Author Topic: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)  (Read 3499 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 2397

  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1684
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #75 on: February 13, 2018, 12:07:58 PM »
In terms of potential, trillions of times the number of people born is wasted regardless, due to the number of eggs and sperm that never get used. And due to the number of different environments that the pre-child could exist in, and be affected by, before it's born.

I don't think there should be a hard limit, because the idea that there is a point after which all abortions become immoral, is something that is used against people who have perfectly valid reasons for seeking an abortion.

The people who have good reasons shouldn't have to prove themselves, or deal with additional burdens because of what others might be up to. If there are some people who have problematic reasons for seeking an abortion, they're the exceptions that it's up to "us" (not the patients) to pick up on.

According to this pro-life site, 89-92% of all abortions happen during the first trimester, and only 1.3% happen after week 20. How big a share of the 1.3% are due to medical matters? And how many abortions happen post week 20 because of poor access to abortion and general reproductive healthcare services?
« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 12:18:52 PM by 2397 »

Offline Fast Eddie B

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3095
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #76 on: February 13, 2018, 12:20:15 PM »
According to this pro-life site, 89-92% of all abortions happen during the first trimester, and only 1.3% happen after week 20. How big a share of the 1.3% are due to medical matters? And how many abortions happen post week 20 because of delays caused by poor access to abortion and general reproductive healthcare services?

That seems to also make the point that very few would be affected by setting a limit at or just after 20 weeks.

If we’re looking for a compromise, that is, and not drawing a line in the sand at absolutes.

Offline CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8406
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #77 on: February 13, 2018, 12:24:35 PM »
According to this pro-life site, 89-92% of all abortions happen during the first trimester, and only 1.3% happen after week 20. How big a share of the 1.3% are due to medical matters? And how many abortions happen post week 20 because of delays caused by poor access to abortion and general reproductive healthcare services?

That seems to also make the point that very few would be affected by setting a limit at or just after 20 weeks.

If we’re looking for a compromise, that is, and not drawing a line in the sand at absolutes.


So, who should  decide when women should be allowed to have abortions and when they should be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, and should that decision be based on an arbitrary number of weeks, with no scientific criteria?

I'm not looking for a compromise on a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body.

and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline Fast Eddie B

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3095
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #78 on: February 13, 2018, 12:33:06 PM »
I'm not looking for a compromise on a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body.

Then you’re clearly planted at one extreme and not open to argument.

Which reinforces my thought that, at least at the extremes, “never the twain shall meet”.

Once the extreme positions are ignored, the rest of use can debate an acceptable middle ground.

Offline Henning

  • Official Forum Artist
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5327
  • Mad "Liker"
    • Anomalina
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #79 on: February 13, 2018, 12:38:42 PM »
Cool, now we're talkin'.

For reference,
a typical pregnancy lasts 40 weeks. 37 weeks is premature, but can survive without hospital.
a premature fetus born at 24 weeks has a 50% chance of surviving with a very hard ICU stay. The record is 21 weeks.
"first trimester" means before week 13.
"second trimester" is before week 27.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. --Voltaire
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. -- Hitchens.

Online Ah.hell

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12560
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #80 on: February 13, 2018, 12:46:47 PM »
(click to show/hide)

I think I quoted the wrong post. Basically, there are pro-choice extremist that drive the discussion in the same way that pro life extremists do.   

I was going argue this point but Carbshark already did.
Quote

That seems to also make the point that very few would be affected by setting a limit at or just after 20 weeks.

If we’re looking for a compromise, that is, and not drawing a line in the sand at absolutes.


So, who should  decide when women should be allowed to have abortions and when they should be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, and should that decision be based on an arbitrary number of weeks, with no scientific criteria?

I'm not looking for a compromise on a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body.
I suspect one of the reasons abortion is so uncontroversial in most of Europe is that they tend to compromise.  Most European countries limit a women's right to abort more than many if not most US states.  Gestational limits, counseling, cooling off periods are pretty common. 

Pretty much any gestational limit is going to be arbitrary.

I'm not looking for a compromise on a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body.

Then you’re clearly planted at one extreme and not open to argument.

Which reinforces my thought that, at least at the extremes, “never the twain shall meet”.

Once the extreme positions are ignored, the rest of use can debate an acceptable middle ground.
Good luck with ignoring the extremists, they're remarkably good at not being ignored. 
« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 12:49:54 PM by Ah.hell »

Online Ah.hell

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12560
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #81 on: February 13, 2018, 12:54:56 PM »
Cool, now we're talkin'.

For reference,
a typical pregnancy lasts 40 weeks. 37 weeks is premature, but can survive without hospital.
a premature fetus born at 24 weeks has a 50% chance of surviving with a very hard ICU stay. The record is 21 weeks.
"first trimester" means before week 13.
"second trimester" is before week 27.
More reference:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6235557.stm

France:
Quote
Availability: On request

Gestational limit: 12 weeks

Conditions: The woman must claim to be in a "state of distress" because of her pregnancy. After 12 weeks, abortions are allowed only if the pregnancy poses a grave danger to the woman's health or there is a risk the child will suffer from a severe illness recognised as incurable. If this is the case, two doctors must confirm the risk to the health of the woman or foetus.

A pregnant girl under the age of 16 may ask for an abortion without consulting her parents first. But she has to be accompanied by an adult of her choice.
Conscientious objection allows professionals to decline involvement in procedures, but they must inform the patient without delay.

American Opinions on the matter show that most folks are in the middle but they are consistently ignored in the discussion. 
http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/
If I read the polling correct, most folks want:
First trimester: No conditions
Second Trimester: Increasing Conditions
Third Trimester:  Only for the life and health of the mother or the Baby has some horrible disease with little chance of survival.

Online Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Global Moderator
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • *****
  • Posts: 14032
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #82 on: February 13, 2018, 01:14:51 PM »
The devil is in the details, so I really want to know what those increasing conditions are.

To me, saying that women should be obliged to go through child birth just because we have some lofty idea about human potential is not far from supporting the draft "but I have these damn heel spurs."
I think its unethical to dictate these terms to others and not give them a chance to commit their own 'sins' in something this benign.
I almost pre-empted the murder rebuttle to the prohibition argument but didnt think I would need to so here goes:
Its not the same as murder. It is a service that people want to avail of. If it can not be purchased legally, it will be purchased legally and at greater risk. Thats the reality.
Not all crimes can be accommodated under this logic, but if you think abortion should be in the same category as murder, theft or assault then I dont think your opinion is in the middle.

Offline SkeptiQueer

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7308
  • DEEZ NUTZ
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #83 on: February 13, 2018, 01:22:17 PM »
The comparison to murder only works if we're going to jail women for buying abortifacients under the table. We have a law against murder because we agree murder is wrong and because we agree that murder is punishable and we set a punishment for murder and for attempted murder as well. If you're not going to punish women for buying the drugs, then a better analogy is marijuana prohibition where you're just trying to make it harder for people to get.

If the hard cutoff doesn't allow for women to seek an abortion or doctors to recommend one when the mother's life is in danger then you're sentencing the woman and possibly the child to death over what, morality? That's some fucked up morals.

Rigid legal bounds ignore that medicine is a fair bit more complex than rigid deadlines. Practically putting a deadline also encourages the fundies to create obstructions to prevent people from getting to the doctor and scheduling the abortion before the deadline. Missouri's waiting period, the requirements for ultrasounds or for doctors to have admitting privileges (reduces available clinics). All of these things function on supply and demand principles.

Speaking of supply and demand, your "just the extremes" ignores that it's not equal numbers. The number of people who would advocate for day-before-delivery abortions on demand as a societal good is going to be relatively nil. On the other side, every "crisis pregnancy center" and Catholic church and fundie Christian pundit talking about "life begins at conception" is also in the "no abortions at any week" camp. Maybe some make exceptions for rape or life of hre mother but that's still massively outweighing the people who would advocate for abortions on demand at any time. Like orders of magnitude. They also tend to oppose insurance/employer funded birth control (which decreases the number of abortions) and government funded contraceptives which do the same.

In a perfect world nobody would ha e an abortion. We don't live in that world and trying to write laws as though we do is just going to cause harm for others.

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

HIISSSSSSSS

Offline CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8406
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #84 on: February 13, 2018, 01:23:17 PM »
I'm not looking for a compromise on a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body.

Then you’re clearly planted at one extreme and not open to argument.

Which reinforces my thought that, at least at the extremes, “never the twain shall meet”.

Once the extreme positions are ignored, the rest of use can debate an acceptable middle ground.

If allowing a woman to chose what happens to her own body is "extreme" then, yes, but I don't consider that extreme.

I disagree that forcing a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, if the pregnancy more than 20 weeks along is not extreme.

I do agree with the "never the twain shall meet."
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline Fast Eddie B

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3095
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #85 on: February 13, 2018, 01:26:21 PM »
Not all crimes can be accommodated under this logic, but if you think abortion should be in the same category as murder, theft or assault then I dont think your opinion is in the middle.

The Analogy Fallacy?

I did not mean to equate abortion with murder. Because some do, it was a poor choice.

Insert "Bank Robbery" instead. Or "Tax Evasion", if your objection is the violence implied in murder, theft and assault.

The point was the argument, "<some> People will continue to do "x" in spite of "X" being illegal" could be applied to any law regarding any crime. I just think its a poor argument against passing a law when the purpose of laws is to encourage compliance, not force 100% compliance.

Online Ah.hell

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12560
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #86 on: February 13, 2018, 01:32:49 PM »
@carb, very few people think of themselves as extremists, so its hardly surprising that you do not think of your self that way.

@the general audience, what would you say of someone that compares the following to murder?

A.  abortion after 30 weeks?
B.  Abortion after 20?

At some point abortion does become infanticide. 

Eddie's right about the argument, "people will still do x if we make x illegal," that's true of every crime.  Really the question should be, are the consequences of the black market in X worse than having X be legal.

Historically the consequences of an outright ban on abortion are clearly far worse than various degrees of legalization. 

Offline SkeptiQueer

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7308
  • DEEZ NUTZ
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #87 on: February 13, 2018, 01:49:02 PM »
@carb, very few people think of themselves as extremists, so its hardly surprising that you do not think of your self that way.

@the general audience, what would you say of someone that compares the following to murder?

A.  abortion after 30 weeks?
B.  Abortion after 20?

At some point abortion does become infanticide. 

Eddie's right about the argument, "people will still do x if we make x illegal," that's true of every crime.  Really the question should be, are the consequences of the black market in X worse than having X be legal.

Historically the consequences of an outright ban on abortion are clearly far worse than various degrees of legalization.
A: they're not being honest or have been lied to
B: they're not being honest or have been lied to

Abortion=murder is ridiculous because there's no good parallel. The only way I get close is to postulate P-zombies (pseudohumans that have no sentience) being farmed for organs. Is that murder? It's clearly not a human. It's not capable of doing anything for itself. It can't survive as is. It might kill the host, who is all of those things, and it might turn into a human but it also might come out with a bunch if things wrong, scream in pain for 2 years not understanding anything beyond EXISTENCE=PAIN AND SOMETIMES FOOD BUT STILL PAIN before it dies. That's not a human. At best it might be a human. At worst it's a slow murderous parasite. In the middle, it's a very expensive demonstration of the harsh evil of existence.

The comparison to murder is just an absurd reduction to try to get an emotional reaction, or more commonly to level moral judgement at people who disagree.

I agree with you about the implications being more important than the possibility of people disobeying the law. It's a question of how effective will it be, what the consequences will be, and how enforceable it is.
HIISSSSSSSS

Offline 2397

  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1684
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #88 on: February 13, 2018, 01:49:38 PM »
At some point abortion does become infanticide.

Literally after birth.

It's never truly comparable with killing an ex vivo person. Terminating a pregnancy is something you do to yourself. Or, if you terminate someone else's pregnancy against their will, that's assault.

I would like to see pregnancy be something that's moved out of the body, because it is a state with significant health risks, regardless of what people want from it. Once the artificial gear is as good or better, we can argue over if we should replace abortions with transplants to artificial wombs.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 02:02:44 PM by 2397 »

Online Ah.hell

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 12560
Re: Pro-choice vs. -life (Split from Religion.jpg)
« Reply #89 on: February 13, 2018, 02:19:38 PM »
At some point abortion does become infanticide.

Literally after birth.

(click to show/hide)
Every bit as abitrary as any other cut off.   What's the difference between the fetus a day before birth vs the day of or day after?  That its breathing on its own?

@skepticqueer
Change the cut off to the the day before birth, still no comparison to murder?  Would you accept a ban on abortion except for the life of the mother/the baby has some horrible disease past any date?
« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 02:25:53 PM by Ah.hell »