[Discussion] Thoughts on Abortion

Silais said:

As I said before, I think abortion should ALWAYS be available as an option. You may not like it, you may not agree with it, but we should be respectful of those who make the incredibly difficult decision to terminate a pregnancy based on other factors in their life that would make raising the child or sending it out for adoption unreasonable and, in many cases, impossible. I think people are ignoring the fact that most women do not think having an abortion is a wonderful or freeing experience; it comes with so many psychological issues, just as pregnancy and adoption does. We can yell "TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOURSELF" and "PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY" all we want, but that is not going to change that some women will see abortion as their only option, and we should be respectful of them making that choice. Are we going to demonize women for taking birth control or the morning after pill simply because it terminates a potential pregnancy? Like I said said in my original post, women should have a choice as to whether or not they become pregnant or if they become pregnant; pregnancy, childbirth and the raising of a child are extremely difficult tasks and we should be allowed to regulate those experiences or prevent those experiences from happening at all.

I am saying that telling a woman she's "taking a life" is psychologically detrimental because the woman already realizes that she is terminating a pregnancy and she does not need the added torment from a medical professional about what she is doing. These women struggle with making the decision to abort a fetus and it's unnecessary to continue to torture them with the knowledge that the fetus growing inside them will be removed and will not develop as a result. We cannot demonize these women for

To say that sexual intercourse is not natural is ridiculous. We are programmed to reproduce. But in a society where it is increasingly difficult to raise a child due to economic and societal factors, it should be easy for women to find options that best suit their needs. There ARE cases where abortion may be the only solution, and I feel that it is necessary to allow that option to exist. You do not have to agree with me; I'm simply sharing my opinion. But this "always take personal responsibility" thing gets old quite fast, especially when you take into account that most of these women ARE taking personal responsibility and simply had pregnancy arise despite their precautions. If you think that women should avoid sexual intercourse to prevent pregnancy, feel free to think that way. But it is never going to happen, and we should recognize that we cannot regulate every human being's activities, and it is not logical and just to do so. Abortion has existed for hundreds of years; nowadays it is a medical procedure performed in a proper setting that is much less dangerous and painful. I think it's rude to call women who have abortions baby killers or other profane terms when they have already suffering as it is.

Sorry about the tangent!

Click to expand...

BlahISuck said:

Hard decisions are not psychological torture. If a person feels bad because they are unable to grapple with worldview that believes abortion is "taking a life", that is not psychological torture. And just because it's hard doesn't mean it's not murder. There are more intricate ways of "taking a life" than abortion. I don't see how this passage refutes TheTorraRegion's claims.



That's quite the diluted interpretation of "natural" and "programmed". I don't think I'd feel good about myself if I reasoned the reason I'd have sex is because "it's natural" and "I'm programmed to do so". We do it because it feels good. We do it /recreationally/. It's for fun. And since we're raised in a society in which we do things for fun, we tend to forget and push aside the natural consequence of pregnancy. We try to separate the two, pregnancy and sex are two different things - the former is a decision while the latter is natural - I'm sure that many people can tell you it's the former that's natural and it's the latter that's a choice.

Also, abortion is not the only option. Adoption is an option. Caring for the child is an option. Now, if we are mindful of the assumption that a pregnancy should not affect my quality of life and others, then yes abortion is the only option. But we have to be mindful when we say we /must/ or /mustn't/ do something.



That logic only applies if the mother's body is in danger. And if the only thing that matters is that the mother's expense of resources, wouldn't that justify the termination of the pregnancy whenever she likes, because it should be /her/ choice over /her/ resources? Parents do not have that level of control over their children, even though they supply all the resources involved in raising a child - we have laws that project a responsibility to protect onto parents. Clearly, that tells me that the mother's "ownership" of resources cannot be a deciding factor in when or if an abortion should occur. There has to be another way to justify when a woman can choose to cancel her continuing a pregnancy/

Click to expand...

AzuGazer said:

(also i would like to know what reason someone would have to not be able to put a baby up for adoption but still be able to afford abortion?)

Click to expand...

Scarf said:

The psychological torture can come from other people, such as protestors outside of the local Planned Parenthood. You may not feel that what you're doing is murder, but when strangers start throwing hate at you it's, well, torture is one word people can use.

Perhaps calling it "natural" is oversimplifying it, but we do have hormones and most of us have a desire for some kind of sexual activity. Obviously that's not an excuse to do anything, but when you and another person mutually want to do something that your bodies are encouraging you to do, that is a mix of the "natural" (or maybe "emotional" is a better word) and, what, the "rational" I guess is as good a word as any.

Although I'm of the mindset that "whenever she likes" is a good rule of thumb for abortion, there is a lot of grey area between "mother's life in danger" and "whenever she likes" that should give someone who isn't of my mindset something to consider. Some women develop certain conditions during pregnancy that may not threaten their lives, but can harm their health. The expenses of a pregnancy can mean a woman's unable to provide for a child she already has, too.




Ah, there's a lot of stuff I could say in response to your post, but I just wanna respond to this one for now.

Pregnancy usually puts you in the hospital and there are lots of medical expenses that you'll rack up. Thousands and thousands. More if you don't have health insurance, or your health insurance isn't that great. If you have certain medical conditions (preclampsia, for instance) you may need extra tests and care for a long time leading up to actual birth. Take into account time lost from the pregnancy that could have been spent working and the cost is even higher.

Abortions, on the other hand can be only a few hundred dollars. They can be more expensive, true, but on the whole the costs are a lot lower.

Click to expand...

Scarf said:

The psychological torture can come from other people, such as protestors outside of the local Planned Parenthood. You may not feel that what you're doing is murder, but when strangers start throwing hate at you it's, well, torture is one word people can use.

Click to expand...

Scarf said:

Perhaps calling it "natural" is oversimplifying it, but we do have hormones and most of us have a desire for some kind of sexual activity. Obviously that's not an excuse to do anything, but when you and another person mutually want to do something that your bodies are encouraging you to do, that is a mix of the "natural" (or maybe "emotional" is a better word) and, what, the "rational" I guess is as good a word as any.

Click to expand...

Scarf said:

Although I'm of the mindset that "whenever she likes" is a good rule of thumb for abortion, there is a lot of grey area between "mother's life in danger" and "whenever she likes" that should give someone who isn't of my mindset something to consider. Some women develop certain conditions during pregnancy that may not threaten their lives, but can harm their health. The expenses of a pregnancy can mean a woman's unable to provide for a child she already has, too.

Click to expand...

That logic only applies if the mother's body is in danger. And if the only thing that matters is that the mother's expense of resources, wouldn't that justify the termination of the pregnancy whenever she likes, because it should be /her/ choice over /her/ resources? Parents do not have that level of control over their children, even though they supply all the resources involved in raising a child - we have laws that project a responsibility to protect onto parents. Clearly, that tells me that the mother's "ownership" of resources cannot be a deciding factor in when or if an abortion should occur. There has to be another way to justify when a woman can choose to cancel her continuing a pregnancy.

Click to expand...

BlahISuck said:

"Torture" does not come from the absence or unavailability of abortion itself. People who harass others should be punished, but they're two separate things. I reject that having someone tell you "abortion is taking a life" as torture.



I disagree, or at least object, to how you describe it as "something your bodies are encouraging you to do". Given such a loose application of what "your body urges", I could describe having cocoa or wanting to play soccer as "something my body is encouraging me to do". There is a hormonal component to everything that we do - sure, sex has its own stimulus pathways - but that in itself doesn't make it different from any other behaviour. I don't like how this language implies that sexual activity is some how exempt from the rest of one's agency - it's misleading. It's sex, and it's a behaviour. It's not very otherly, and we shouldn't hold it in some mystique it doesn't deserve.

Click to expand...