time for a well-informed decision.
I didn't read it carefully, but I hope a woman can still legally abort after 20 weeks if there is a PROFOUND reason.
|
On April 28 2011 11:01 lagmaster wrote:
In addition, doctors are required to tell women that abortions may cause infertility and that fetuses can experience pain at 20 weeks or earlier.
When you can't think of a coherent argument against it, start making shit up.
|
My general idea:
Although abortion is a huge deal, and I personally don't even know what I think is right or wrong since both sides have great arguments, it is simply not a political issue, it's a moral issue. It's up to the mother, not the politician.
|
On April 28 2011 11:28 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. Sure, but I dont view a fetus as being alive, so abortion isnt killing in my eyes.
Yet even a fetus has a heartbeat, hard to deny it's a living thing.
|
On April 28 2011 11:32 Abysus wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:
You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. Not entirely true, and is entirely based on what state you live in. Florida for instance this is 100% not true.
Even under Castle Doctrine you cannot just kill anyone who happens to step on your property.
|
On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill.
I have to disagree with your approach - the fetus is not invading the person's property - it is invading the person. The woman's right of self-ownership gives her authority over her body and everything within it.
By your logic, a woman being raped has no right to kill her assailant because her life is probably not in danger. Not that it matters, but an unwanted pregnancy/birth when summed over 38 weeks could easily be as psychologically damaging and physically uncomfortable as a rape. The woman has a right to intervene forcefully. If the only option is to kill she may do so.
|
On April 28 2011 11:33 Essentia wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:28 Mastermind wrote:On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. Sure, but I dont view a fetus as being alive, so abortion isnt killing in my eyes. Yet even a fetus has a heartbeat, hard to deny it's a living thing.
Yes it's living but is it concious? self aware? capable of feeling ANYTHING?
|
In many developed countries, there are stricter limits on the time period of allowed abortion, so this law has basis not just in the US: + Show Spoiler +12 weeks (Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Georgia, Greece, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Rep., Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Norway, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Ukraine, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Yugoslavia), 13 weeks (Italy), 14 weeks (Austria, Belgium, Cambodia, Germany, Hungary, and Romania), 18 weeks (Sweden), viability (Netherlands and to some extent the United States), and 24 weeks (Singapore and Britain) Some countries, like Canada, China (Mainland only) and Vietnam have no legal limit on when an abortion can be performed.
^above quote from wikipedia, sourced from:
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2405698.pdf
|
On April 28 2011 11:33 Essentia wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:28 Mastermind wrote:On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. Sure, but I dont view a fetus as being alive, so abortion isnt killing in my eyes. Yet even a fetus has a heartbeat, hard to deny it's a living thing.
I hope you're vegan... 'cause killing living things seems to be one of the greatest passion of mankind
|
On April 28 2011 11:28 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. Sure, but I dont view a fetus as being alive, so abortion isnt killing in my eyes.
How could you possibly prove that natural rights are only relevant outside the womb. Birth is such arbitrary dividing line. Does a child delivered by C-Section never gain its rights?
On April 28 2011 11:34 jello_biafra wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:33 Essentia wrote:On April 28 2011 11:28 Mastermind wrote:On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. Sure, but I dont view a fetus as being alive, so abortion isnt killing in my eyes. Yet even a fetus has a heartbeat, hard to deny it's a living thing. Yes it's living but is it concious? self aware? capable of feeling ANYTHING?
A fetus is conscious of plenty of things - it feels, responds, and adapts to its environment. Self aware? Babies may not realize that they are whole, separate beings until much later than you seem to think (a year or more iirc). Self-awareness is not a criteria for the right to life.
|
Don't see how debate on abortion is out of place in this thread at all... 20 weeks is 5 months? I think thats reasonableish, should probably be a little later but what's important is there's some kind of exception for extenuating circumstances where it was impossible for the woman to find out/get the abortion earlier, idk i'm sure there's a way it could happen. But as a general rule i think super late term abortions should be illegal, they're pretty unnecessary and at that point the baby is pretty close to what its like when its born so its pretty brutal.
They definitely shouldn't go any further than this, a ban/heavy restrictions on abortion would be a horrible idea don't get me wrong. What i don't like about this law is the part where the government is making the doctors have to tell the woman that it might cause infertility or pain to the baby, i mean if these things are medically relevant to the woman the doctors have to tell her anyway and if they aren't than the doctors shouldn't have to say it.
Similar clauses like waiting periods and/or laws that make a woman physically look at an ultrasound before deciding (those exist) are ridiculous, nobody takes this kind of decision (its surgery) lightly or without thinking it through and the govt forcing women to be ethically guilt tripped after previously making the decision they know is right for them is cruel and unnecessary. Especially if they're a rape victim or something like that.
Planned parenthood should definitely be invested in considering how much money it saves us in future welfare payments/govt aid/etc, plus its an important service for poor people (often single moms) that don't have time between 3 minimum wage jobs to take care of kids or make perfect decisions or whatever other important shit they help with at planned parenthood.
|
On April 28 2011 11:33 jello_biafra wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:01 lagmaster wrote:
In addition, doctors are required to tell women that abortions may cause infertility and that fetuses can experience pain at 20 weeks or earlier.
When you can't think of a coherent argument against it, start making shit up.
Oh, I missed that. I actually didn't read carefully into what information was being provided. That's so unbelievably dumb.
|
Ah the greatest hypocrisy of mankind. Whether you're pro-abortion or against abortion, you're essnetially making a judgement of what you believe is alive or not. When did man get the right to decide what is alive? Are we gods now?
<3 the old man regulating a woman's womb comment.
|
On April 28 2011 11:28 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. Sure, but I dont view a fetus as being alive, so abortion isnt killing in my eyes.
So you don't see the difference between an human being and an human... and you think that a women hasn't the right to control her body, congrats
Any distinction between a fetus and you or me also applies to either newborn babies (not really 'human' yet mentally) or siamese twins (not physically independent).
The best option (for respecting both the mother's right to her body and the fetus's right to its body) is the "evict but don't kill" ie you can remove the fetus/embryo prematurely, but you must not kill it for the purposes of removing it. (ie I can have a starving person removed from my kitchen, and let him die in the street, but I can't chop him into bits him if he poses no threat and I can easily remove him without killing him).
Ah the greatest hypocrisy of mankind. Whether you're pro-abortion or against abortion, you're essnetially making a judgement of what you believe is alive or not. When did man get the right to decide what is alive? Are we gods now?
When we started punishing people who killed things, instead of waiting for God to smite them, then we had to decide what was "alive"* and what wasn't.
*alive here = worthy of punishing one who destroys it, even if they "own" it. (even vegans kill plants which are alive in a biological sense)
The issue is what makes someone worthy of those human protections.
Mental status? (includes some apes/dolphins, can exclude newborns and some handicappped, and possibly sleeping people)
Physical independence (excludes siamese twins... and includes all species)
"Feeling"..type of mental status that is even looser (can arguably include plants and even computer operating systems)
"Life"..LOW standard (includes bacteria... may exclude sterile people or those who don't plan on having kids)
etc.
|
On April 28 2011 11:34 gogogadgetflow wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. I have to disagree with your approach - the fetus is not invading the person's property - it is invading the person. The woman's right of self-ownership gives her authority over her body and everything within it. By your logic, a woman being raped has no right to kill her assailant because her life is probably not in danger. Not that it matters, but an unwanted pregnancy/birth when summed over 38 weeks could easily be as psychologically damaging and physically uncomfortable as a rape. The woman has a right to intervene forcefully. If the only option is to kill she may do so.
Notice I used the word threat. If you feel your life is threatened, then yes you have the right to defend yourself with all the force which you view is necessary. However, a fetus is not a threat to her life, and she made the decision to have sex which has the possibility of incurring a new human life. She has no choice in a matter of rape. Equivocation is unwarranted as the two scenarios are completely different. Now, if the woman's life is in danger, then yes, she has every right to kill the fetus. Natural Law stipulates that your body is your own property, just as the fruit of your body (labor) is your property. They are one and the same. If the woman has the right to kill because someone happens to be on her property, the equivocation is that anyone who steps on anothers property, but yet, does not put anyone in any danger or is no threat (like for example a child walking onto your front lawn to grab a football) you may kill. Liberty entails mutual rights. The fetus has every right to life as does the Mother.
|
United States7483 Posts
In the second trimester (after around 15 weeks) the fetus starts being able to feel things, at which point it meets the definition of sentience. 20 weeks is fairly reasonable, it's not as if they're banning abortion completely or even restricting it only to early abortion. It's basically just saying "no late abortions," which seems okay.
I'd have a serious problem if they tried to ban abortion, but this seems like an okay restriction, there's scientific reasoning for it.
|
On April 28 2011 11:34 jello_biafra wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2011 11:33 Essentia wrote:On April 28 2011 11:28 Mastermind wrote:On April 28 2011 11:16 Wegandi wrote:On April 28 2011 11:09 gogogadgetflow wrote:
You can't be banned for arguing for/against abortion as long as you keep it civil and substantive. No need to paint tl negatively.
For now the solution for Hoosiers is simple. Leave the state if you need an abortion. On one hand 20 weeks is plenty of time for an abortion, so the law is at least moderate in that respect. Ethically, however, I support the right of a woman to expel the fetus at any stage of pregnancy; because the baby lives inside the woman its right to life is forfeit. Whether or not it can feel pain is a non-factor (legally - I myself would consider such a factor but I cannot force someone else to). No one has the right to kill another individual unless your life is in danger. Yes, you have the right to evict, but not kill, which means the woman can have (induce) early pregnancies and put the child up for adoption. You do not have a right to kill a trespasser on your property who is not a danger to you, your family, or your property. I really do not like to get into this debate, because both sides are pretty well set in their views. My personal view is pretty moderate -- a woman has a right to evict, but not kill. Sure, but I dont view a fetus as being alive, so abortion isnt killing in my eyes. Yet even a fetus has a heartbeat, hard to deny it's a living thing. Yes it's living but is it concious? self aware? capable of feeling ANYTHING?
capable of living outside of the womb? Heartbeat doesn't make it living by that assertion a turtle heart is alive in itself even after you cut it out of the turtle becuase it beats for quite some time after. And genetically grown hearts which has been done are alive in it self how does a heartbeat constitute as living. To me one would have to have a sense of identity to be truly alive.
Mostly i wonder if the law bans late term abortions to sick mothers who will likely die with the growth inside her.
Also if you talk liberties, if the growth is nothing but fed and sequestered genetic material taking it's time up in the mother does the mother not have the right to dispose of it? After all it comes from the mother it essentially cannot exist without the mother if my arm essentially is rendered useless from an accident do i not have the right to cut it off? Mostly just wondering if this bans abortions for the sake of the mothers health, becuase after 20 weeks that's usually the 2 categories they will fall in, those doing it for health reasons to the mother and those doing it becuase of health reasons to the growth.
|
Stages of fetal development by weeks:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002398.htm
FWIW, fetuses can live outside the womb at approximately 22-25 weeks. Althoguh generally they will have some degree of mental difficulties. 28+ is more normal since there is huge amount of neurological development around the 24-32 week period.
I find it pretty funny that women are allowed to kill off a fetus but people aren't allowed to kill cats and dogs or other pets lest you get put in jail and railed on by PETA for example.
(again, both are living, can feel pain, have heartbeats, but don't have "conscious" thought or rather self aware).
Shrug.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
