are you pro-life or pro-choice? (read OP)

@buttersdaman000: @superguy1591: Some liberals out there want to have Abortion taxpayer funded.

Look, I may not have a stance, but I have to say the sperm argument is freaking stupid. Do you not know the difference between sperm, an egg, and a multicellular diploid human embryo at a stage of constant development? Sperm on it's own has no potential, an egg on its own has no potential, An Embryo does and is growing in the process. Unless sperm on it's own can grow a heart, a brain, arms, legs, its not even a logical comparison.

Pro life because abortion is basically murder

Pro-Life.

Rape (though I've heard and seen multiple stories of people overcoming that.) and the condition of the mother are the only reasons why I could understand Pro-Choice.

But that whole, "I'm not ready for a baby" bs when you've been having causal sex crap.. I have 0 sympathy. If you're ready to have sex, you damn well better be ready to have a child.

Having casual sex.. and SOMEHOW not expecting a baby to be the result, but then have the nerve to get an abortion.. yea that person is trash. Js.

1.) No Left leaning politician currently holding office wants to make abortion funded by the government.

2.) well, hear me out here because we're aware that the argument is silly--we think it's as silly as the zygote is a human baby argument--but it makes as much sense as the counter argument in that if you let that sperm live instead of wasting it and letting it die in a napkin, that sperm COULD have been a child if you had used it to try to impregnant a woman.

If you let the sperm alone it could begin being a part of your "constant development" requirement. Every sperm is a potential child and every jerk is a mass murder, since that couldve been a "developing embryo."

About as murder as jerking off.

@dbvse7: So you want to punish people for having casual sex--specifically women? That's what children are to you--a punishment?

No it's not mate, Sperm is not at a state of development, it's not growing the same way like an embryo or a zygote, this isn't even a logical comparison. Unless you get a woman pregnant and the embryo is there.

There is no potential. Like the egg that falls out when a girl has her period.

Choice

You're right: the sperm isn't in development, but it is cause of development.

You're saying a seed isn't a plant--which is true--but you can't plant a tree without seeds. Me throwing an apple seed in the trash and you taking an apple seed out of the ground that someone has planted yield the same result--no apple tree.

@dngn4774: POTENTIAL right to life...

and someones right to privacy should always trump another's potential right to life

Ok mate, you got me. But I still remain undecided.

@superguy1591: This goes for men who don't want their girl to keep the child as well. No, it's about taking responsibility for your actions.

Pro choice. It's your body, if you don't want the fetus, you don't have to have the fetus.

I support abortions in rape cases, when dealing with young women and when done early. Aside from that it starts getting murky. I know it's hotly debated what should be considered 'early' so it gets even murkier.

@rpgesus: No. It shouldn't. Life is more sacred than privacy. When people's privacy is violated they get pissed, when the right to life is violated they cease to exist.

@dbvse7: You're forcing someone to have a child to teach them a lesson? Are you going to pay for that child's clothing, schooling, medical bills, food and recreational activities for the next 18 years, Mr. Lesson giver?

I'm all for forcing a woman to keep a child...just as long as the people who are saying the woman should keep the child are willing to pay more in taxes to help make rearing a child easier on women.

@dngn4774: I don't consider fetuses on the 1st and 2nd trimester really objectively they exhibit for the most part none of the characteristics of sentient life

@rpgesus: I never said you had to agree with me.

Edit: Life is still developing in those stages. Even if it doesn't suit your criteria for what a living sentient being is, the fact remains that such a life is developing, and negating that process ends it. You might not consider that to be murder but I do. There's no safety period to halt life then pretend it never existed at all.

@dngn4774: I never said you had to agree with me either just debating

@superguy1591: There's a difference between punishment and responsibility.

It's not about teaching them a lesson. If you think you're old enough, and responsible enough to have sex.. you should be old enough, and responsible enough to handle the result. Having an abortion in a situation like this is just a childish immature excuse for not being responsible.

That's such a sad mindset to have too.. "Well I want to be grown, but if there's a situation where I actually have to grow up.. I'm just going to get rid of the problem so I don't have to"

@dbvse7: well, we can argue all day, but I think knowing your not ready to rear a child and making the painful decision to abort it is very mature.

Child rearing is should be one of the most meticulously well-planned out decisions of your life and not the result of a mistake you made.

@dbvse7: so your arbitrary made up idea of responsibility means both child and parents should suffer in the name of youre old enough to have sex so ruin you and your babies life because I think it is your responsibility that's not even including the fact that most scholars don't believe that a fetuses in the early stages is even considered sentient life

It is illegal to have an abortion after the first trimester.

But she's not only doing it to her body.

She's doing it to the body that hasn't came out yet.

- TAS

@chimeroid: no it is not

I'm pro choice because I believe when used judiciously, and with a lot of thought, abortion can save as many lives as it takes. Making it legal, safe and affordable improves the quality of life of young women, and I don't consider it murder because the embryo or fetus is not a person yet (which, I suppose, is the real debate.)

Good luck on your essay :)

@superguy1591: I agree with what you said, I just wanted to comment on the usage of "mistake" that often comes up in this conversation. It's a terrible generalization, regardless of the meaning. If you mean sex, that excludes accidental pregnancy from consensual sex between committed partners. If you mean birth control, that exludes accidental pregnancy from the rare failure of properly used birth control.

Not pooping on your argument, I'm just sick of hearing it.

y'know here's a couple questions I have for all the pro-lifers... given that a woman's right to an abortion is Constitutionally protected under the 14th Amendment why does it matter so much to you that someone you don't even know might decide they want to have an abortion? How does it adversely affect you personally? Why is it SO important that your personal views be forced upon others who don't share them? Especially if you aren't footing the bill for the procedure in any way shape or form.

@superguy1591:

I am both and at the same time neither prolife nor prochoice because I am libertarian. The prolife argument is simple, which is to ban abortions because it is immoral and the prochoice argument is also simple that we shouldn't ban abortions because it's just a ball of cells.

Both arguments are flawed to me because (yes I am religious) killing babies or potential babies is still immoral and banning abortions will not accomplish anything other than abortion clinics becoming criminal operations and going underground.

I am religious and I still think it's evil to abort babies, but at the same time I understand why some women, especially those who were raped, would want to abort their babies.

The only true solution is to improve living standards (most importantly in third world countries), educate minors on the dangers of premarital sex, and do our best to prevent violence such as rape. Should it be legal? It doesn't matter if it becomes illegal or not because my stance is to create a world where people no longer need abortions 90% of the time when they know exactly that they WANT and CAN give birth to and raise their children.

But of course, you're going to call me prochoice again just to bait me into a really long argument right?

EDIT; My libertarian conclusion leads to this: whether an action is moral or not it's not the government's business to force people. Prolife or prochoicen this violates the non-aggression principle against the mother (prochoice) or both her and her baby (prolife).

@theamazingspidey:

The fetus is still apart of the woman body, your argument is nothing more nit-picking and semantics, tbh. As, I don't consider a fetus to be anything close to sentient life.

@rpgesus: My idea of responsibility is, if Sentient Life can make a decision, know the results of that decision (which can be a life changer) then you should have a back up plan like a responsible human being that doesn't include "getting rid of the problem"

Please.. I couldn't care less about what MOST (not all ) BELIEVE (not know absolutely)

@dbvse7: I'll see you on 16 and pregnant suffering while rational peoples back up plan is abortion and everyone is happy and there is little suffering

@rpgesus: Nah, that will never be my future. Happy because of an excuse to make their life easier, but w.e you say. :)

Life is all about choice which is why I'm pro-life. A woman can choose to do whatever she wishes to do with her own body, but she cannot choose to destroy someone else's body because that destroys the other person's right to live and make decisions for themselves.

There is a legitimate debate to be had as to when a fertilized egg becomes a human being, but it's completely illogical to say that a baby just delivered is a human being while a baby two-thirds out of the womb can have it's head sliced open and it's brains ripped out. (partial birth abortion) Where life should be said to begin is a complicated question to which I have no satisfying answer, but once it's a life, it deserves protection. It's just as asinine to say, "We'll make abortion legal because women will just kill their unborn children anyway," as to say, "We'll make infanticide legal because women will just kill their children anyway."

I am from Europe and in most countries it is. In the US tho, you are right. Only one country is 6 week limit and one 12 weeks Most are at 24 weeks

This as well.

Apart from exceptions including endangerment of the mothers life or rape, responsibility must be taken. Using abortion as an excuse is disgusting. If you can't keep it in your pants, a life shouldn't be lost because of that.

There should definitely be a limit on time of when you can abort. And in my country it is 3 months. For a simple reason. A girl can be pregnant up to 45 days without even realizing she is, and it takes time to arrange the surgery. But in most states in US it is at 6 months which is wrong. Those women knew they were pregnant, decided they WANTED the child and then 6 months later decided to kill it. That should be banned. Choice is cool and all, but even in perfect democracy you vote and then have to live with your choice for a while.

Anyhow. Infanticide is a form of lesser murder as women are hormonally unstable after birth and can kill a child in that state.

In general, I'm pro-life. However, I don't think abortion should be illegal.

I agree that abortion limit should be lowered, although most people get an abortion in the first 12 weeks or 3 months. Rarely do people get an abortion the last minute. It would be nice if it can be lowered everywhere to 5 month, it doesn't inconvenient many people since only less than 2% of abortion are after 5 month and can save the child from enduring pain. That being said, most politician are sneaky when it comes to 5 month bill, like in Texas where they passed the bill with a strict regulation closing down Clinics. I am all for limiting abortion month to save further harm to a unborn, but preventing people choice to even do it is horrible.

What kind of a dumb thing is that to say? XD

I'm probably pro-life.

This seem like a interesting argument...

Pilasy:La Voix d'un homme

This means "Pro Choice" by the way. "Pro Life" = "no matter what the situation.."

@antithetical:

y'know here's a couple questions I have for all the pro-lifers... given that a woman's right to an abortion is Constitutionally protected under the 14th Amendment"

The 14th Amendment gives women the right to abortion like the 4th Amendment gives government the right to collect everybody's phone records. In both cases, the Amendment gives no such right, but the Courts just made it up because it suited their agenda. The Constitution says nothing about abortion one way or another. It should be decided on the state level.

"why does it matter so much to you that someone you don't even know might decide they want to have an abortion? How does it adversely affect you personally?"

I want it to be illegal to kill a child in the same way as I want it to be illegal to kill an adult. It doesn't matter if I know the individual personally. I simply don't want them to be murdered.

"Why is it SO important that your personal views be forced upon others whodon't share them?"

I'm very live and let live, but when someone else's values are pro-murder, then I think it's reasonable to impose my values. If someone tried to machete you to death, I'd protect you. I have the same courtesy for the unborn.

"Especially if you aren't footing the bill for the procedure in any way shape or form."

Sadly, government funds do go to abortions and Obamacare mandates companies pay for abortions.

Abortion is not rare. One-fifth of pregnancies end in abortion, and almost none of those are because of health issues. Nearly half of black pregnancies end in abortion which would make Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, leap for joy since she promoted abortion in the hopes that races she considered to be inferior would be exterminated.

As you said, the real question is when a fertilized egg becomes a human. It's fine to say you don't believe it is a human being, but what separates a fertilized egg from humanity? Surely we should take great care in this judgment if making the wrong decision ends in the murder of innocent human being.

I also consider myself Libertarian, but I differ with the mainstream Libertarian view on this issue. I agree that if abortion were made illegal, then it would still occur, but you can say this about all crime. The reason for having a law in place is two-fold. 1. To encourage good behavior and discourage bad behavior and 2. to bring justice to the guilty. Just because some illegal activity will still take place, that does not negate the reasons for the law.

You don't say that making murder illegal starts an underground economy and empowers shady type characters therefore murder should be legal, so why do apply this same logic to abortion since you seem to believe abortion is murder?

I have no problem with making all sorts of activity I personally find wicked, such as illegal drug use and prostitution, legal because all people involved consent to these activities, but an unborn child does not consent to being sucked up by a glorified weed whacker, so I'm not okay with this. The libertarian view is about protecting people's individual rights, and there is no more fundamental right than the right to life.

How do you define sentient life? What crucial difference in sentience in the child exists three seconds after birth that did not exist three seconds before birth?

Not true. The vast majority of people who consider themselves Pro Life would allow abortion if a mother's life were in danger, and a large percentage of Pro Life people (can't remember off the top of my head if its a majority) would allow it in the case of rape and incest.

You're basically wrong.

I don't think Abortion is right, but I think it's necessary on a planet with 7 billion+ people.

I am pro choice cause I think that if you figure it out and have the procedure during month 1 then it's pretty close to the BS argument that fetuses aren't people yet.

In general I think it is so appalling that so called civilized people would have such an institution solely for the convenience of lazy, amoral people. Why prevent pregnancy or even be choosy about who we have sex with when we can pay to have someone kill our unborn children AMIRITE? If this s*** wasn't real it would sound like the premise to a movie set in a dystopian future. This IS the dystopian future. This is not a religious argument, this is a morality issue based on the idea that human lives are important. The importance of human life is the very essence of human existence since we all need a group to survive within.

Here's the other angle that makes me pro-choice: Old people are euthanized in nursing homes once no one can pay for them. Undesirables are killed by law enforcement. Foreign civilians are killed by kids behind joysticks thousands of miles away. We breed countless dogs and cats into the animal pound meat grinder. Our society does this type of s*** everywhere you look. So basically this is who we are. Fiends. Soulless ghouls. If we were to ban abortion there would still be abortion. The difference would be that rich people would have it done the way they do it now and poor people would be getting abortions by the same people doing butt injections on people with cement. So... I guess let's have a little equality when it comes to killing the most defenseless people in the world. Little do the tiny ones know it's their own mother putting the hit out on them. "MOMMY! HELP!" She looks the other way in silence as the doctors close in.

I am pretty liberal pro-life.

And therein lies the hilarity of the hypocrisy. How are these pregnancies considered fundamentally different than normal pregnancies? By the logic used by pro-lifers, these pregnancies are still life but for some reason, are allowable 'murders' in the eyes of pro-lifers.