Does abortion really equal murder?

[daydreamergurl15]

Hear some pro-lifer rhetoric, this appears not to be the case.right. Because people always think that clinically about emotional topics. And "Just so NO" ended the war on Drugs too.Whether women are "designed" to be pregnant or not does not alter the fact that an unwanted foetus gestating is using the mother's own body and resources against her willMale. Bovine. Excrement. The real world simply does not run in such black/white either/or terms. A woman consenting to have sex does NOT imply consent to get pregnant. She is consenting to have sex. Thats it. Consenting to have sex and consenting to be pregnant are NOT the same thing.

Pregnancy does not need your consent. Pregnancy is decided once you decide to have sex. It really is black and white, you don't want to deal with the consequences of sex, don't have sex.

Now, while I fully agree that people who don't want to be pregnant should make every effort not to conceive, I do NOT believe, for a moment, that the mere act of having sex implies anything near the same sort of consent as actively deciding to get pregnant and have a child. Chalk and cheese dude.

That's because the implications are different. One is seeking a child while the other is simply seeking the pleasures of sex (though I'm sure the one seeking a child is also seeking the pleasures of sex). But it still remains, even if you are seeking or not, pregnancy is still one of the consequences of sex.

 

[CCGirl]

Hear some pro-lifer rhetoric, this appears not to be the case.right. Because people always think that clinically about emotional topics. And "Just so NO" ended the war on Drugs too.Whether women are "designed" to be pregnant or not does not alter the fact that an unwanted foetus gestating is using the mother's own body and resources against her willMale. Bovine. Excrement. The real world simply does not run in such black/white either/or terms. A woman consenting to have sex does NOT imply consent to get pregnant. She is consenting to have sex. Thats it. Consenting to have sex and consenting to be pregnant are NOT the same thing.

Pregnancy does not need your consent. Pregnancy is decided once you decide to have sex. It really is black and white, you don't want to deal with the consequences of sex, don't have sex.

Yes, pregnancy is a punishment.Where did you dream up this idea that having sex means you are consenting to pregnancy??!!

 

[The Gregorian]

I hate to quote myself, but:

This is such an easy one. I'm really tired of explaining it to people. Here's how it is: the world would be a frightening place if it were legal to kill other people's wanted foetuses. (Happily) pregnant women would live in fear. Therefore it has to be illegal to kill someone else's foetus without their consent. That's why it counts as more than just assault. The legal terminology is not ideal, but the law against killing wanted foetuses exists as it is for the psychological benefit of mothers, not foetuses. It has nothing to do with whether or not a foetus is a human being. It simply recognises the fact that the loss of a wanted foetus is a traumatic experience for a woman and that therefore people who cause involuntary miscarriage should be dealt with more severely than those who merely assault.

OIC... so it's not about the fetus being "human" by any means... but because it causes a woman distress... THAT'S what makes it wrong. So, you can be charged with manslaughter for causing a woman emotional distress?

What if I get a girl pregnant and find out and am very happy to be a father... but the girl doesn't really feel like that much of a commitment, so she kills my child. Am I not being put through the SAME emotional distress?

 

[WhatThe]

What if I get a girl pregnant and find out and am very happy to be a father... but the girl doesn't really feel like that much of a commitment, so she kills my child. Am I not being put through the SAME emotional distress?

In such a case. you would have the right to take her to court, and, provided that you agreed to take all responsibility for the child after it was born, you would probably win the case.

 

[CCGirl]

OIC... so it's not about the fetus being "human" by any means... but because it causes a woman distress... THAT'S what makes it wrong. So, you can be charged with manslaughter for causing a woman emotional distress?

What if I get a girl pregnant and find out and am very happy to be a father... but the girl doesn't really feel like that much of a commitment, so she kills my child. Am I not being put through the SAME emotional distress?

These laws must only exist in the states, right?

 

[Maren]

The difference between "riding in a car" and "getting pregnant" is prevention. If you ride in a car and get into a car accident, unless the accident was your fault, you could not prevent another car from hit you. When it comes to sex, you have a choice. If you choose to have sex, then you are consenting to anything that can happen.

Actually, this isn't really true per what we've discussed. Practicing safe sex is much like riding in a car, you do all you can to prevent pregnancy but sometimes an accident can happen. This is no different than driving a car, you do all you can to drive safely including putting on your seat belt but accidents do happen. As such, having sex is no more consenting to pregnancy than driving (or even getting in a motor vehicle) is consenting to have an accident. In both cases, despite it being against your wishes it can still happen. That is why they are called accidents.

 

[The Gregorian]

thanks for pointing out that the anti-abortion crowd considers a child punishment for having sex.
good to know that you consider sex only for procreation and nothing more, funny that women who are married are just as likely to have abortions

Absolutely not! Pregnancy is a wonderful side effect. I've had sex plenty of times with no intent on getting the girl pregnant... but guess what? If she had become pregnant, I would live up to the consequences of my actions.

If you can't handle the risk, you shouldn't take it. Sex should certainly not be ONLY for procreation... but if you can't handle the side effect, were it to come up, you're not ready to have it. There are plenty of other ways to feel nice.

so sex is a contract now? "if i have sex with you, i here by state that no matter how horrible you are after it and if i get pregnant and suffer i will have your spawn, even if i hate the child after its born"

... if you know the person to be horrible, or don't know the person not to be horrible, you probably should keep them out of your vagina. Sort of common sense.

sure because this is what happens good straw-man though

Aha... the infallible argument "I have no logical way to respond to a valid point, therefore I can accuse anything I don't like to be a straw-man."

Great debate tactic.

if they know they have aids and they don't tell you, its murder anyway.

The example specifically stated that your partner only found out they had aids AFTER the fact. If they accidentally give you AIDs, are you free to kill them because you didn't want that to happen?

lets punish people instead of teaching them how not to get pregnant that'll work!

It's not bloody punishment. Yes, teach them how to avoid getting pregnant... but abortion isn't a form of birth control. It's killing your own child. If your birth control fails, you have to live with the consequence. If you can't, you'd better make sure your birth control doesn't fail. Problem is, a LOT of young girls today don't really care about birth control because they know 'they can always just get an abortion.' I know girls who actively lie to guys, telling them they're on the pill just because the guy likes it better not having to wear a condom. When she conceives someone's child, she just kills it without ever letting them know they were a father. Do you not see that as being remotely "wrong?"

what in the world??! when has this ever happened in the real world, if you mean child support, it needs to be rethought out, but the whole point of it was to make a unwilling unsupportive father take some responsibility
its not "enslavement" when otherwise you wouldn't do anything for this child you know is yours.

I personally know women who have gotten pregnant to get a guy to marry them. I know a girl who keeps telling guys she's pregnant to get close to them and have them buy her things and get everyone excited, then she gets an abortion and calls it a miscarriage so everyone will feel sorry for her. I live in a community with a lot of illegal immigrants.... and it is VERY common for a girl to go out and get pregnant ASAP so she can collect child support/well-fair and never have to work again. Of course, they tend to find one guy to give them a baby, then run off with another guy so they can collect child support checks, but have the guy they're currently living with support them both... then she gets to pocket the child support money.

So, a guy might have to pay for a child for 18 years that is already being supported by some other guy... just so the mother doesn't have to work.

Compared to a few months of discomfort.

sure she can, its her body! no one but anti-abortionists seem to not get this, no one i mean no one, has the right to take blood from you against your will, no one can take any organs or food or anything without your consent
why does something that is growing inside you get to have the right to do so? why is a fetus an exception if nothing else is?

because it's your child and you put it there via consensual sex. And it's not "her" body, it's the baby's body that's being killed.

please show that anyone has ever had an abortion for such a stupid reason, you make light of something most of society feels strongly about.

some straw-man there, i've never heard of such a sick person in my life

So if one parent kills the child without the other's consent, it's perfectly within their right. If the other parent kills the child without the first parent's consent "i've never heard of such a sick person in my life."

... my point exactly.

Yes... women have the inconvenience of carrying the child... but men have to trust women to do so. A man knows that one bad flu and the child can die. If she gets too stressed, his child can die. We have to sit powerless for nine months trusting women with our children. Yet, we have to deal with the fact that a woman has the right to go have an abortion without us even knowing whether we were a father or not.

... any physical pain of childbirth is NOTHING compared to that.

Imagine if you've missed your period a couple times, but haven't tested and aren't quite sure... someone mugs you and punches you in the stomach as they run away... you go to the hospital and only find out you had a baby when you hear that it's dead... and someone took it without your permission. Men have to live with this every day... and we know we can't always even be sure if it happened... I personally have had at least one occasion where I've suspected the girl I was with was pregnant, then she disappears for a while and comes back different. And I don't even have the right to know if I was a father... let alone any say in what I believe happened.

You have no idea how powerless that makes you feel.

Even being raped... you still at least know whether or not you were raped. You can still at least try to fight back. You can still press charges and punish someone for taking something so valuable from you. As men, we don't have a chance for any of that... we just have to sit back and take it.

Women don't appreciate that at all... because you're the woman... you get to say what lives and dies, and that makes life cheap.

 

[The Gregorian]

If the mother considers the baby a person, THEN it is manslaughter. If she doesn't, then it isn't.

Therefore: If the father considers the baby a person, THEN it is manslaughter. If he doesn't, then it isn't?

I think a line can be drawn at 20 weeks. But I disagree that just anyone should be able to decide to abort someone elses child without possibility of punishment.

Why not define it as with any other person: Brain activity. As soon as brain activity begins, it's a living person. If there is no brain/no brain activity, it's not a living person?

Like, a parent can smack a child, yet be quite rightly upset about someone else smacking the same child. In some cases it is NOT appropriate to consider anyone capable of making a decision, particularlry when it involves individual consent issues.

Is it not OK for a father to "smack" the child, but perfectly fine for the mother?

... oddly enough, this tends to be the case. If the father's abusive... it's abuse. If the mother's abusive... oh well. Just like in society, if you see a man hit a woman, chances are he's about to be taken down by anyone else who saw. If you see a woman hit a man, people just wonder what he did to deserve it. Horray for equal societies.

 

[CCGirl]

You seem to be rather bitter that you are male, Non?

 

[platzapS]

It's not bloody punishment. Yes, teach them how to avoid getting pregnant... but abortion isn't a form of birth control. It's killing your own child. If your birth control fails, you have to live with the consequence. If you can't, you'd better make sure your birth control doesn't fail. Problem is, a LOT of young girls today don't really care about birth control because they know 'they can always just get an abortion.' I know girls who actively lie to guys, telling them they're on the pill just because the guy likes it better not having to wear a condom. When she conceives someone's child, she just kills it without ever letting them know they were a father. Do you not see that as being remotely "wrong?"

Morally wrong? Nope. Although I think this girl is pretty stupid, considering condoms/pills are probably a lot less stressful and expensive than abortion.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

The difference between "riding in a car" and "getting pregnant" is prevention. If you ride in a car and get into a car accident, unless the accident was your fault, you could not prevent another car from hit you. When it comes to sex, you have a choice. If you choose to have sex, then you are consenting to anything that can happen.

No more than you consent to being in a car accident by geting in a car. Whats the difference?

If you get in a car, that does not equate to consenting to be in a car accident, even though an accident is certainly a possibility
If you have sex, that does not equate to consenting to be pregnant, even though pregnancy is certainly a possibility.

Its exactly the same. Possible outcomes of an action does not imply consent to said outcomes.

 

[The Gregorian]

No more than you consent to being in a car accident by geting in a car. Whats the difference?

If you get in a car, that does not equate to consenting to be in a car accident, even though an accident is certainly a possibility
If you have sex, that does not equate to consenting to be pregnant, even though pregnancy is certainly a possibility.

Its exactly the same. Possible outcomes of an action does not imply consent to said outcomes.

That's a good illustration, actually. So, if you consent to get in a car, and the person uses caution while driving and is... say... rear ended. Do you have the right to kill the driver because they were driving when you got hurt?


Of course, I'm completely appalled at the fact that you equate a baby with a car accident.

 

[The Gregorian]

Morally wrong? Nope. Although I think this girl is pretty stupid, considering condoms/pills are probably a lot less stressful and expensive than abortion.

... wow... you honestly don't think it's wrong at all for a girl to lie about being on birth control and when she gets pregnant she kill the man's child without even telling him?

Children just mean that little that killing someone's child isn't wrong at all.... Where do your children go to school, again?

 

[platzapS]

... wow... you honestly don't think it's wrong at all for a girl to lie about being on birth control and when she gets pregnant she kill the man's child without even telling him?

Children just mean that little that killing someone's child isn't wrong at all.... Where do your children go to school, again?

Now that I think about it, I do think it's wrong to lie about such a thing, because the men might find it very important that their offspring is being killed. But the wrong is the lying, not the aborting.

I do not believe that abortion kills a person, so I don't see it as too much of a big deal. I find your scenario highly unusual--why would a girl do that? Abortion can be painful or uncomfortable at the least, and contraception is usually a lot easier.

I don't have any kids right now (I'm only 18).

 

[HannahBanana]

That's a good illustration, actually. So, if you consent to get in a car, and the person uses caution while driving and is... say... rear ended. Do you have the right to kill the driver because they were driving when you got hurt?


Of course, I'm completely appalled at the fact that you equate a baby with a car accident. If you think that's true... get steralized... easy as that. Then you never have to experience plus the gene pool will be a nicer place.

First of all, please stop with the ad hominem attacks. They're completely unwarranted and totally un-Christ-like.

Second of all, to some women, the thought of having a baby is as traumatic as being in a car accident is. Not all women love babies, you know, just like not all women love shopping or chatting with their friends. Different people have different likes and dislikes, and it is not your place at all to say that a woman is wrong for disliking the idea of having a baby. Nor is it your right to force a woman through pregnancy and childbirth against her will. To me, that is much more cruel than "killing" an unthinking, unfeeling, unknowing first-trimester fetus is.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

That's a good illustration, actually. So, if you consent to get in a car, and the person uses caution while driving and is... say... rear ended. Do you have the right to kill the driver because they were driving when you got hurt?


Of course, I'm completely appalled at the fact that you equate a baby with a car accident. If you think that's true... get steralized... easy as that. Then you never have to experience plus the gene pool will be a nicer place.

The example is only to show the paraleles of intent and consent.

Please stop intentionally trying to find unintentional points to get bent out of shape about.

sex does not equal consent to pregnancy. Period.

 

[Allegory]

Wouldn't an aborted soul just go back to god anyway? If god wants that soul in a body so badly he can put it in a non-aborted fetus.

 

[RobertByers]

For my fellow pro-lifers, the thread title says it all. Since I hear it trumpeted as such, should we not advocate imprisonment or the death penalty for the women who have it done and the medical staff who carry it out as we do for most murderers in our society? If not, then shouldn't we consider putting it in its own category? I'm not saying we should support abortion, rather give it a more accurate description. Thoughts?

Murder is only murder when it is the intent to take a human life without just cause. Those who believe in allowing abortion or do them or had them are only murderers if they knowingly killed the child. Most, or all, denie that abortion kills a human being. Its not yet become a baby person.
Abortion is what it is. Unintentional manslaughter.
This is why so many pro-chociers switch over to pro-life without a soul change. They don't stop agreeing with murder and all the psychology behind that but instead they stop disbelieving the foetus is a human being.

Pro-lifers should never use the word murder because its not true, intelligent, or profitable. Perhaps some actual people accept abortion for the evil intent to murder mankind but few and far between.

Even if pro-choicers do not articulate their disbelief in the humanness of the foetus it is stil their dominating motivation on their opinion.
Pro-lifers because of our demagraphics and living in a pro-choice establishment tend to be more articulate and downright smarter then our adversarys.
We more clearly understand our motivations and the other sides.

 

[cantata]

I understand my own motivations and reasons perfectly. The personhood of the foetus makes no difference whatsoever. The fact is that dying is only bad if you want to live, and a foetus cannot be said to want to live. A first trimester foetus can't even feel any pain. So I see absolutely no reason not to kill it, whether you think it's a person or a human being or a soul or whatever.

 

[Q2004]

Pro-lifers because of our demagraphics and living in a pro-choice establishment tend to be more articulate and downright smarter then our adversarys.
We more clearly understand our motivations and the other sides.

Does all of that empty back-patting have a purpose? You do know that you say Pro-lifers should not use the word murder in this context (which we know they often do) and immediately follow up with "We're more articulate and smart!"? When you're more articulate and smart than your adversaries (because of demographics or otherwise) you don't generally make the mistake of misusing the word murder (you'd also generally proof-read your statements; or are you trying to be ironic?).