Abortion Opinions (no flaming)

[Guest GhostRanger]

No because if he didnt want the baby even the slightest bit, he shouldnt of been having sex.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I dont think im gonna touch this topic anymore, too much religon involved, same with morals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That doesn't make much sense. If a woman doesn't want the baby in the slightest, shouldn't she also not be having sex? That seems like a double standard to me.

[mad4u689]

But then, if the woman didn't want the baby the slightest bit, she shouldn't have been having sex either, right? I don't believe that, but that's just going by your argument.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: GhostRanger beat me to it :D I don't even need to post in this post, GhostRanger has totes got me covered :D

[rocketman089]

Bah, that's not a fair arguement imo. I don't want to break my neck in a car crash, but I still drive. I don't want to trip, but I walk anyway. Same logic, is it not?

[insane]

Bah, that's not a fair arguement imo. I don't want to break my neck in a car crash, but I still drive. I don't want to trip, but I walk anyway. Same logic, is it not?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you're comparing a baby to a car crash then yea I guess... if you really think having a kid is the worst thing in the world, which is kind of sick.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Actually on second thought, maybe not. The primary purpose of sex is to reproduce, to have that child - the primary purpose of walking is NOT to trip, the primary purpose of driving is NOT to crash. So the parallel you're trying to draw is

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't want to get somewhere, so I shouldn't turn my car on and put it into drive...

[dusqi]

 

 

 

The primary purpose of sex is to reproduce, to have that child

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can you think of any other reasons that people might have sex? Are they necessarily less 'primary'?

[Death_By_Pod]

 

 

 

Actually, the medical community is very ambiguous about when its considered life. No where could you find an exact time they've decided on to say is life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/294/8/947

 

 

 

The time you would start to feel pain and hence have some physical perception of the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The primary purpose of sex is to reproduce, to have that child - the primary purpose of walking is NOT to trip, the primary purpose of driving is NOT to crash. So the parallel you're trying to draw is

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Animals like dolphins and bonobos also show us that sex isnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t just for reproducing. What IÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢m trying to get at is that there is more then 1 primary function of sex and it isnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t just for kids.

[Collective]

If you're comparing a baby to a car crash then yea I guess... if you really think having a kid is the worst thing in the world, which is kind of sick.

 

 

 

Where did he say anything about "worst thing in the world"? Answer: He didn't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps this is because I live in the real world, but I wouldn't equate falling over, or driving into the back of the car infront, to be "the worst thing in the world." Shocking news: People don't always want kids. This doesn't make them "sick".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pathetic attempts at emotionalism most definitely 'for the lose.'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The primary purpose of sex is to reproduce, to have that child

 

 

 

What gives you that idea? Even if you argued "that's what God made it for" it wouldn't stand up to scrutiny: even if something was created with purpose X in mind it does not mean that that will be the primary purpose of it for every user, or even for the original creator.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sex, like all things, only has the purpose each person gives to it. Some people have come to the amazing conclusion that sex is fun, and hence decide to have sex for fun. The primary purpose of their sexual activity is to have fun, not to reproduce.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The primary purpose of sex is only to reproduce if reproduction is what you're doing it for most of the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the primary purpose of walking is NOT to trip, the primary purpose of driving is NOT to crash.

 

 

 

Most of the time I walk to get somewhere, not because I want to try to not fall over for as long as possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like sex, however, walking's purpose is given to it by the person doing the walking. Most of the time you walk to get somewhere. Sometimes you walk to get fit. Sometimes you walk to relax. The 'primary purpose' of walking is the differs in all three cases.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So the parallel you're trying to draw is : I don't want to get somewhere, so I shouldn't turn my car on and put it into drive...

 

 

 

I'd of thought it was reasonably obvious that that is not the parallel he's trying to draw. More like:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I want to have sex because it's fun, but I don't want a baby in 9 months. (I should use protection)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I want drive because I want to go somewhere, but I don't want my insurance premiums to rise. (I should drive carefully)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I want to eat a curry because it tastes nice, but I don't want heartburn. (I should keep Gaviscon in my kitchen cupboard)

[soda711]

eeny meeny miney moe, catch a tiger by it's toe. if he hollers let him go, eeny meeny miney moe! i randomly selected and have chosen to be against abortions! Abortions are bad for you, they kill the babies and then the babies die. its bad

[insane]

 

 

 

 

The primary purpose of sex is to reproduce, to have that child

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can you think of any other reasons that people might have sex? Are they necessarily less 'primary'?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of course - but one cannot deny the reproduction is the main function of it. If sex didn't reproduce we wouldn't be here...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Animals like dolphins and bonobos also show us that sex isnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t just for reproducing. What IÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢m trying to get at is that there is more then 1 primary function of sex and it isnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t just for kids.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There can't be more than 1 "primary" function, for anything. It's like having two "favourite" flavours of ice cream, it just doesn't work.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where did he say anything about "worst thing in the world"? Answer: He didn't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Okay, so worst thing in the world wasn't a great choice of words. How about "worst plausible outcome in a certain circumstance?". Way to attack my choice of language, instead of my logic. You really destroyed my straw man...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

People don't always want kids. This doesn't make them "sick".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If does if they compare getting pregnant to a car crash.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sex, like all things, only has the purpose each person gives to it. Some people have come to the amazing conclusion that sex is fun, and hence decide to have sex for fun. The primary purpose of their sexual activity is to have fun, not to reproduce.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I disagree with relativism, but that's another argument for another time. Quick one: if I use a calculator as a frisbee, it doesn't change the fact that a calculator's main purpose is to calculate mathematical equations. If I use sex for fun (which I have absolutely no objection to, btw), it doesn't change the fact that sex has a primary function of reproduction. Take away the function of reproducing and BAM! There goes the human race. Take away the function of pleasure, and yea, life would seem much less enjoyable, but at least there's still life :|

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As the rest of your post deals with subjectivism again I'll just leave it at this.

[Collective]

Way to attack my choice of language, instead of my logic

 

 

 

If does if they compare getting pregnant to a car crash.

 

 

 

How about you start attacking people's logic rather than their choice of words, then maybe you can expect to be afforded the same respect.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

if I use a calculator as a frisbee, it doesn't change the fact that a calculator's main purpose is to calculate mathematical equations.

 

 

 

If you were using a calculator as a frisbee it is reasonably safe to assume that your main purpose for that calculator would be as a frisbee and not mathmatics.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My point is that what an object/action's "main purpose" is depends entirely on the individual that's using/doing it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Example: An AOL disc. You would argue its main purpose is to give people trials of the AOL internet service. I'd argue its main purpose was as a coaster.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edit: Fixed constant apostrophising of "it's"

[Guest GhostRanger]

 

 

 

 

Actually, the medical community is very ambiguous about when its considered life. No where could you find an exact time they've decided on to say is life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/294/8/947

 

 

 

The time you would start to feel pain and hence have some physical perception of the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not arguing about when you "feel pain," I'm making the point that the medical community that does not agree about when life begins. There are plenty of ways you can die without feeling pain, I don't see how that's necessary. Once again, I'm not making a pro-life statement, I'm merely pointing out that a foetus is not anything like ova or sperm - its an entirely different being. You might have more of your dad's DNA than your mom, but you're still a different being right?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You will never be able to convince anyone that medical community agrees when life begins. I could find as many respected opposite opinions from yours which just shows the ambiguity of the field. Blanket statements like that are just not acceptable.

[xxsheepxx]

nope. if you really don't want the baby, then give it up for adoption. [i'm a republican, btw.]

[Death_By_Pod]

 

 

 

 

 

The primary purpose of sex is to reproduce, to have that child

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can you think of any other reasons that people might have sex? Are they necessarily less 'primary'?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of course - but one cannot deny the reproduction is the main function of it. If sex didn't reproduce we wouldn't be here...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Animals like dolphins and bonobos also show us that sex isnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t just for reproducing. What IÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢m trying to get at is that there is more then 1 primary function of sex and it isnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t just for kids.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There can't be more than 1 "primary" function, for anything. It's like having two "favourite" flavours of ice cream, it just doesn't work.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where did he say anything about "worst thing in the world"? Answer: He didn't.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Okay, so worst thing in the world wasn't a great choice of words. How about "worst plausible outcome in a certain circumstance?". Way to attack my choice of language, instead of my logic. You really destroyed my straw man...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

People don't always want kids. This doesn't make them "sick".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If does if they compare getting pregnant to a car crash.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sex, like all things, only has the purpose each person gives to it. Some people have come to the amazing conclusion that sex is fun, and hence decide to have sex for fun. The primary purpose of their sexual activity is to have fun, not to reproduce.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I disagree with relativism, but that's another argument for another time. Quick one: if I use a calculator as a frisbee, it doesn't change the fact that a calculator's main purpose is to calculate mathematical equations. If I use sex for fun (which I have absolutely no objection to, btw), it doesn't change the fact that sex has a primary function of reproduction. Take away the function of reproducing and BAM! There goes the human race. Take away the function of pleasure, and yea, life would seem much less enjoyable, but at least there's still life :|

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As the rest of your post deals with subjectivism again I'll just leave it at this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Without recreational sex we might not be here either, maybe it was the thing that took our parents relationship to the next level and furthered their commitment to each other. How could you possibly discount recreational sex in playing a factor in your existence?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Having a car crash could be just as bad as having a child; both are unexpected events which set you back. An unwanted teenage pregnancy is worse then a car crash at least with a car crash you donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t have to drop out of school to take care of a child; with a car crash you might be out for a few months but you can always bounce back, with a child your out for 18+ years and after that time it might be too late for you to achieve your aspirations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So youÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢re saying there is nothing out there that doesn't have more then one primary function? How about things that have equally important primary functions, recreational sex is as important if not more important then having children; especially for social animals like humans, bonobos and dolphins. I wouldnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t even dare to say that the primary biological function of reproduction is to have children, why would we even need something that gives us pleasure every time we have a child; the child itself should be enough motivation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Using the bonobo as an example, settling disputes over sex is a much better survival strategy then attempting to have as many offspring as possible; bonobos can only produce one offspring every five years so it is vital that they donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t kill themselves over something unnecessary like arguments between each other. Too me both actions are primary functions but if I had to choose recreational sex would be their primary function and reproduction is secondary. Without recreational sex they would have hunted themselves out of existence, reproduction is just used to keep the lineage going rather then a survival mechanism. Sex isnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t a numbers game to us (unlike many other animals); we also use sex socially to get ahead.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can use the calculator to solve math problems but if youÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢re creative enough you could reprogram it to do entirely different tasks. The reprogrammed calculator can still do math problems but itÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s not the primary function anymore; depending on circumstances primary functions change.

[Death_By_Pod]

 

 

 

You will never be able to convince anyone that medical community agrees when life begins. I could find as many respected opposite opinions from yours which just shows the ambiguity of the field. Blanket statements like that are just not acceptable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I know what you mean, it's just having physical perceptions of your surroundings is what I would consider life (sentience). If you had no senses then whatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s the difference between life and death; you just couldn't tell. You would be like a plant, you still grow and develop but you don't have any sentience.

[Guest GhostRanger]

 

 

 

 

You will never be able to convince anyone that medical community agrees when life begins. I could find as many respected opposite opinions from yours which just shows the ambiguity of the field. Blanket statements like that are just not acceptable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I know what you mean, it's just having physical perceptions of your surroundings is what I would consider life (sentience). If you had no senses then whatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s the difference between life and death; you just couldn't tell. You would be like a plant, you still grow and develop but you don't have any sentience.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its a good point...but then there would be others who say that there are plenty of handicapped people who don't really have sentience, yet we consider them humans. Or even others might say that since death is normally declared when the heart stops, when the heart begins beating at 13 days we can consider it to be life. Everyone decides for themself...

[Barihawk]

I'd like to spawn some conversation here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A few years back here in Texas, a bi-partisan law was put in place that requires the parents of somone under the age of 18 to be notified if thier daughter seeks an abortion. Teen abortions made up 67% of the abortion rate in Texas (which is common across most states).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That rate after 5 years is now down to 49%. A very noticable drop in abortions due to parents being involved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just something to get the juices flowing.

[Mercifull]

"facts"

Source?

[Barihawk]

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/105712.asp

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The stats are off in that because it only counts 16-18 year olds. It's in almost every newspaper in the state.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Warning, this is a download link below, and it is in PDF format.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://reprohealth.ucsf.edu/publication ... August.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDIT: More stuff:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11730518/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/354/10/1031 (New England Journal of Medicine, seems like a decent source)

[dusqi]

The flip side is in the article

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But the law has also led to an increase in births among older teenagers and forced some to wait until after they are 18 to have riskier abortions, according to the study published in the March 9 edition of the New England Journal of Medicine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In addition, there is no data about girls that get an abortion outside of the medical system, or girls that go to another state to get an abortion (though it mentions that since Texas is so big, it makes it more difficult to travel outside).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm against abortions from a killing something that can feel pain point of view, but I don't like the reasoning behind the idea of notifying girls' parents. Though in many cases parents can provide support, I should imagine that there are times when notifying a girl's parents makes a difficult situation even more difficult for her.

[Barihawk]

Well, a decrease in abortions tends to lead to an increase in births, Dusqi.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And yes, it's impossible to be 100% accurate. However, all 4 states surrounding Texas (New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana) have the same law in effect. A girl in San Antonio would have to travel over 1000 miles in any direction to escape the notification act. And I wouldn't trust a complex surgery to a border Mexican town.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The parents deserve to know. If they don't already know, it means the girl is only seeking the abortion to keep her parents from finding out, and that is exactly the thing I am against. Getting an abortion for the sake of getting out of trouble is wrong.

[Mercifull]

Decrease in abortions also leads to an increase in crime ;)

 

 

 

http://www.freakonomics.com/

[Barihawk]

Pfft, economists always say stuff like that. :P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Almost as bad as Political Scientists.

[Raegen]

Abortion is an abomination to this world and should be illegal. People say things such as "Its not even a baby yet" and things like that, but a baby is a baby, if it isnt a baby...then the mom would not be pregnant. Abortion is no different from killing a 2 month old infant or a 45 year old man. I believe it should be illegal and banned from all countrys. If the womens life is at risk, abortion still isnt right because everything happens for a reason, it was God's Will. If a women dosn't want a baby, she should of never had intercourse.

[Collective]

If the womens life is at risk, abortion still isnt right because everything happens for a reason, it was God's Will.

 

 

 

So if you got cancer you would refuse treatment?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If a women dosn't want a baby, she should of never had intercourse.

 

 

 

Sex isn't always consensual, halfwit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For the sake of your reputation don't respond to this topic again until you have read it. Your ludicrous ideas have been ripped to shreds multiple times already.

[insane]

 

Way to attack my choice of language, instead of my logic

 

 

 

If does if they compare getting pregnant to a car crash.

 

 

 

How about you start attacking people's logic rather than their choice of words, then maybe you can expect to be afforded the same respect.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry, I don't understand. Maybe I'm a "half-wit", as you said to the other person. How am I not refuting logic? In your case, you picked only one part out of my whole argument that was really irrelevent and picked on that - in my case, his entire logic is based on that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The rest of your post is again, where we're just going to keep disagreeing - I believe purpose is not determined by the user. If the creators of calculators realized that all people were going to use them for was for frisbees, they would make frisbees instead, they wouldn't make calculators.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Without recreational sex we might not be here either, maybe it was the thing that took our parents relationship to the next level and furthered their commitment to each other. How could you possibly discount recreational sex in playing a factor in your existence?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bolded the word that weakens your argument. Without reproductive sex we WOULD NOT be here, without recreational sex we MIGHT NOT be here.