Jump to content
Bear

Abortion

Recommended Posts

From what I've experienced, there's more extremists than real pro-lifers nowadays. I wouldn't label some "extremist", just not educated enough to know about biology and what can go on in the womb, and I don't think many care to because they fill that spot in with their morals so they don't see the need to. It's the main reason why I feel like pulling my own teeth when I see bills/laws trying to be passed based on personal morals and religion because they're being forced onto everyone else.

There's a difference between lack of education and willful ignorance.

 

I see a lot more of the latter. Even when presented with evidence that proves them wrong, many reject it and/or try to prove that evidence wrong, even if it means refuting it with lies.

 

A case in point is the purported link between abortions and breast cancer, something that has been thrown around for years in an attempt to discourage abortion and get laws passed to illegalize it. This is an outright lie, as studies have proven that no such link exists. However, people are still spreading it around like it's truth.

 

Seriously, if a person is going to form an opinion on the topic at ALL , they ought to at least have an understanding of the subject from a biological point of view. For example, as I understand it, plenty of fertilized eggs never implant and therfore 'die' without ever developing into a baby.

 

I'd like to point out that a lot of the people coming from the antichoice point of view are religious and frequently rely on religious dogma to back their argument. Religion is invariably tied with the abortion debate, because there is no real reason outside of religion to justify the illegalization of abortion*. I don't think they see the need to understand reproduction to make a proper opinion; they simply rely on what they're been taught.

 

And you are correct, most eggs never implant, and the menstrual cycle actually flushes out an egg every time. Some fertilized eggs are aborted by the uterus before you even know they're fertilized at all.

 

*If someone can find me a nonreligious argument against abortion I'd be glad to hear it.

Edited by Infinis

Share this post


Link to post

The fact is that there is no religious reason to stop abortion.

 

The Bible says, "We are born into sin."

NOT conceived.

NOT tri-mestered.

 

So for those that fervently believe it is their personal duty to force the hand of God to grant DNA a Soul are beyond reasoning with. But what are the chances of reasoning with people who talk to an imaginary BFF in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Some probably legitimately think that making it illegal will stop it... or at least discourage it. Some people may simply not realize that some women will be so desperate as to go to someone who may not even have the proper credentials if they think it will help them out of their problem.

 

It may well be that some of these people honestly have good intentions and do NOT really want to see women die.

Eeh, maybe they don't outright want women* to die, but the pro-life/anti-choice/pro-forced-birth platform is based around misogyny. Whether or not people consciously realize what they're doing and saying, the platform working to limit abortion access/limit birth control options/stunting sex education/etc. is, at its core, meant to uphold patriarchy by controlling women*, often punishing them for "stepping out of line".

 

*women since the conservative platform doesn't even acknowledge nonbinary genders

Share this post


Link to post
Do I approve of abortion? No, not really. Seems to me that avoiding the unwanted pregnancy in the first place... while granted not always fail-proof... is the better option. IMO it should PROBABLY be used only as a last resort.

Um, a good chunk of abortions are because other contraceptives used failed. So yes, they're already a last resort.

 

Others get them because they either

a) didn't know to use contraception

or

B) didn't use the contraceptives properly, thus a failure

 

...so it either already happens in the way you wish all of them would, or many don't know to use/how to properly use contraceptives. I do think that abortions are indeed a last resort in most cases anyway. :P

 

I do agree with you, though. I'd rather someone manage to have many successful uses of contraceptives and not need to get an abortion except for the moments the contraceptives failed than never using or improperly using them and needing abortions all the time. That's got to be hella-expensive! >w<

Share this post


Link to post
Somethings dark tells me that pro births WANT women to go to back alleys because they like the fact that it's unsafe and she may die.. seeing it as her punishment

Yeah, I get that feeling at times.

Share this post


Link to post

GhostChilli

Somethings dark tells me that pro births WANT women to go to back alleys because they like the fact that it's unsafe and she may die.. seeing it as her punishment

Yeah, reminds me of my mother. She basically believes if you're going to kill a "Defenseless life" then you need to do it in a manner that will kill you too, because you're unfit to live by killing a "baby". Fun times growing up with that mindset. I remember when I was like...maybe 13? That we were talking about rape, and I asked her "would you make me give birth to the baby if I was raped"? Her reply? A firm "Yes". Do you KNOW how screwed up that is? Being 13 and asking your PARENT who is suppose to care for and protect you..say THAT to you? She justified it because "it's god's little treasure that was his will to have be born this way..." (Probably another reason I quit being religious was because this mindset literally had me terrified and screwed me up) Ugh, I just...it disgusts me. This was something from my childhood that I really don't want to remember q_q

 

Edited by BlightWyvern

Share this post


Link to post
GhostChilli

Yeah, reminds me of my mother. She basically believes if you're going to kill a "Defenseless life" then you need to do it in a manner that will kill you too, because you're unfit to live by killing a "baby". Fun times growing up with that mindset. I remember when I was like...maybe 13? That we were talking about rape, and I asked her "would you make me give birth to the baby if I was raped"? Her reply? A firm "Yes". Do you KNOW how screwed up that is? Being 13 and asking your PARENT who is suppose to care for and protect you..say THAT to you? She justified it because "it's god's little treasure that was his will to have be born this way..." (Probably another reason I quit being religious was because this mindset literally had me terrified and screwed me up) Ugh, I just...it disgusts me. This was something from my childhood that I really don't want to remember q_q

I asked my father if he'd make me give birth if it was going to KILL me. You know what he did? He had to THINK about his answer. THAT has scarred me to this day.. and also agreeing with what you said, I had to look up to him as my protector but that gets halted to a stop when something like this happens..

Share this post


Link to post

Oh man, are there honest-to-god human beings who would rather have a clump of cells survive than their actual living loved ones? That is like ten million different ways of screwed up. The collateral damage from us existing kills way more cells every day than that, but these are just special because they're in a specific configuration that might possibly become a human being? Seeds are not the same as trees, dammit. (And then there are the people who picket abortion clinics, accidentally get pregnant, get themselves one because for some reason they are the one exception, then go right back to picketing. Because those exist too. Humanity is kinda terrifying sometimes.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

If giving birth did not require so much money and effort and sacrifice I would say yes abortions are stupid they could just give the baby up for adoption. But giving birth requires a lot and women should have the choice whether or not they want to go through with it.

Share this post


Link to post

WARNING: Link is somewhat graphic.

 

I don't understand how someone could value this over the life of a person who has established relationships, dreams, etc. Taking away their life by forcing them to have an unwanted child is absolutely wrong. Even if carrying to term does not kill the mother, there are many ways it could destroy her life if it is not a wanted pregnancy, and I thus find it disgusting for anyone to do that. Also, it's awfully sadistic to say that it's a woman's punishment to become a mother if she has sex. No child should be raised by a resenting family, and that's not only hurting the mother, it's potentially causing the child to suffer as well. (If the mother decides she wants he child after all, though, great for her ^^)

Share this post


Link to post
If giving birth did not require so much money and effort and sacrifice I would say yes abortions are stupid they could just give the baby up for adoption. But giving birth requires a lot and women should have the choice whether or not they want to go through with it.

Adoption isn't exactly perfect, either, you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Adoption isn't exactly perfect, either, you know.

Yes, but it is still an option. I have lots of friends who were adopted because their parents could not have children. Nothing is perfect, it is just an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Yes, but it is still an option. I have lots of friends who were adopted because their parents could not have children. Nothing is perfect, it is just an option.

A very poor option, which has been discussed at length in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
A very poor option, which has been discussed at length in this thread.

It's not always poor though. Sure sometimes it can be, but I think it is a case by case basis. I simply cannot see how you can generalize adoption as a "poor option" I do not think adoption is a poor option. I do not think abortion is a poor option. It really depends on the parents situation. Without adoption, people who could not have kids for medical reasons, or lgbt couples could not have children either. Adoption can be a great thing at times, it is not always a "poor option"

Share this post


Link to post

ok this is something I came up with back in school when we were learning about sex and such, I want to know what you guys think about it because the only reaction I got from my class was them getting uppity and calling me nasty names

 

this is what I said/asked

if most abortions are from unwanted pregnancies then why not at the age of 13 everyone stores some eggs and sperm, and then is sterilized

no more unwanted pregnancies, no more kids messing up their lives and fewer abortions

 

 

yes I know this will never happen but I would like to hear a reason against this other than how dare you want to take away peoples rights to have babies

 

 

 

 

also to the whole life starts thing

I've always believed life starts at first breath

because if its the other ones, the deaths a day thing jumps from a few million to billions (I'm counting all life on earth not just humans)

Share this post


Link to post
It's not always poor though. Sure sometimes it can be, but I think it is a case by case basis. I simply cannot see how you can generalize adoption as a "poor option" I do not think adoption is a poor option. I do not think abortion is a poor option. It really depends on the parents situation. Without adoption, people who could not have kids for medical reasons, or lgbt couples could not have children either. Adoption can be a great thing at times, it is not always a "poor option"
The adoption system is horrible.

 

Many of the kids put up for adoption are never adopted. Some do get lucky and get out, but many simply grow up in foster homes, etc, never leaving the system until they become adults.

 

The adoption process is ALSO extremely hard for parents looking for a child. Not only do you have to have the money for the adoption itself, you have to have a certain degree of financial stability, can't smoke, and meet a bunch of other requirements (I think there's an aptitude and/or IQ test or whatever) to be even deemed a fit parent. :\ While it makes some sense, most people that have children and are GOOD parents would never meet those requirements.

 

It's a poor option to simply put a child up for adoption because they may NEVER leave the system. And when they do, some end up with serious problems from the knowledge that they were put up for adoption because they feel unwanted, some go searching for their birth mother and get totally mixed results that can be hard on them and their birth mother...

 

It's just a very messed up system at this current time. Unless we crack down and seriously try to fix it, it will be a poor option in many ways. :\ Yes, there are the lucky ones that get out of it early on and never have any problems. But there are far too many who never have that luck.

Edited by edwardelricfreak

Share this post


Link to post
ok this is something I came up with back in school when we were learning about sex and such, I want to know what you guys think about it because the only reaction I got from my class was them getting uppity and calling me nasty names

 

this is what I said/asked

if most abortions are from unwanted pregnancies then why not at the age of 13 everyone stores some eggs and sperm, and then is sterilized

no more unwanted pregnancies, no more kids messing up their lives and fewer abortions

 

 

yes I know this will never happen but I would like to hear a reason against this other than how dare you want to take away peoples rights to have babies

I believe that option actually is available, but it's really expensive.

 

I do think it would be a good option to those who can afford it, but overall I would just prefer proper sex ed for everywhere in the world. That is definitely a proven way of cutting back unwanted pregnancy, STDs, AND abortions. :3 And it's a lot cheaper.

 

Though, I do wish sterilization in any form was a lot cheaper, even if it's a temporary thing that could be undone later. We neuter our pets and other stray animals to control the population and not have a bunch of unwanted kittens and puppies and various other animals roaming around, but we don't do this for ourselves?

Share this post


Link to post

if most abortions are from unwanted pregnancies then why not at the age of 13 everyone stores some eggs and sperm, and then is sterilized

no more unwanted pregnancies, no more kids messing up their lives and fewer abortions

 

 

yes I know this will never happen but I would like to hear a reason against this other than how dare you want to take away peoples rights to have babies

1. Violation of bodily autonomy

2. Expense of the initial procedure

3. Storage (space, expense, records)

4. Expense of procedures once pregnancy is desired

5. What to do with "extras" (too many of the eggs implant successfully, fertilized eggs left after successful implantation)

 

Most of it boiling down to the fact that, in addition to violation of personal rights, it would be more expensive to do it that way than the way it is now and would still carry the risk of "deaths of defenseless babies" in the form of the "extra" successful implantations that are over what the mother can carry to term as well as those fertilized eggs that are not yet implanted when pregnancy is confirmed.

Share this post


Link to post
It's not always poor though. Sure sometimes it can be, but I think it is a case by case basis. I simply cannot see how you can generalize adoption as a "poor option" I do not think adoption is a poor option. I do not think abortion is a poor option. It really depends on the parents situation. Without adoption, people who could not have kids for medical reasons, or lgbt couples could not have children either. Adoption can be a great thing at times, it is not always a "poor option"

Adoption is first, and foremost, about the children involved. Not about the adults looking for children. The children should always be thought of first; so instead of thinking, "Oh, there are people looking to adopt children. Someone wants this kid!" we need to look at numbers. These numbers prove, time and time again, that most children do NOT get adopted. They get bounced back and forth between foster homes until they are legal adults and left on their own. And if the child isn't a healthy, white, neurotypical infant, the chances of adoption decrease by a significant amount.

 

This is why we consider adoption a very poor option. A high demographic of people who get abortions are people of color or people or people with genetic disabilities, which means the potential child's chance of a successful adoption are dangerously low. And what happens to all of these children that don't get adopted?

They kill themselves. Or at least, they try.

 

 

A poor option is one where the chance of success is significantly small, which is the case for adoption.

Share this post


Link to post
ok this is something I came up with back in school when we were learning about sex and such, I want to know what you guys think about it because the only reaction I got from my class was them getting uppity and calling me nasty names

 

this is what I said/asked

if most abortions are from unwanted pregnancies then why not at the age of 13 everyone stores some eggs and sperm, and then is sterilized

no more unwanted pregnancies, no more kids messing up their lives and fewer abortions

 

 

yes I know this will never happen but I would like to hear a reason against this other than how dare you want to take away peoples rights to have babies

I meant it as mandatory world over and did not cost anything

Share this post


Link to post

Also "not always a poor option" is kind of dubious odds, considering we're discussing the life and ultimate fate of human beings. Even if more than 50% of infants were adopted successfully by non-abusive loving families, what about the rest?

 

yes I know this will never happen but I would like to hear a reason against this other than how dare you want to take away peoples rights to have babies

Um, that's kind of a really big thing though. Having children is really really hugely important to a lot of people - and if we let the governments do this, who's to say they won't go on to restrict every other part of people's autonomy?

Also, are you kidding me? Where's the money for all this surgery coming from if it's "free"? There needs to be equipment, regularly monitored and replaced, and probably an army of doctors containing more people than there are doctors alive today. Unless you want like 200% tax on everything for everyone on the planet, it's not going to happen.

Edited by Fractional Pi Day

Share this post


Link to post
I meant it as mandatory world over and did not cost anything

I don't mean the cost to the individual, I mean the cost in general of having the procedure done, the eggs and sperm stored, etc. It's not like the doctors would be doing the surgeries and such for free, or that the workers at the storage facilities wouldn't be getting paid, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
It's not always poor though. Sure sometimes it can be, but I think it is a case by case basis. I simply cannot see how you can generalize adoption as a "poor option" I do not think adoption is a poor option. I do not think abortion is a poor option. It really depends on the parents situation. Without adoption, people who could not have kids for medical reasons, or lgbt couples could not have children either. Adoption can be a great thing at times, it is not always a "poor option"

Because it is.

 

A majority of children who enter the system never make it back out to a loving family. This is the fallacy of the adoption argument so many keep throwing around: the children who exit the system with a perfect family and life are the exception, not the rule.

 

Children in the system still face problems like neglect and abuse; a number of foster and adoptive families have neglected and abused the children they have fostered or adopted. They face a number of behavioural and mental illness issues, with problems like depression, among others. These children are also prone to suicide for any number of reasons.

 

Adoption is not foolproof. It's very expensive, both for the woman giving up the baby and for the potential adoptive people. LGBT+ couples have an even more difficult time across the board because of still-widespread stigma and misconceptions about LGBT+ people. It's hard to pass the adoption qualifications and it can take years to actually adopt the child a couple is interested in.

 

(If someone could find one of ShinyTomato's posts that'd be great.)

 

if most abortions are from unwanted pregnancies then why not at the age of 13 everyone stores some eggs and sperm, and then is sterilized

no more unwanted pregnancies, no more kids messing up their lives and fewer abortions

 

 

yes I know this will never happen but I would like to hear a reason against this other than how dare you want to take away peoples rights to have babies

 

Not all people begin puberty at 13. Because of natural variation, some begin later and some earlier.

 

I'd like to point out that to store eggs, you first have to take fertility treatments. The ovary, under normal conditions, only releases one egg at a time. Fertility treatments force the ovaries into releasing multiple eggs at once for harvesting. These fertility treatments cannot be taken by all people; carry a risk of death, injury, and/or infertility from complications, allergies, overdose, and/or other problems; and cannot be taken by people under the age of 18, last I checked.

 

It costs money to store eggs and sperm.

 

I'd also like to point out that if everyone is sterilized no one can give birth, which makes the whole idea pointless. I don't think we can raise whole babies in test tubes yet and we still haven't invented an artificial uterus. At this point in time, having a baby still requires a functional uterus.

 

Do you have any idea how hard it is to get voluntarily sterilized? In many places you can't get a voluntary sterilization done unless you already have children, have the consent of a spouse, a medical reason, or all of the above.

Not to mention the expense of getting sterilized - with men it's a simple, quick procedure (which can actually heal over time and make him viable again), but females have internal plumbing and require much more invasive and thus more costly procedures.

Share this post


Link to post
I meant it as mandatory world over and did not cost anything

I don't know about you, but even assuming this were plausible and sustainable the idea of the government or a corporation or ANY organization having permanent access to my freaking DNA scares the absolute hell out of me.

Share this post


Link to post

you lot do realize it was a make-believe question (cant remember the word right now) for a world where it was normal and that was the only way to have kids

I was 8 at the time and the only answers I ever got were uppity how dare you ones

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.