TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- So my friend is driving his ex girlfiend up to DC for an abortion.
Pages (7): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 »

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Deeply flawed yes, but so are the opposed arguments. Are you suggesting that any human would rationally choose to grow up in a family devoid of love?

+1

I believe that abortion should be available to women, however I think there should be a few restrictions.

I don't really care to go into details on my opinion at the moment, however, I must say that "giving the unborn baby the option to choose life" is a shitty reason to let the 'baby' live.

First of all, it is not a concious thinker, and is no way able to decide whether life is a positive or negative choice, and is unable to decide until it is far too late.

In my opinion though, choosing for a child to bring it into a loveless, unwanting, possibly abusive, neglective environment is, in my opinion, worse on the parents than to abort the life in the first place.

i'd say if the woman is carrying a child, its her choice what she wants to do with it..

and keeping the population down is clearly important

quote:

Originally posted by astroboy To me robbing someone of "choice" is not a problem in itself. The problem is that in not giving someone a choice with regard to their own life you may be forcing them to undergo an experience that is contrary to their will. A fetus has no will, it only has the potential to develop into something that has a will - a "reasonable creature in being". If the choice involved is something like circumcision, this involves pre-emptively making a decision that will permanently place a reasonable creature in being into a condition that he may not have chosen for himself had he the choice. Here robbing the creature of choice has caused it to undergo an experience against its will, for this reason the removal of choice or free will is wrong in this case. In killing a fetus you are not forcing any reasonable creature in being to undergo any experience, let alone one contrary to its will.

thaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaank you.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa +1 I believe that abortion should be available to women, however I think there should be a few restrictions. I don't really care to go into details on my opinion at the moment, however, I must say that "giving the unborn baby the option to choose life" is a shitty reason to let the 'baby' live. First of all, it is not a concious thinker, and is no way able to decide whether life is a positive or negative choice, and is unable to decide until it is far too late. In my opinion though, choosing for a child to bring it into a loveless, unwanting, possibly abusive, neglective environment is, in my opinion, worse on the parents than to abort the life in the first place.

i couldnt have say it better myself, abortion should be an option

abortion as an intelligent option is all well & good, but it shouldn't be used as a secondary contraception. If someones stupid enough not to use any protection or at least be careful (i mean there is the morning after pill too to be safe) then they deserve 18 years of financial commitment.

I deem anything after the first couple of weeks of the second trimester as human and therefore they shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion. To me, it's a fundamental disagreement at what constitutes human which causes the huge debate. The reason that the argument is never resolved is because it's almost impossible to alter someone's definition of human.

Damn, I do tend to write long posts

quote:

Originally posted by astroboy There is ofcourse the problem of defining will and intelligence to comprehend it's environment or what it is undergoing. My stance is that humans have special rights with regards to their will (as opposed to animals) as a result of their intelligence and capacity to comprehend the experiences they undergo. As far as I'm aware for a foetus in the first trimester there is little or no higher brain activity...

Yeah, I think that's the main problem here: the definition of concepts such as will and intelligence, and topics related to philosophy of mind and Being in general.

In the end, the difference between our opinions is a subtle one, and it all comes down to the interpretation of that little brain activity you mentioned that bothers me. Summarising my views on this, I'd consider a foetus a Dasein-like creature¹ in a Heideggerian sense, and therefore, can be subject of a Kantian-like morality... but I admit this is not, at all, the only possible view on this issue (reason why I'm clearly outnumbered here ).

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Well that's quite an assumption. If a tomato happens to roll off the cutting board when I'm reaching for the knife am I to assume it has a will to escape being cut?

Well, there's nothing in the structure of a tomato that convinces me that it might have any reasoning one day. A foetus, on the other hand, usually becomes a person.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Also, the level of development is pretty important here. I doubt we'll see a blastula exhibing any behavior that could be conceivably interpreted as "defending itself" anytime soon.

Indeed... but, here, I found an interesting chart:


(taken from Wikipedia on "Abortion").

The 4th week is prior to the first missed menstrual period, and its the development starting at the 5th week that worries me:

5th week

• A notochord forms in the center of the embryonic disk.
  
• A neural groove (future spinal cord) forms over the notochord with a brain bulge at one end.
  
• Heart tubes begin to fuse.
  

• The embryo measures 4 mm (1/8 inch) in length and begins to curve into a C shape.
  
• Somites, the divisions of the future vertebra, form.
  
• The heart bulges, further develops, and begins to beat in a regular rhythm.
  
• Branchial arches, grooves which will form structures of the face and neck, form.
  
• The neural tube closes.
  
• The ears begin to form as otic pits.
  
• Arm buds and a tail are visible.
  

quote:

Originally posted by Sunsnail Fetuses defending themselves? Seems interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira I've spent an hour writing this so I'm a bit in a hurry...

Holy mother Christ I believe it. I've successfully begat an intelligent c0r thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira A women does not have a foetus in the same way she has a liver, or a heart. The fact that it is inside a woman's body does not grant the woman the status of saying that it's her body.

And under what right does the state claim ownership of a womans body. Tread really carefully here because I'm not exactly enamoured with the idea of being a baby-farm with no rights.
Better yet, lets solve the problem with preventative measures instead of this and reduce things like abortion to being a rare medical procedure used in emergencies. So, you take this male contraceptive pill or be fitted with an implant which has slow release contraceptive and we'll avoid the whole problem of accidents.
Better yet, lets start up a licencing scheme for people to have kids.
We'll do a full family background history of heart disease, diabetes, MS and anything else, bit of testing for drugs, alcoholism and genetic defects and if you make the grade you get to use your nuts, if you dont, the state can have you spayed because its not quite the same as having a liver or heart, theyre a vestigal organ at best and you'll be a perfectly functional and hard working member of society.

Do you see where this is leading?

quote:

And, as for the mother, it's not a matter of being overly optimistic, but it's reality: you can't predict one's future.

Medical technology has come a ways to the point where they can pick up a fair amount of problems in late stages which will affect the quality of life of someone born with them. Life is fairly hard enough as it is without being handicapped and we havent even started on social upbringing which the child may be being brought up in.
Unwanted kids face just the same challenges as a handicapped kid, theyre so far behind the 8-ball from the start its just not worth it, even from a moral perspective which I dont really want to touch on.
Because ultimately, some stupid politician is going to draw a line and my faith in governments to maintain roads is bad enought without having one of them, who are essentially elected because theyre popular, rather than educated or competent, to decide our reproductive futures.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov It depends entirely on circumstance in my opinion. How it happened, how far along she is, etc. I agree that it should never be an immediate fall-back option, but I believe there are cases that warrant it.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith And under what right does the state claim ownership of a womans body. ...

There's no right for the state for do that, the same way I'm claiming the woman has no right to claim ownership over the foetus' body

Actually, the state is not even part of the argument, why is it popping up every now and then?

I don't understand. Why didn't he just push her down a flight of stairs when she wasn't looking? Sometimes the simplest of methods are the most effective - and rewarding.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike I don't understand. Why didn't he just push her down a flight of stairs when she wasn't looking? Sometimes the simplest of methods are the most effective - and rewarding.

He tried getting her drunk and he tried feeding her copious amounts of aspirin as well as a few other d.i.y. remedies for miscarriages (all of which she did consent to) but to no avail. Trust me, he already tried the fundamentals

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Well, there's nothing in the structure of a tomato that convinces me that it might have any reasoning one day. A foetus, on the other hand, usually becomes a person.

What something may become (with help from a woman's body, not on its own) in the future is precisely what we're seeking to avoid with an abortion here. But when we're dealing with the existence (or not) of rights and, in particular, the rights a foetus has now, not the rights it might usually develop to the point of having.

quote:

Like mentioned earlier in this thread, there's no clear cut definition as to when an embryo becomes a "living being", so to speak, but these features I stressed convince me that there is something going on, and I'd be cautious about how I'd define such being.

Well, we'll just have to do the best we can then, won't we?

quote:

Synapses are what form the overwhelming number of connections between nerves. Since the functions of the brain depend almost exclusively on the ability of nerve cells to communicate with each other, synapses are also key to understanding the brain. . . . The cells that will eventually be part of the cerebral cortex [the higher brain, the foundation of human consciousness] begin forming in the seven-week embryo. . . . They migrate to positions in what will eventually be the cortex, where they build up in layers. . . . Before synapses are formed, the fetal brain is just a collection of nerve cells. The fetus is incapable of awareness or volition. . . . [The] burst of synapse formation [between 25 and 32 weeks gestation] marks the period during which the brain is transformed from a collection of individual cells into a connected machine capable of carrying out human thought. . . . [B]efore the wiring up of the cortex, the fetus is simply incapable of feeling anything, including pain. . . . [S]ignals may be sent by the nerves, but there is simply nothing to receive them. They stop at the brain stem for the simple reason that there is nowhere else for them to go.

Morowitz, Harold and James Trefil, The Facts of Life: Science and the Abortion Controversy (Oxford U. Press, 1992)

Prior to 25 weeks there is no biological possibility that the foetus is aware of its environment, or capable of conscious thought or feeling of any kind.

Now, look at that chart again.

quote:

But there's something that seems to be overlooked here: A women does not have a foetus in the same way she has a liver, or a heart. The fact that it is inside a woman's body does not grant the woman the status of saying that it's her body. Except for rape, there is a direct causality from the actions of both to-be-parents, so these rights you mention might need reviewing, as they seem to view pregnancy similar to the way you see a disease.

The foetus is certainly not a part of the woman's body, but it is also not entitled to free room and board in a woman's uterus for nine months and all the free nutrients, antibodies, hormones, and oxygen it wants. It would not be entitled to any of those things, even if it did have a right to life, since a right to life does not imply a right to be provided with whatever you require to live.

Of course, it's true that in most cases the creation of the foetus could have been avoided entirely rather than terminating it's development. But is that supposed to be somehow better for the foetus? Is to have never existed at all supposed to be preferable to having existed for a short time? If we accept that life is a good thing, then parents are doing the foetus a favor by letting it have a few weeks of it prior to abortion rather than abstaining and letting it have none. Of course, given that the foetus prior to the late term is incapable of thought or feeling, I tend to believe it won't have any preference on way or the other and, ergo, defers any rights it might or might not have to the woman who does have a preference.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike I don't understand. Why didn't he just push her down a flight of stairs when she wasn't looking? Sometimes the simplest of methods are the most effective - and rewarding.

quote:

Ben Folds Shes a brick and Im drowning Slowly Off the coast and Im headed Nowhere Shes a brick and Im drowning Slowly They call her name at 7:30 I pace around the parking lot Then I walk down to buy her Flowers And sell some gifts that I got Cant you see Its not me youre dying for Now shes feeling more alone Than she ever has before

quote:

Originally posted by Lira But there's something that seems to be overlooked here: A women does not have a foetus in the same way she has a liver, or a heart. The fact that it is inside a woman's body does not grant the woman the status of saying that it's her body. Except for rape, there is a direct causality from the actions of both to-be-parents, so these rights you mention might need reviewing, as they seem to view pregnancy similar to the way you see a disease.

I think both views (the view of a foetus as a live sentient being with the power of rational thought and the view of a foetus as simply another organ) are wrong.

There is nothing to suggest that a foetus has any power of self-awareness until very close to birth. Neural formation does not equate to neural functionality. A heart beat merely sustains, it does not carry any inherent sentience or emotionality with it. To argue that a foetus, with no brain activity and no self-awareness, is subject to the same rights and laws as developed adults is absurd. In fact, even children under the law are not subject to the same set of laws as adults are. The argument that a foetus has a set of rights under the law that must be observed, to me, is silly. This has been the religious argument for some time now -- that even a fertilized egg has the fundamental right to develop into a human life. Now this is treading onto some unsure moral ground, but is human tissue enough to have unalienable rights? Because by that logic, surely a vegetable-state person, who under the realm of possibilities just might awake someday, has the right for us to err on the side of its coming back to life. What about a dead person? Surely they have the same neural structure as a 5th week foetus? Just because they're on the opposite side of life, does that mean there is some line between their rights and the rights of a foetus?

Modern medicine is pretty amazing. People have been known to be brought back to life minutes after the pronouncement of death. Shouldn't we hold out hope that perhaps it is always a possibility? But instead we burn and bury bodies as a way of disposing of unwanted biotissue.

The argument will surely be made that a foetus and a dead body are not the same, and I agree. The argument to be made here is that both are not sentient beings. They both either were or could be, but at that exact moment are not. Why should the rights we bestow on the tissue of something that actually was a fully functional person differ from the way rights we bestow on the tissue of something that may, one day, become a functional person?

My point here is this:
We eat eggs regularly, but surely no one has made the argument that an egg is a fully functional chick.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira The possibility of having a poor life (both on emotional and financial grounds) exists for all of us. The difference here, and which is what I'm trying to stress is that seeing abortion as the only way out is a matter of acting in bad faith: you're already closing all the possible outcomes to the one you judge to be the most probable one.

I really don't think you understand the desperate situation of the poor. Yes, a teenage girl that lives in a 3-level in suburbia is not likely to experience this situation. But what about a 22-year old former crack addict on the streets of DC, who may or may not have a job, but already has to skip meals so that her daughter can eat?

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Resorting to reductio ad absurdum, imagine what it would be like to have a 7 year old child and then deciding you can not really raise that kid the way you think is desirable and decide to abort it.

This is what all the fuss in the argument is really about. Many conservatives in the states are eager to point to the slippery slope argument in many contexts. Gay marriage, abortion, affirmative action, etc. And while once in awhile those arguments may have some merit, that is why it is important to delineate. A foetus in the first trimester is not a sentient human life. A foetus in the third trimester very well may be. In my mind, abortion should be a valid legal option for women up until the moment a foetus is declared living, and an availability after that in exceptional circumstances (not in socio-economic ones, but in cases of fetal alcohol syndrome and the like).

quote:

Originally posted by Lira And, as for the mother, it's not a matter of being overly optimistic, but it's reality: you can't predict one's future.

I understand your point here, but I think you are the one not being realistic. I consider myself an optimist in many cases, but this is not one of them. It must be significantly easier to move from abject poverty to the middle class in Brazil, because in the United States, rags to riches stories are very rare indeed. Without an education or any economic capital, there is no social mobility in the United States, a product, no doubt, of the ever-growing gap between rich and poor in this country.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Morowitz, Harold and James Trefil, The Facts of Life: Science and the Abortion Controversy (Oxford U. Press, 1992) Prior to 25 weeks there is no biological possibility that the foetus is aware of its environment, or capable of conscious thought or feeling of any kind.

This is the credible information that my post lacked. Thanks for posting it first

Here's my take. I don't remember jack shit from the time before I was three years old. So if someone snufffed me out in that time period it wouldn't have mattered. Hell it wouldn't even matter now. I've had a good life. I've seen through the veil. I'm ready to go. Especially if it were painless.

i'm fine with abortions, keep religion out of the fucking gov't!

Re: So my friend is driving his ex girlfiend up to DC for an abortion.

quote:

Originally posted by Demoted She's a minor, and DC is coincidentally the only place in the States where a minor can have an abortion without parental intervention. He left at 11:30 this morning to go and get a Dirt Devil taken to her vagina. And I'm chuckling. Aheh heh... hooooooooo not that any of you cared or whatnot.

OMG that's terrible! if you lived here, theres a clinic almost within a 10 mile radius! by the responces looks like a lot of people "care"..

why are you laughing?

This just in! The abortion went off without a hitch supposedly. It took roughly four hours, but the bastard wannabe child (mostly comprised of satan and bed sheets) has been destroyed. Just between all of us and the hundreds of thousands of people that browse these boards, the child would have been one mentally messed up brood.

They're on their way back right now.

quote:

Originally posted by Demoted This just in! The abortion went off without a hitch supposedly. It took roughly four hours, but the bastard wannabe child (mostly comprised of satan and bed sheets) has been destroyed. Just between all of us and the hundreds of thousands of people that browse these boards, the child would have been one mentally messed up brood. They're on their way back right now.

yay.

I had no idea it took 4 hours though.

Some people believe that if you abort a fetus before the third trimester you're doing no harm. Think what you want, but it's still a life. The difference in your opinion now and your opinion later in life when you're in love and trying to start a family will possibly change. Abortion to you now means nothing. A miscarriage when you're trying to start a family means a loss of life.



At 6 weeks, the embryo is less than 1/2 inch long, and leg buds are forming. The spinal cord is visible. All 20 tiny baby teeth are present in the gums. The ears, respiratory system, and sex organs are developing. Brain waves can be detected. The heart beats at 140-150 a minute.

At 7 weeks, the child is 3/4 inch long, and can move her hands. The eyes have retina and lenses, and the muscle system is forming. The child has her own blood type, different from the mother's. Nerve cells in her brain are touching each other by means of projections. Some are connected in primitive nerve paths. 100,000 nerve cells are created every minute.

At 8 weeks, fingers are well-defined, toes are visible, and the stomach produces digestive juices. The child, now called a fetus at this stage, can swim gracefully in the amniotic sac. If her cheek is stroked, she will arch her back and throw back her arms. If her nose is tickled, she will move her head away from the stimulus. All body systems are present and all organs are in place. The outer ear begins to take shape, but will not completely form until the fifth month.

At 9 weeks, she can feel pain, and suck her thumb. If an object is placed in her hand, she can grasp it, and if her palm is stroked, she will make a fist. She can move her tongue. Every organ in her body is functioning.

At 10 weeks, the fetal heart is almost fully developed. She is 2 inches long.

At 11 weeks, the baby can make facial expressions, and even smile. She can breathe, and has fingernails. Facial features that run in the family can be recognizable. Blood cells are forming in the liver and spleen. The bone marrow produces blood cells, which also are forming the lymph glands and the thymus. Notice the developing skeleton.

At 12 weeks, the fetus is 3 inches long, and has vocal cords. Its brain is almost fully formed, and it can cry (silently, or course!). Eyelids have developed.

At 13 weeks, the fetus can squint, swallow, and make a fist.

All of her body systems are working. At 14 weeks, the mother may be able to feel her child's movements. Tiny whiskers begin to form all over the baby's body, indicating the first signs of hair. At 15 weeks, the child can savor the mother's meals, and has taste buds. Her sensory organs are formed. By the end of the first trimester, the baby can urinate, and depending on whether the child is a boy or a girl, he or she is starting to produce sperm or eggs.

At 16 weeks, the baby is 5 1/2 inches tall, and weighs 6 oz. He can grasp and kick, and has eyebrows and eyelashes. The mother may be able to feel "flutters". This is actually the child performing somersaults in her womb. The fetus is also capable of hearing very clearly.

At 17 weeks, nails can be seen. If the fetus is a female, she will already have 5 million ova inside her body--all she'll need for her entire lifetime.

Around 18 weeks, he will cover his ears if loud music is played, and shield his eyes if a doctor peers into the uterus with a light. The baby enjoys using the umbilical cord as his first toy through a series of grasps and tugs.

At 20 weeks, the mouth and lips are formed, and he can see. The child can hear and recognize his mother's voice, and could possibly survive if born at this point. He has fingerprints, and the sex organs are completely formed.

The baby also experiences REM (Rapid Eye Movement), which is a sign of dreaming. The fact that a fetus is able to dream proves that it is also capable of thinking and processing thoughts.

The unborn child is also capable of partially defending himself against infection by his own immune system.

At 24 weeks, the child has downy hair, and is covered with a waxy substance called vernix, which protects his delicate skin. Sweat glands are functioning.

i'm going to be anal and say good for you and celebrating the death of a life!!! anyhow I know a lot of you dont care much for scripture but a verse that I think of in the argument against abortion is when God says that He knows us from the womb and He created us with purpose. If you believe that mankind is born with inherent value and purpose then there is no way that you can argue that abortion is ok unless it is from rape or extinuating circumstances, not iresponsibility and carelesness!! But to most of society human individuality and worth have become simply disposable.I believe that each and every person was created with a purpose and a meaning, that fetus was created and had the potential to be a great man or woman, think of how many Einsteins, Beethovens, C.S. Lewis's, Aristotles, Jesse Owens, Wright Brothers and so many great minds and people that we have destroyed because we dont value life. Furthermore I believe that the reason I think abortion is wrong goes way beyond my religious background, i'm quite sure that even if i was an athiest or buddhist or whatever I would still find it a crime against humanity. You know abortion is getting out of control when someone thinks it would be funny to tell everyone that his friend is doing it...whatever i would never judge anyone because they have had an abortion because i'm not perfect either but there are measures and precautions one can take. I just hate to see people use it as an "easy" button.

well said MT04

Although I support unrestricted access to abortion for the first trimester and think that the Bible and Christianity are a big load of crap, I was definitely put off by the flippant and "celebratory" tone used by the thread-starter.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.