Why is the abortion debate framed as pro-choice vs pro-life?

[Deleted]

@title: So that people like me have no choice. For we are contra life and contra choice and just would gladly agree both together may be the best solution.

[Halyon]

I see no reason for you to stick your nose into my medical choices for MY own body, but yet, here you are. BIRTH at 20 weeks, control freak!

Do tell me when I have ever explicitly told anyone to do something with their bodies? You can't, because I haven't. I have only voiced my agreement or disagreement on certain things, that is all. What other people do with their time, resources, and bodies, is their own business.

[Endus]

And youll be hauled away to prison like the murderous sociopath you are.

So, are you arguing;

A> arguing that the fetus's right to life trumps the woman's bodily autonomy, in a way that makes no sense whatsoever under any other set of circumstances, or
B> that every developed nation's code of laws are going to be totally overhauled to be vastly more punitive towards women who demand the same rights as anyone else, or maybe
C> that miscarriages are always murder?

It's some combination of those three. None of which make any sense.

[Swalload]

Genuine question. Neither side is anti-choice or anti-life, so how are the terms of the discussion framed in this manner? Shouldn't we be discussing pro-abortion against anti-abortion points in a real discussion?

One side claims that abortion is fetus murder, the other claims that it's the mother's choice and not really a matter of ending a life (which comes from the fact that at some point during pregnancy abortion is no longer an option so people take this deadline as the moment where a fetus is "human enough" to make it count as murder).

[Sorcath]

Yeah, and the pro-choice people really the pro-murder people.
It's almost like reductive nonsense is nonsense.

For that to be possible
1.) A fetus must be something other than a clump of cells
2.) Consciousness

Since fetuses retain neither of these traits, there is no murder. Take your moral highground and pound it, weekend warrior. Also, God is dead and you're proof.

[kail]

His comment was dead on.

In response to your response:"By all means, put his sorry ass in the ground where it belongs." Right next to the innocent murdered baby?

What does capital punishment have to do with bodily autonomy?

[Fojos]

Ah. Hmm, I technically don't see that much wrong with it, since the survival rate is practically non-existant below 21 weeks, but that's stretching it. Personally, I'd agree with 20 weeks elective abortion tops... However, your case said 22 weeks, then it's restricted, according to you. Thus there is no real problem, since it must have been done due to an emergency of some sort. As it should be. Are you sure it was an abortion though, and not an induced birth?

Was abortion. Because so many women make abortions, and many want to make it late (21st week) it often progress to the 22nd week during the procedure. When this happens the fetus technically becomes a child with rights. Of course they're not going to cancel the procedure, but they obligations if the child can survive without the mother, and it's insane to still blabber about women's bodily autonomy at this point (tip to the girls: if it's not in your body it's no longer your choice).


- - - Updated - - -

How could you legitimately debate MY pregnancy without MY permission? What are you going to do at the end of the debate? Tie me down and force me to remain pregnant? Forcefully abort my pregnancy against my will? If not, what is the point of debating MY pregnancy against MY will?

- - - Updated - - -



Closed adoptions absolutely pay the mothers. You mean MY body decides. And that's fine. I don't mind MY body deciding.

And I don't make a career from abortions, but I damned sure would from carrying pregnancies to term, IF they paid MUCH more then 16k per nine months... or is it 20 weeks? They can't make up their minds on when a fetus can live outside a womb, but that's ok, they don't get to decide that for me anyway.

What happens is we charge you with murder. If you wait until after the last week and then make your own abortion, you are violating the rights of someone else (their right to live at that point is much stronger than your right to bodily autonomy). You could of course make it seem like an accident, but good luck with that.

Make your choices, live with the consequences.

[Kraenen]

I don't have an incredibly strong opinion on this topic, but I just can't see how someone can equate a fetus at any stage to simply a clump of cells that could resemble any other clump of cells. I dunno, I'm weird and have human emotions and sympathies like that.

[Zeth Hawkins]

This is just factually incorrect. A fetus needs a hell of a lot of support and care (read: "interference") to manage basic life functions for months, until it's developed enough to handle them on its own. It's more accurate to say a fetus cannot become a person without extensive interference and support, which it doesn't automatically have any right to, given that it's not a person, and thus has no rights.

What support and care does a fetus need to "manage basic life functions for months"? The mother need only continue her life as normal, something she would have done regardless of occupational status of her uterus. Development of a fetus requires, in actuality, a lack of interference.

Hypothetical possible futures don't make for convincing arguments. It's like arguing that Scarlett Johannsen has to sleep with me and bear my children because if she doesn't, she's murdering them. Does that make sense? Obviously not. It should be seen as ridiculous, and any such argument regarding a fetus is equally so.

"Hypothetical possible future" is a fairly meaningless phrase when discussing an event with a high likelihood of occurring. You are expressing the idea that one should not make plans for the future, as the idea that the sun will rise tomorrow is a hypothetical possible future. The Scarlett Johannsen analogy is irrelevant due to the faulty presumption that one can murder that which does not exist. Surely you are not insinuating that pro-life supporters believe that life starts before conception.

[Total Crica]

live with the consequences.

YOU don't get to decide the consequences of MY pregnancy. If you TRY to, I will defend myself from you with DEADLY force.

- - - Updated - - -

The mother need only continue her life as normal

My normal life consists of getting drunk on the weekends and amateur wrestling matches every other weekend, thinking about starting up kick boxing as well once a month.

[Endus]

What support and care does a fetus need to "manage basic life functions for months"?

You know how a fetus dies immediately if it's taken out of the uterus too soon? How even premature babies that survive often need extensive medical support to do so?

That's because of all the support that the mother's body is providing that fetus, continuously, precisely because the fetus can't survive on its own. And that is support that the fetus has absolutely no right to.

"Hypothetical possible future" is a fairly meaningless phrase when discussing an event with a high likelihood of occurring.

It isn't a "high likelihood of occurring". In any case where you're trying to prevent an abortion, there is no chance of it occurring. Because there'll be an abortion. It's a fiction that you are trying to manipulate current events for the possibility of bringing it about.

The future is not real. You don't get to deny people their rights because of your imagination.

You are expressing the idea that one should not make plans for the future, as the idea that the sun will rise tomorrow is a hypothetical possible future.

The difference being I have no capacity to stop the Sun from rising, and there's a cycle involved.

None of this applies to a pregnancy. Your argument is literally no different in any respect than trying to deny a cancer patient their medications because them dying is "God's will". It's exactly that objectionable and wrongheaded, for exactly the same reasons.

[Zeth Hawkins]

That act specifically states that you're wrong. It states that a fetus is not a human being. If a fetus were that Act would be irrelevant; the existence of the act conclusively proves you wrong here.

I am seeing the opposite. What are you basing your opinion on?

"As used in this section, the term ‘unborn child’ means a child in utero, and the term ‘child in utero’ or ‘child, who is in utero’ means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.’’

https://www.congress.gov/108/plaws/p...108publ212.pdf

[Symphonic]

I am seeing the opposite. What are you basing your opinion on?

"As used in this section, the term ‘unborn child’ means a child in utero, and the term ‘child in utero’ or ‘child, who is in utero’ means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.’’

https://www.congress.gov/108/plaws/p...108publ212.pdf

Sounds like the law claims a fetus is a human being at any stage?

[Torgent]

In the same way making rape illegal is anti-choice.

That's a horrible argument that I would be ashamed of from a 10 year old.

[Fojos]

YOU don't get to decide the consequences of MY pregnancy. If you TRY to, I will defend myself from you with DEADLY force.

- - - Updated - - -



My normal life consists of getting drunk on the weekends and amateur wrestling matches every other weekend, thinking about starting up kick boxing as well once a month.

No wonder you go to wrestling matches. They're not known to host the most aware people.

I don't need to do anything to throw your WT body into jail, the justice system takes care of that.

[Total Crica]

No wonder you go to wrestling matches. They're not known to host the most aware people.

I don't need to do anything to throw your WT body into jail, the justice system takes care of that.

The only justice that will be served will be to anyone that TRIES to decide the consequences of MY pregnancy, and it will be meted with deadly force!

[Freighter]

The only justice that will be served will be to anyone that TRIES to decide the consequences of MY pregnancy, and it will be meted with deadly force!

You sound crazy.

[Total Crica]

You sound crazy.

As opposed to YOU people wanting to FORCE me to remain pregnant against my will? K. Bring your crazy to me, and you will get crazy back. It's that simple.

[Shadowferal]

Only one can possibly claim a zygote as a human being...legally or otherwise; and that's the woman in question.
And if she determines that it isn't human...well, she has the finally say in the matter.

[Freighter]

As opposed to YOU people wanting to FORCE me to remain pregnant against my will? K. Bring your crazy to me, and you will get crazy back. It's that simple.

If you don't want to risk pregnancy you really shouldn't have sex that can result in it.