Toddlers can think and move on their own, so this premise is false to begin with.
https://www.brighthorizons.com/family-resources/how-toddlers-think-understanding-supporting-toddler-brain-developmentYou can read the “Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development” section.
Infants? one month olds?
So you think a one-month old should be terminated if the mother thinks they are to much of an inconvenience?
Look, I’ll just make my point. I think the whole pro-choice side of the debate is stupid and dishonest. It is all sugar coated with feigned empathy “Think of the children” BS. I lived in poverty with a single parent. It was rough, but I don’t think it was so bad that I would have rather never have lived. And even if it -was- that bad, no one else has the right to make that choice for me.
The reality is simply no one has the balls to say what it is really about. Humanity has got to the point where we are capable of controlling our own reproduction. In a way our ancestors have never been able to do. What some of us consider a right was an impossibility for them. But with run away overpopulation on a planet with finite resource, it only makes sense that we would control the rate in which we reproduce. But that involves a moral problematic concept like choosing who gets to live and who doesn’t.
This is forwarded to me by Mercedes Lackey an represents my last contribution to this pointless debate. Actual credit is to Kristen Sunderlin via Quora. If you want to argue this further that’s a great place to go to. or to the Off Topics subform in this venue.
Text has been Edited to please the board censors
·
Following
Posted by
E-learning Producer (2020–present)Oct 15
Why do you think abortion is okay when it ends lives?
Q: Why do you think abortion is okay when it ends lives?
A: Abortion is always a matter of the lesser of two evils, and the only one who can make the judgement on which one is the lesser of two evils is the woman herself.
I will ask you two questions, and I want you to think about them real hard.
The first question is: What is more important to you? Moral posturing or actually reducing abortion rates?
The second question is: Do you want abortions that will happen to be safe, legal and rare, or illegal, unsafe, unfair, hidden but more common?
I am not so much interested in your reasons of being pro-life, because that is irrelevant. Not even pro-choice people think abortions are right, and certainly not fun. They think that abortions may be necessary (which is not the same thing as right) – basically the lesser of two evils. And they argue that there is one single person on the planet who knows if it is necessary or not: the pregnant woman herself.
But that’s just a side track. Back to the first question. What is more important?
If it is moral posturing, you can stop reading now. There’s nothing I can say that will convince you.
If you actually want to reduce abortion rates, then it is another matter. These things work at reducing abortion rates:
In every state or nation where such measures are implemented, abortion rates drop like a rock.
Abortions will still happen, though. And the reason is this:
Pregnancy is dangerous. Abortion bans do not make pregnancies safer – in fact, in every state or nation which has abortion bans or severe abortion restrictions, maternal mortality and child mortality are significantly higher than states with lighter or no abortion restrictions. There is preeclampsia and numerous other complications that can occur during pregnancy, and numerous cases where women have died because the doctor does not dare to abort a dead fetus, leading to sepsis and death.
On top of that, there are cases where honour culture or economical circumstances forces a woman to the untenable situation of having an illegal unsafe backstreet abortion rather than carry the pregnancy to term.
So abortion bans kill women.
This is by the way not a problem if you are rich. Then you just take a vacation to a country or state where abortions are allowed, and miraculously return non-pregnant. So abortion bans hit poor women only, which is bloody unfair.
There is a moral stance as well, if you want to get back into it. It’s not just about “ending lives”. A pregnant woman in a country or state with abortion restrictions have less rights over her own body than a dead corpse. You cannot harvest organs from a dead corpse without their consent. The government cannot even force you to donate blood to save the President, even if you were the only person in the world with a compatible blood type. You are free to do it if you want to, of course, but nobody can force you.
But you can deprive a woman the right to her own body the moment she gets pregnant. For all purposes and intents, that is nine months slavery. And I think that is immoral as f**k.
I don’t think that this argument will convince you – pro-lifers often value the life of the unborn child higher than that of the mother, and even more often want to punish the mother for being a slu** and having sex (see that bit about the slu** shaming/honour culture above).
In the end, no matter if you ban abortions, and no matter if you think of all the unborn children that are killed, abortions will still happen. This is the pragmatic truth: even when abortions are banned completely, they will happen. You will just drive abortions underground.
And now I will ask another one choice question: will you keep them safe, legal and rare, or illegal, unsafe, unfair and hidden but common? Remember, abortions will happen so there is no “no abortions at all” choice. There are just those two choices.
I am not pro-life, so you are not debating with me.
Read what I said above.
Thank you for posting this, honestly. What a great reply.
I literally never even said I wanted abortion to be illegal. In fact, I think I have made my position quite clear that it shouldn’t be. I have only explored it’s moral facets. Not making any claims of my own, merely asking questions, and not taking any moral position on the issue itself, that alone made people defensive. Which kind of proves the point I am making.
Yeah, I can’t believe I’m saying this, but you’re gaslighting poor Akiyass.
The thanks should go to Ms. Lackey who forwarded this to me and the original author Kristen Sundelin.
Its a good reply, but it is also a bit irrelevant to the conversation.
Thing is I’m not interested in your moral positions and I don’t think that mine are of particular interest either. Legislating morality is a pointless and frequently dangerous exercise whenever it has been tried it’s generally led to consequences far worse than the problem it sought to address. The American mafia was in a far stronger place at the end of Prohibition than it had been when it started.
My interests are in law and public policy. What laws and customs should we be setting as a people? And that’s what is at stake.
Then why are you inserting yourself into a conversation about morality?
I didn’t say anything about legislation.
I said, multiple times, that I am pro-choice.
So… what’s the issue? Or did you just not read anything and copy pasta’ed without context of the conversation?
Conception control methods are mentioned at least as far back as classic Greek and Roman literature, and I’m pretty sure that it’s older than that. Or as TV Tropes would put it… it’s “Older than Dirt”.
But it was never as sophisticated as it is today. So how about you answer these questions.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the point of this discussion is, that we can all agree that life is precious, just that it’s gotten so bad that a woman’s life is seen as being worth less than a potential child
Who is saying that? Even hardcore republicans support abortion under life threatening circumstances, but those make up less than 12% of all cases.
If that were true, than why do states like like Texas have some of the most strict abortion laws in the entire country? (They don’t even allow even it if it rhymes with tape and incest)
This is strictly about controlling a woman’s body and you know that.
Eeeeh… I won’t dismiss that idea, but I think it’s just as reasonable to think they just don’t like the idea of baby murder.
Not saying I agree with restrictions, such as the one you mentioned. I agree that such things only make matters worse and less safe.
At the same time “legalize the killing of the unborn, or else I will adopt a more dangerous way to do it myself.” Doesn’t really sit right with me either.
Seems like a weird leap to make it about misogyny when the killing of would-be children is the real elephant in the room.
I’m not disagreeing with anything your saying, you have bought up some valid points that do need to be considered, it’s just a very complicated issue is all.
At the end of the day, I think the less restrictions the better. But I also think acknowledging the nuance of it is important.
Defining where life starts is important. Like, should a 9th month old fetus be subject to termination? If the difference between life and not literally just a few inches outside the body? A few days before birth?
I don’t have an answer. But I think those are the issues that need to be hashed out. But as we have seen throughout this thread… no one seemed to even want to think about it.
It’s an emotional issue, and you know how these type of hot button issues can get. I don’t know how one would exactly define life, wish I had the answer to that myself.
But we both can agree that the respect for women has taken a nose dive, right?