Why are you pro-choice?

[rogueMatthias]

You can't abort at that time, all you can do is induce labor or do a c-section.

WOAH, you're saying a woman "CAN'T" abort? Just because it's later in pregnancy? Such a misogynist.. why do you hate women so much?

We're into black-or-white politics nowadays, it's either one or the other.

[Deleted]

WOAH, you're saying a woman "CAN'T" abort? Just because it's later in pregnancy? Such a misogynist.. why do you hate women so much?

We're into black-or-white politics nowadays, it's either one or the other.

No doctor is going to do an abortion at that time. It's easier and safer to just induce labor or do a c-section and then give the baby up for adoption if you don't want it than to abort that late.

[Shadowferal]

We're into black-or-white politics nowadays, it's either one or the other.

That's your opinion.

[The Penguin]

Because Abortion is murder and anyone condoning it should be aborted. I mean if it's not murder, what do you have to fear? /endthread

[Elba]

So if she's 8 1/2 months along, but gets bored and decides she doesn't want it anymore, it's ok for her to abort still, as it should be her "right" to her own autonomy?

Late term abortions are extremely rare, less than 2%. They don't happen because the woman is bored but for sever medical reasons.

And as Mikkonen said, at that late you induce labor.

[rogueMatthias]

That's your opinion.

Have you not had political discussions on the internet recently? Whenever it comes to this debate it always ends up as "hating women" vs "murdering babies".

[unbound]

I am pro-choice because:

1) This is an incredibly complicated issue with no simple moral answer (regardless of what many religions would like you to believe)
2) Just because I don't support abortion for non-medical reasons doesn't mean I have to right to enforce my beliefs on others (see #1 above)
3) I understand the medical complexities of the female reproductive system which means there will always have to be an abortion option (see #1 above)...e.g. read up on ectopic pregnancies
4) Arbitrarily giving a fetus priority over the mother is morally wrong (see #1 above)...e.g. read up on Savita Halappanavar
5) Forcing a woman to go to term with a rape or incest pregnancy is morally wrong (many pro-forced birth advocates push for this)
6) I find the arguments of pro-forced birthers to be laughably naive and short on facts, and, many times, immoral overall. Most pro-forced birthers also fight against programs that feed the poor (including children) and provide good healthcare for the poor (including children)...hence, they are not, in reality, pro-life; they are simply pro-forced birth...and, in looking at the whole process, pro-forced birthers have an immoral stance.

[Deleted]

Am I? :thinking:

[Kapadons]

I'm pro-choice because of the demographics of those that have abortions in the US.

[drakensoul]

This. All other arguments are irrelevant. It does not matter whether the fetus is alive, a person, a human, has a heart beat, is conscience, feels pain, has a soul or anything else.

As long as it resides within the woman's uterus she has the right to expel it.

I'm pro choice as well, but I think there's an innate understanding that at some point it's too late.

At some point the parasitic cell block could survive outside of the uterus, it's just there finishing up a bit (~26 weeks with current technology, sometimes a bit earlier). At that point it has the makeup to behave the same as it will for the next 7-8 months outside of the womb: lay on its back, flail around, and shit everywhere while not spontaneously dying.

So I think final trimester abortions should be illegal unless the pregnancy threatens the mother's life; you've known and should have made a decision by then, and if you don't want it then put it up for adoption.

As technology improves this will become more of a question. What about when NICU incubators can effectively generate the fetus from a simple fertilized ovum? Once you can literally take the zygote out and put it in a maturation chamber and it can grow into a full human without the woman involved, does she still have the right to abort it? If our adoption system is as archaic as it now is with so many unplaced or poorly placed kids, is it still morally acceptable to force more to live within it? Should they at the age of 21 have the right to say "No, this is shit, I should have been aborted, I elect suicide"?

If the determining factor is "whenever it is no longer dependent on her body for survival," that time point will change as technology evolves.

For now I'm fine with abortions (which are never a happy party) until 24-26 weeks, though that's pushing it a bit. I start to feel yuck about it after 20 weeks. And I don't even like babies.

[Shadowferal]

Because Abortion is murder and anyone condoning it should be aborted. I mean if it's not murder, what do you have to fear? /endthread

A group of cells versus a conscious being...

Try harder...or at least try.

Women should make the choice of what they want to do.

[drakensoul]

A group of cells versus a conscious being...

Try harder...or at least try.

Women should make the choice of what they want to do.

A neonate isn't particularly conscious (those of you having lived through the moment when a baby first realizes its hands are extensions of itself). I don't think that's a viable distinction; it simply regulates its own body systems well enough to not spontaneously die while sitting there.

[rogueMatthias]

I'm pro choice as well, but I think there's an innate understanding that at some point it's too late.

At some point the parasitic cell block could survive outside of the uterus, it's just there finishing up a bit (~26 weeks with current technology, sometimes a bit earlier). At that point it has the makeup to behave the same as it will for the next 7-8 months outside of the womb: lay on its back, flail around, and shit everywhere while not spontaneously dying.

So I think final trimester abortions should be illegal unless the pregnancy threatens the mother's life; you've known and should have made a decision by then, and if you don't want it then put it up for adoption.

This is my thoughts too.


Personally, I think that for a greater amount of the pregnancy the "baby" is just a ball of cells, whether it's moving or not. There's likely a pretty clear point where it is conscious/aware and "a baby"; I'd put that question across to some scientists in this area give an actual answer to build the law around. Can't say I know enough about it.

Beyond that point, I'm sorry, but it is "killing a baby". Whether you're ok with that or not, you can't deny that's what's happening. IMO, there should be a point where the baby is legally classed as an independent person.

I wasn't joking about the ""hating women" vs "murdering babies" debate earlier though. For the life of me I can't see how so few people can managed reasonable discussion or compromise on issues like this. Bizzarely, some of my most hardcore Vegan friends are the most pro-choice. They'll be adamant about the rights of a Clam to not be eaten, but are quite happy that the life of a baby in it's final trimester is forfeit at the mothers discretion.

[derpkitteh]

i am pro-choice with limits.

i feel there is a time when that thing becomes a person, and at that point, it should be illegal to abort unless there are certain circumstances that require abortion, like rape or potential death of the mother.

so, up to the point where the mother's stomach starts to grow in size maybe. when the thing is formed into a humanoid appearance. when it looks like a person, that should be the cut off.

[drakensoul]

Beyond that point, I'm sorry, but it is "killing a baby". Whether you're ok with that or not, you can't deny that's what's happening. IMO, there should be a point where the baby is legally classed as an independent person.

Again, I'm pro-choice.

No. The baby isn't self-conscious or 'awake' until well after birth. Awareness of self is a particularly magical moment to witness as a third party.
So consciousness isn't the substance differentiating here and you're most certainly not killing a baby until it is indeed a baby and capable of sustaining its own life at a basic level. Which is probably a change occurring around the third trimester for now.

But memories aren't formative until well after self-consciousness happens, so it's essentially a blank slate until then (although not really as neuronal development is continually influenced by the environment from day one). Some say it isn't a baby until its memory storage subsystem is functioning.

I think the point is all of the distinctions people cling to as justifications for being pro-choice or pro-life are very nebulous. Regardless of where you land, eventually technology will change that timeline and this argument happens all over again.

[Cuppy]

Because I don't give birth to anything - Let women have the choice
Obviously, between 2 adults there should be a discussion if a child is wanted or not.

IMO abortion should be available as long as it's safe to do, instead of declining because "it looks like something".

[Elba]

For now I'm fine with abortions (which are never a happy party) until 24-26 weeks, though that's pushing it a bit. I start to feel yuck about it after 20 weeks. And I don't even like babies.

You feeling yuck does not make the woman lose her body autonomy. If she wants to remove the occupant, she must have the right, no matter when. If the fetus survives, nice. If not, too bad.

[derpkitteh]

Seems to me like deciding to not have a kid you can't afford is the responsible thing to do.

there's a wonderful thing you can do that is 100% effective birth control.

masturbate instead of having sex. it literally performs the same function, and is not really any worse than the real thing.

i hate the lesser and animalistic nature that people display when they behave as though that's impossible to do. like are YOU even a human at that point? what defines a human is sentience and knowledge to be above lesser beasts, who cannot even control base instinct. we're supposed to be enlightened and above it. if you can't be above your base desires, you're not worth being given full personhood.

[Deleted]

there's a wonderful thing you can do that is 100% effective birth control.

masturbate instead of having sex. it literally performs the same function, and is not really any worse than the real thing.

i hate the lesser and animalistic nature that people display when they behave as though that's impossible to do. like are YOU even a human at that point? what defines a human is sentience and knowledge to be above lesser beasts, who cannot even control base instinct. we're supposed to be enlightened and above it. if you can't be above your base desires, you're not worth being given full personhood.

No, it does not perform the same function as sex and it's worse than having sex.

[Elba]

Beyond that point, I'm sorry, but it is "killing a baby". Whether you're ok with that or not, you can't deny that's what's happening. IMO, there should be a point where the baby is legally classed as an independent person.

It might be an independent person, it might not be. Fact is, the woman is an independent person. And when she says GTFO, you GTFO