|
The Debates: Issue #2 - Abortion (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| tiesto14 |
I think Thor was right about the stem cell research....
but before i respond to this....do you wanna start a NEW debate in a NEW thread or talk about stem cell research here...u decide and lemme know |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| quote: | Originally posted by lMIlk
if i was a girl, and i were to have a retarted baby or a non-normal baby, i would definately have an abortion...please don't yell or flame me |
so would I...and i beleive there is a law on that meaning it is legal....i could be wrong but i think i have heard that before |
|
|
| Devbert |
Once I feel that this thread has come to a conclusion, I'll start up The Debatess: Issue #3 - " ".
I'd rather save the stem cell research for a new thread then discuss it full on here. Referencing is all well, but I don't think full blown debate on it should happen in this thread. |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| ok save it for another debate....i have another idea for a debate...i dunno if its good but me and my friends talked about for hours one night...the debate is = If you die would you be a organ donor....what do you think..good or bad debate/? |
|
|
| Devbert |
| I don't know if it would really make that great a discussion, because I think most people are pretty comftorable with organ donation after death. Maybe I'm wrong though. If you think it would spark up some enthusiasm, lets do it. I just doubt how many people would say "I wouldn't donate." |
|
|
| lMIlk |
| quote: | Originally posted by tiesto14
i would :D |
i would, theres no real debate about it for me, i mean, its goin to do more use to someone who needs it then me |
|
|
| ABTsportsline |
i wouldn't, and i'll tell you why:
(this really suprises me that you don't know this, being a fellow Carlinist....)
".... Organ donor programs.... Can you believe this? Guess who they're run by? THE DMV. if i gotta wait in line that long for a kidney, it, do without! "
".... If you get in a serious car crash and the paramedics arrive and see 'Organ Donor' on your card, you really think they're going to save your ass? Hell no, they're LOOKING FOR PARTS, MAN!!"
"....Look Jim, here's that Lung we've been looking for! put the paddles away Jim, this man's a DONOR!"
"... f#ck 'em... if they want my parts they can have my sphincter and my rectum, take 'em, f#ck you, and get the hell outta my life!"
LoL :D
i know maybe a little far-fetched, but still funny!
-ABT- |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ABTsportsline
i wouldn't, and i'll tell you why:
(this really suprises me that you don't know this, being a fellow Carlinist....)
".... Organ donor programs.... Can you believe this? Guess who they're run by? THE DMV. if i gotta wait in line that long for a kidney, it, do without! "
".... If you get in a serious car crash and the paramedics arrive and see 'Organ Donor' on your card, you really think they're going to save your ass? Hell no, they're LOOKING FOR PARTS, MAN!!"
"....Look Jim, here's that Lung we've been looking for! put the paddles away Jim, this man's a DONOR!"
"... f#ck 'em... if they want my parts they can have my sphincter and my rectum, take 'em, f#ck you, and get the hell outta my life!"
LoL :D
i know maybe a little far-fetched, but still funny!
-ABT- |
I swear to God George Carlin is the funniest commedian EVER....i ing love him.,... |
|
|
| lMIlk |
| well abt you got a point there, you see i didn't think about that, i think positive :D haha wel if they were true, which they probably are, then it |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| LOL thats not true...are u crazy...do you really think the paramedics would stop working on you because of that..LOL...the only way they MIGHT is if their family member is nest on the list of an organ theyw ill get from you...besides my friend is a volunteer paramedic and we talked about all this stuff and he said they dont even look at the license..the police do..they are way too busy helping you |
|
|
| Renegade |
*Cough*
Quickly returning to the original point.....
| quote: | | Anyhow, women should have the right up to say 1 month - 2 months to have an abortion. |
And after that?
I think abortions are legal up until about 22 weeks (feel free to correct me, because I'm not exactly sure about that point) and anything after this point is called a "late abortion" and is currently illegal. I did a research assignment on abortion in Year 12 - an oral presentation - and after seeing every take exactly the same line (pro-choice, but only in certain circumstances - rape, fetal deformity etc.) I decided to take a hardline "pro-choice" stance - mainly just to be different, not necessarily because it was the perspective I agreed with - advocating abortions in virtually all cases up until 18 weeks (which I'll explain later) and late-abortions in special circumstances.
Like I said before, originally I took this approach just to be different, but the more I researched and overcame my moral qualms, I began to see the sense in this sort of approach.
| quote: | | Its a woman's right, upto a certain period, and if a woman wants an abortion I think its not only in the mothers best ineterest but also the child itself... |
This whole right of the mother vs right of the child issue is essentially what's at the heart of this entire debate. If you believe the rights of the mother - up until a certain point anyway - absolutely supercede the right of the fetus, then you are likely to be pro-choice. If you believe the the rights of the fetus (or "unborn child" as the right-to-lifers put it) are at least equal with those of the mother, then you are likely to be pro-choice.
I think the current consensus is (and again, forgive me if I'm wrong because it was a fair while ago that I researched all this) that the child is incapable of surviving on its own until the 24-28 week stage (though, naturally, there are exceptions). Up until this point, it is essentially a part of the mother, and cannot really be considered an individual entity. However, this lingering doubt about when exactly the child can be considered to be an independant entity (because, obviously, each pregnancy is different) makes abortions around this time period something of a grey area.
However, any abortion before the 18 week mark I agree with in virtually all circumstances. Why the 18 week mark? Well, it is at this point that the nervous system begins to develop (and I think the heart may start beating near here as well, but don't quote me on this). It takes 6-8 weeks or so before it can be considered to be anywhere near "complete" which is the point at which the fetus is considered capable of surving on its own (albeit on a life support machine with a slim chance of survival). Before the 18 week mark - even though it may have developed recognisable anatomic features (arms, legs, head etc.) - it is still, for all instents and purposes, just a lump of flesh growing in the mothers womb. To insist that the fetus before 18 weeks can be cosidered a "person" is ridiculous. You can call it human at this stage, because it has a human genetic structure, but then hair and finger nails have human DNA as well, but does anyone cry bloody murder when we remove these parts of ourselves?
| quote: | Under many given circumstances, i think abortions are appropriate.
But i do not see it as a form of birth control. |
Which brings me to my next point.
I'm not particularly comfortable with seeing abortion as a form of birth control either, but unfortunately that's just simply the role it plays. What's the difference between an abortion pre-18 weeks and taking a morning-after pill (apart from the length/difficulty of the procedure)? The baby pre 18 weeks is definately not self-aware, incapable of feeling pain, seeing, hearing, touching, smelling tasting, or moving. It doesn't have a nervous system, nor can it in anyway be considered an independant entity from the mother, as it's still, for all intents and purposes, just a lump of flesh growing in her womb. Sure, a fetus aborted at this stage may be more developed (structurally and size-wise) than one aborted the morning after, but it's still not really any closer towards being considered a person (which, as I said, cannot really be the case until the development of the nervous system).
Even if you don't agree with me here, let me ask you this. A worst case scenario: a woman is 16 weeks pregnant and decides she doesn't want the baby. No other real reasons for having an abortion (the fetus is healthy, she is physically and financially able to care for it), she just simply doesn't want it. Now, with 90% of abortions, there is some commendable or easily justifiable reason for not continuing the pregnancy through to term, but I've decided to pick up on this situation, simply because it is representative of a situation where abortion is being used, for all intents and purposes, as a form of birth control.
So she doesn't want the baby: what do you tell her? That she should have taken better care with contraceptives? She should have been more careful? She's being very selfish and should continue with the pregnancy? But what then? She goes through with the pregnancy - simply because it's been deemed, somewhat arbitrarily, that abortion is only justifiable in specific circumstances - and goes on to have the baby. The mother resents the child she doesn't want, is unable to live her dreams because of the demanding child, the child senses this maternal strain and grows up to live an unhappy life.
Well, okay, that was obviously a worst case scenario, and obviously you could argue that if she was to have the baby that she may grow to love it, but, again, it's one of those "what-if" situations. She may grow up to love the child, but she may not. You can't predict these things with foresight, but you can take heed of what the pregnant woman is saying. If she is saying she doesn't want the baby, she is the best judge of that, and it is not for anyone to say that it is worth the risk of playing Russian Roullette with the lives of two people (the mother and the child that grows out of the fetus) simply because you are struck down with moral nausea at the thought of such a capricious abortion (although, as Thor said, there is no such thing as a capricious abortion: it quite literally is a life or death situation).
And of course that's the worst case scenario: that the abortion is being carried out for virtually no reason at all. Then think about all the cases where there is a specific reason where the mother wants an abortion: how can anyone possibly force a woman in such a situation to go through with a pregnancy? Especially if she's incapable of caring for the child, or if the child's deformed, or if the child was conceived through rape or incest? Who can this hard-line stance (forcing a woman to go through with a pregnancy she doesn't want) possibly benefit?
There is no possible justification, in my mind, for a pro-life stance pre-18 weeks for the reasons I have outlined above. How anyone thinks they have the right to tell a woman what she should and shouldn't be doing with her body, simply because of a moral doctrine they were prescribed from a book written 2000 years ago, is beyond me.
As for post 18-week abortions? Well, it's a slightly different story. Perhaps I'll get into it when I get the time. |
|
|
|
|
