I’m not against abortion in cases where the mothers life is in danger and cases of proven rape (yeah, I know that one is going to piss people off because many on the pro-abortion side are also on the side of “believe all women no matter what because women never EVER lie about anything! Men are the scourge of the planet and should be eradicated”)
I am 100% against using abortion as birth control.
If we could reach a scientific consensus as to when “life” actually starts, I would be 100% for allowing abortion up to that point. But nobody wants to reach that consensus.
My current mindset is based on this: if we found a bundle of living cells (not even a fully formed human) on Mars, our entire world view would change dramatically! Everything would come into question: religion, politics, everything.
Why is it that here on Earth, a bundle of cells isn’t given as much weight as it would on another planet? Just because you might have to make sacrifices?
I don’t know whether or not we are snuffing out any consciousness when a fetus is aborted, but I do know that neither side of the argument wants to even discuss it because it’s either all or nothing, my way or fuck you!
I would rather err on the side of caution. Maybe we should not be so willy nilly about ending possible life. Also, maybe we should come to some kind of acceptable consensus.
Please proceed to post all of your “fuck you for thinking about anything other than unrestricted abortion access!!” comments below:
Edit: I am not a religious person. Pretty far from it. I shouldn’t have to make that point since online forums like this have made it perfectly clear that religious people in the US are totally not being persecuted, but I know that many of you will probably just brush off my comments as “religious loony shit” if I don’t make my position on religion crystal clear.
many of you will probably just brush off my comments as “religious loony shit”
The problem doesn’t have anything to do with your faith. The problem is that you have personal ideas that you are using as justification to control someone else’s healthcare decisions.
Your feelings about abortion are perfectly valid. Wanting to tell someone else that they can’t have a medical procedure unless it meets YOUR justification standards is asinine and should be met with ridicule. There is no compromise on a fundamental right like this. Stay out of people’s healthcare decisions.
But you are still completely rejecting the idea that the fetus has any right to exist. You still have it fixed in your thoughts that the “bundle of cells” is not actually a form of life. As I said, if there was a scientific consensus on this, that would be a different story. But again, nobody wants to come to that consensus.
Totally not even related (/s): what is your stance on the meat processing industry? Do you feel sympathy for the creatures that do not have a voice?
But you are still completely rejecting the idea that the fetus has any right to exist.
There’s plenty of existing philosophical arguments over this that you can find online, but the idea that a fetus has a right to exist is not mutually exclusive with the idea that a woman has the right to bodily autonomy.
A fetus can have the right to exist, and a woman can have the right to refuse to provide nutrients for an unwanted fetus. If the latter precludes the former, the former precludes the latter—leading to an impasse. As a compromise, most of society has deemed “fetuses” rights do not supersede that of their mothers’ until a certain point where they gain personhood, such as when they have a heartbeat (which is the medical requirement for being alive).
You’re welcome to believe that the rights of a fetus unconditionally supersede that of the mother, but you would need to make a very convincing argument to not come across as being unsupportive of women’s rights.
I would be absolutely fine with allowing for abortion up to the point of hearing a heartbeat if that’s the scientific consensus for the definition of life.
Unfortunately, heartbeat bills have been demonized to no end because (again) “it’s my way or fuck you!!”
I am not unsupportive of women’s rights, I am willing to be supportive of the rights of those who may not be able to speak for themselves.
Heartbeat bills don’t actually cover a heartbeat. They cover electrical signals that are not a heartbeat, but they can be detected much earlier.
An actual heart beat can be detected around 17 to 20 weeks. Heart beat bills kick in at 6 weeks when there is no heart yet. It’s not even a fetus until 8 weeks. You have to deny all the science to pass these laws.
I think its just best that we don’t force people who don’t want or can’t handle the responsibility of rasing a child into raising a child. People generally are not good at things they don’t want to do and being a parent is a pretty important job that often lasts for life.
I’m not against abortion in cases where the mothers life is in danger and cases of proven rape (yeah, I know that one is going to piss people off because many on the pro-abortion side are also on the side of “believe all women no matter what because women never EVER lie about anything! Men are the scourge of the planet and should be eradicated”)
I am 100% against using abortion as birth control.
If we could reach a scientific consensus as to when “life” actually starts, I would be 100% for allowing abortion up to that point. But nobody wants to reach that consensus.
My current mindset is based on this: if we found a bundle of living cells (not even a fully formed human) on Mars, our entire world view would change dramatically! Everything would come into question: religion, politics, everything.
Why is it that here on Earth, a bundle of cells isn’t given as much weight as it would on another planet? Just because you might have to make sacrifices?
I don’t know whether or not we are snuffing out any consciousness when a fetus is aborted, but I do know that neither side of the argument wants to even discuss it because it’s either all or nothing, my way or fuck you!
I would rather err on the side of caution. Maybe we should not be so willy nilly about ending possible life. Also, maybe we should come to some kind of acceptable consensus.
Please proceed to post all of your “fuck you for thinking about anything other than unrestricted abortion access!!” comments below:
Edit: I am not a religious person. Pretty far from it. I shouldn’t have to make that point since online forums like this have made it perfectly clear that religious people in the US are totally not being persecuted, but I know that many of you will probably just brush off my comments as “religious loony shit” if I don’t make my position on religion crystal clear.
The underlying assumption that women are having abortions for funzies is incredibly sexist on top of being untrue.
Abortion is a medical procedure between a woman and their doctor. You and no one else has any right to take that away.
If you are in a burning building and only have the time to save either 100 fertilized eggs (or fetuses) or a baby, what would you choose?
Do you have any idea the process to prove rape? You want women to suffer for months with an unwanted pregnancy just to qualify for abortion?
Why is rape even a qualifier here? It’s not yours or the States decision.
Exactly what cases do you want to criminalize abortions? Early term, mid term, late term?
The problem doesn’t have anything to do with your faith. The problem is that you have personal ideas that you are using as justification to control someone else’s healthcare decisions.
Your feelings about abortion are perfectly valid. Wanting to tell someone else that they can’t have a medical procedure unless it meets YOUR justification standards is asinine and should be met with ridicule. There is no compromise on a fundamental right like this. Stay out of people’s healthcare decisions.
But you are still completely rejecting the idea that the fetus has any right to exist. You still have it fixed in your thoughts that the “bundle of cells” is not actually a form of life. As I said, if there was a scientific consensus on this, that would be a different story. But again, nobody wants to come to that consensus.
Totally not even related (/s): what is your stance on the meat processing industry? Do you feel sympathy for the creatures that do not have a voice?
There’s plenty of existing philosophical arguments over this that you can find online, but the idea that a fetus has a right to exist is not mutually exclusive with the idea that a woman has the right to bodily autonomy.
A fetus can have the right to exist, and a woman can have the right to refuse to provide nutrients for an unwanted fetus. If the latter precludes the former, the former precludes the latter—leading to an impasse. As a compromise, most of society has deemed “fetuses” rights do not supersede that of their mothers’ until a certain point where they gain personhood, such as when they have a heartbeat (which is the medical requirement for being alive).
You’re welcome to believe that the rights of a fetus unconditionally supersede that of the mother, but you would need to make a very convincing argument to not come across as being unsupportive of women’s rights.
I would be absolutely fine with allowing for abortion up to the point of hearing a heartbeat if that’s the scientific consensus for the definition of life.
Unfortunately, heartbeat bills have been demonized to no end because (again) “it’s my way or fuck you!!”
I am not unsupportive of women’s rights, I am willing to be supportive of the rights of those who may not be able to speak for themselves.
Heartbeat bills don’t actually cover a heartbeat. They cover electrical signals that are not a heartbeat, but they can be detected much earlier.
An actual heart beat can be detected around 17 to 20 weeks. Heart beat bills kick in at 6 weeks when there is no heart yet. It’s not even a fetus until 8 weeks. You have to deny all the science to pass these laws.
Dude… Hate to break it to you but you are unsupportive of women’s rights.
I think its just best that we don’t force people who don’t want or can’t handle the responsibility of rasing a child into raising a child. People generally are not good at things they don’t want to do and being a parent is a pretty important job that often lasts for life.
So then you agree with the death penalty, yes? Since those people can’t handle the responsibility of being a functional part of society?
No because the Justice system is not infallible.
https://innocenceproject.org/