Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

'Reacting' doesn't necessarily indicate the mental processing of the stimuli, though. Even single-cell living beings can have their cycles of activity and will react to their surroundings, and it cases these reactions can be quite specific (even up to 'preferring' certain frequencies in sounds, for comparison).

 

As it is, the most definite way of determining when higher brain function is present is to monitor which parts of the brain are active and functional, and to what extent.

Having Girl 'dance' to proper 80s music and throw a hissy fit when Jedward came on the radio sounds like higher functionality to me smile.gif

 

Besides, we can't quantify or demonstrate personality, so what Girl did is good enough for me.

Edited by Kestra15

Share this post


Link to post

KageSora, you bring up interesting points. Pro-life has not had that connotation for me because a lot of the vocal 'pro-lifers' seem to want the mothers to have their babies no matter what.

 

To me, being pro-life means wanting to preserve life in a quality that makes it worth living--and having the ability to prevent and unwanted life from being born, or from destroying another, is important to that.

 

This is what I thought pro-life should mean when I heard it.

And that's why I argue that the two sides are actually pro-choice and pro-birth.

 

But, of course, "pro-life" sounds much better, so they will not give up an inaccurate label. Well, it is accurate, sort of. They're pro-baby-life, but not mother.

 

Okay, nobody scream at me for this, or take this offensive in any shape, form, or way, but how can you kill an innocent baby? sad.gif

            Let's say there's a zombie apoclypse (yes, I have been watching Walking Dead tongue.gif) You're running for your life when you accidentaly drop your baby. Will you risk your life for this baby, or will you leave it to die? Same applies. You make a mistake or get raped, and you find out you'll have a baby. Will you risk your life to conceive this baby, or will you inject fluids into your body and leave this baby to die?

 

Consider it.

...I'd leave the baby. But then, if it were a zombie Apocalypse, I'd kill the kid and myself since I know I have zero shot at survival and I'd rather spare the kid the agony of being eaten alive by zombies, so...

 

Cause it's a censorkip.gif BABY! I mean, it's not the babies fault his/her mom got raped and doesn't want him/her!Why kill a baby that didn't do anything wrong?

What if the 1st people on the world killed their babies?

No Earth.

So why is it the mother's fault she got raped and is now forced to bear what, in her mind, might as well be the spawn of Satan himself, a horrible monster that has hijacked her body and turned her from a person into nothing more than a broodmare? Why punish a woman who didn't do anything wrong? Because to many, pregnancy IS a punishment. Why force her to raise a child she will neglect or abuse because she hates it? And chucking it in the system isn't always much better. I'm a lucky success story. Too many end their lives after growing up in a system that doesn't give two censorkip.gif about them.

 

Additionally, rape is FAR from the only reason an abortion happens. People aren't financially capable of caring for the child--nor able afford putting it up for adoption. Would you rather they abandon it in the street? Other people simply do not want children and they used every means possible to protect themselves from pregnancy but it failed. What about the people who wanted a child but a sudden change in their life made it impossible for them to support it? Or if the mother develops a sudden illness or the child develops fatal birth defects? Or if they received such piss-poor "sex ed" that they don't even know that babies come from sex? Because even in the USA, there ARE people who seriously don't know that because their education is "Sex is bad, YOU WILL GO TO HELL IF YOU HAVE SEX OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE" and babies and STDs are never brought up at all.

 

Are you saying that it's okay to completely and irreversibly mentally and emotionally break the mother, so long as she pops out that kid? Then why don't you raise it? If you can't take that child into your own home at no cost to the mother, then you have no right to tell her she should not get rid of that mass of cells.

 

What about the women who hate their unborn parasite so much that they try to kill themselves because death is preferable to giving birth? Or if they're too terrified of pregnancy or childbirth? Those are very real phobias.

 

How can you casually discard the life of the woman so easily in favor of what might not even become a human being? Since, y'know, it could be a miscarriage, it could die, develop a fatal birth defect that means it could never survive outside the womb, become a tumor (with a heartbeat!), or a calcified mass, etc.

 

 

And, uh, actually there would be an Earth. The planet doesn't need the human race to exist. It existed just fine before mankind, and will continue to exist once mankind has met it's end.

Share this post


Link to post

Having Girl 'dance' to proper 80s music and throw a hissy fit when Jedward came on the radio sounds like higher functionality to me smile.gif

In the end, acquiring higher function is a continuous process, and tends to vary slightly from individual to individual. Rather than disprove your point, I simply wanted to bring out that behavioral signs can be easy to misinterpret, and on occasion only a scan can give a clear answer as to whether there are higher cognitive functions at play or just the basic reflexes.

 

As I said on the last page, most valid-looking sources I've come across seem to indicate that the higher brain functions start to have an effect at about 20th week - which would, more or less, equal the first signs of higher brain function being present towards the end of second trimester. So, I don't deny Girl might have started to develop some preference to certain tunes by then beyond the merely instinctual responses. wink.gif

Edited by Shienvien

Share this post


Link to post

man, this discussion is depressing. I'm out. *makes like a baby and heads out* (pun intended) You guys have your opinion, I have mine. That's fine. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post

In the end, acquiring higher function is a continuous process, and tends to vary slightly from individual to individual. Rather than disprove your point, I simply wanted to bring out that behavioral signs can be easy to misinterpret, and on occasion only a scan can give a clear answer as to whether there are higher cognitive functions at play or just the basic reflexes.

 

As I said on the last page, most valid-looking sources I've come across seem to indicate that the higher brain functions start to have an effect at about 20th week - which would, more or less, equal the first signs of higher brain function being present towards the end of second trimester. So, I don't deny Gil might have started to develop some preference to certain tunes by then beyond the merely instinctual responses.  wink.gif

Don't worry, I'm well aware that I am interpreting what could be simply random chance or automatic responses to be a personality smile.gif But at what point does personality go from instinctive/learned responses to something else? I could introduce you to plenty of people with apparently no higher-functioning capability but they definitely have personalities. A personality is a nebulous, human concept much like faith after all smile.gif

 

Regardless, I love Girl and can't wait to meet her. She seemed to like hearing my voice on the phone so I hope she likes me in person.

Edited by Kestra15

Share this post


Link to post
man, this discussion is depressing. I'm out. *makes like a baby and heads out* (pun intended) You guys have your opinion, I have mine. That's fine. smile.gif

Says the male who will never ever be pregnant.

 

You'll never know if you kill it

 

I'd rather not play that roulette with a pregnancy OR life

Share this post


Link to post

I would like to know why people have sex when they aren't ready to care for the child it can potentially produce. Condoms and birth control pills only do so much. Even if you use them, I remember reading that they don't always prevent pregnancy.

Share this post


Link to post

I thought the same way for a while CrossingStar, but now my outlook is changing because of the relationship I'm in now. I see why its used for bonding, intimate activities can have a strong affect on both parties. Add to it that our bodies feel pleasure from it and soon you're gonna have people doing it because it feels good as well.

Share this post


Link to post
I would like to know why people have sex when they aren't ready to care for the child it can potentially produce. Condoms and birth control pills only do so much. Even if you use them, I remember reading that they don't always prevent pregnancy.

Are you saying that no-one should ever make love unless they want a child ? blink.gif

 

That would have made my 48 years of marriage with only two children a bit - sad...

 

Making love (aka sex...) is NOT just about procreation. "With my body I thee worship" and all that.

Share this post


Link to post
I thought the same way for a while CrossingStar, but now my outlook is changing because of the relationship I'm in now. I see why its used for bonding, intimate activities can have a strong affect on both parties. Add to it that our bodies feel pleasure from it and soon you're gonna have people doing it because it feels good as well.

I get what you mean, but I suppose I'm pointing more to the young 16-year olds who are doing it way too early. Now I think we can all agree that that's just too early and downright foolish.

Share this post


Link to post

I again say it depends on the individual. If a 16 year old is smart about it it can be just the right time for them, if the 16 year old rushes into it then no its not a good thing.

 

From an evolutionary standpoint girls probably started having sex younger longer than we've had this push to wait until we're older (20s-30s), and marriage was also done at a younger age.

Share this post


Link to post

A 16 year old can legally marry. In some countries you can marry younger even than that. So....

Share this post


Link to post
A 16 year old can legally marry. In some countries you can marry younger even than that. So....

Doesn't mean they're mentally mature and responsible by that age.

Share this post


Link to post
Doesn't mean they're mentally mature and responsible by that age.

You can't say that none of them IS, either. Some 16 y/os I know are WAY more sane and responsible than a lot of alleged adults.

Share this post


Link to post
I would like to know why people have sex when they aren't ready to care for the child it can potentially produce. Condoms and birth control pills only do so much. Even if you use them, I remember reading that they don't always prevent pregnancy.

At it's simplest it's because sex is about more than procreation. It's about bonding probably more than anything else. There are plenty of adult, married couples that do not want more kids (or any kids at all), or that can't have kids that will still be having sex because it strengthens their relationship.

 

Incidently a very quick trawl of google shows a rough figure of around only 20% of abortions being performed on those under the age of 20 in the US. Of which 60% are performed on those over 18. So while it's something that's frequently discussed as a scare tactic it must be pointed out that the number of abortions being had by those under 18, as a percentage of all abortion, is actually very low. The oft-cited irresponsible teen using abortion as a form of birth control is actually really not all that common.

 

^ As a note on that I'm sure that Shiney can provide much more accurate data from her Big Box O Statistics than my quick google trawl can.

Share this post


Link to post

Mine was when I was 20 and in a committed relationship and using birth control. Sometimes it is just the Wrong Time.

Share this post


Link to post

Mine was when I was 20 and in a committed relationship and using birth control. Sometimes it is just the Wrong Time.

Amen to that.

 

Mine was when I was 22 and on the Pill.

 

I had no job, and had just escaped a physically abusive relationship and was moving around staying with relatives because the guy kept showing up at my parents' place looking for me. So, yeah... no income, no steady place to live, and then I found out I was pregnant. The last thing in the world I needed at that point was a permanent connection to my abuser.

 

(Edited because I can't spell today.)

Edited by catstaff

Share this post


Link to post
I get what you mean, but I suppose I'm pointing more to the young 16-year olds who are doing it way too early. Now I think we can all agree that that's just too early and downright foolish.

Ten years later, I don't think 16yrs was the wrong time. It was a great time.

Share this post


Link to post
Amen to that.

 

Mine was when I was 22 and on the Pill.

 

I had no job, and had just escaped a physically abusive relationship and was moving around staying with relatives because the guy kept showing up at my parents' place looking for me. So, yeah... no income, no steady place to live, and then I found out I was pregnant. The last thing in the world I needed at that point was a permanent connection to my abuser.

 

(Edited because I can't spell today.)

This. Right here.

 

I'm not saying that all 16 year olds are irresponsible, or that sex is bad. I'm mainly saying that most teens are not emotionally or financially capable of raising a child well.

 

As catstaff and fuzzbucket said, they were in their twenties, and it still wasn't the right time. It's just, I think, a good idea for everyone to make sure that they are ready to deal with the consequences. Perhaps I'm just being overly, but look at the number of kids in the foster system. The majority are there because their parents were irresponsible.

Share this post


Link to post
I get what you mean, but I suppose I'm pointing more to the young 16-year olds who are doing it way too early. Now I think we can all agree that that's just too early and downright foolish.

Poor education is one reason. Some people honestly don't realize sex makes babies. Some people think protection is absolute. Some people believe the various myths (pulling out, doing jumping jacks after sex, the girl being on top, etc.) can protect them from pregnancy.

 

Another is that they honestly don't realize just what kind of a burden taking care of a child is and they honestly think that they're ready to handle it, again because of poor education. Not realizing that they won't be able to go hang out with friends all the time, the amount of money it takes to care for it, the whole "up on and off all night caring for a screaming baby" thing, how much it can cost to have somebody watch your child for you, all the things you suddenly won't be able to do anymore, etc.

 

Some of them honestly don't realize that it's a full-time commitment that will eat up many, if not all, of their resources.

Share this post


Link to post
It's just, I think, a good idea for everyone to make sure that they are ready to deal with the consequences. Perhaps I'm just being overly, but look at the number of kids in the foster system. The majority are there because their parents were irresponsible.

And abortion is taking responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post

I would like to know why people have sex when they aren't ready to care for the child it can potentially produce. Condoms and birth control pills only do so much. Even if you use them, I remember reading that they don't always prevent pregnancy.

Because sex is awesome and I'm not going to be celibate until the day I can no longer get pregnant just because I don't want to have anymore kids. I will never be ready for a second child, so I will (continue to) abort any pregnancy that comes along. So I don't really *need* to be ready for a child in order to have sex.

Edited by danis

Share this post


Link to post
Because sex is awesome and I'm not going to be celibate until the day I can no longer get pregnant just because I don't want to have anymore kids. I will never be ready for a second child, so I will (continue) to abort any pregnancy that comes along. So I don't really *need* to be ready for a child in order to have sex.

This is a very controversial view (well heck, it's a controversial topic in the first place), but I can sort of understand that.

 

What about monogamous, even married couples that, for whatever reason, *know* that they *never* want children? Does that mean that they should *never*, ever have sex, for their entire lives, just because there is a very slight possibility of it producing a fetus? If they use condoms, take birth control, etc, they are doing everything they can to minimize this risk. But I don't agree with "if you aren't prepared to have a baby, don't have sex" as an absolute, because that would mean that many people would have to go their entire lives without sex. And yeah, sex can possibly produce those fetus-forming cells, but sex is also just plain fun. And pleasurable. And no one should be denied that forever, just because of that slight chance.

Share this post


Link to post
This is a very controversial view (well heck, it's a controversial topic in the first place), but I can sort of understand that.

Haha I'm pretty aware that a good number of people find my views to be "extreme", but I suppose I see it as I know what I can handle, and I value being healthy and a good mother to my existing child more than bring an unwanted child into this world that I'll resent at the risk of my life.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.