Abortion
-
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
I guess if the guy has no right to say anything about the child he created then he should equally have no obligation to provide for a child he didn't want. His right to choose and all....
Talking about choice, you're free to minimise your risks of conceiving. All the way to jerking off to ensure you don't have to pay child support.
And free to choose not to pay child support?
No, although I concede a tremendous amount needs to be done to fix broader Family Court issues.
So the guy has to accept and be responsible for his actions but not the woman?
That argument doesn't make sense. She has to either abort it or take it to term in which case she then has to offer it for adoption or raise it. She's still left with a choice and has to take responsibility for those actions.
What are you going to do with a guy that says "don't have an abortion" but then won't pay child support?
How doesn't it make sense? If it all boils down to an absolute right to choose then why should the guy have any obligation to look after a kid he didn't want?
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
I guess if the guy has no right to say anything about the child he created then he should equally have no obligation to provide for a child he didn't want. His right to choose and all....
Talking about choice, you're free to minimise your risks of conceiving. All the way to jerking off to ensure you don't have to pay child support.
And free to choose not to pay child support?
No, although I concede a tremendous amount needs to be done to fix broader Family Court issues.
So the guy has to accept and be responsible for his actions but not the woman?
That argument doesn't make sense. She has to either abort it or take it to term in which case she then has to offer it for adoption or raise it. She's still left with a choice and has to take responsibility for those actions.
What are you going to do with a guy that says "don't have an abortion" but then won't pay child support?
How doesn't it make sense?
Because you accepted the risk of her conceiving and leaving the decision what followed to her. That's why.
-
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in US Politics:
I guess if the guy has no right to say anything about the child he created then he should equally have no obligation to provide for a child he didn't want. His right to choose and all....
Talking about choice, you're free to minimise your risks of conceiving. All the way to jerking off to ensure you don't have to pay child support.
And free to choose not to pay child support?
No, although I concede a tremendous amount needs to be done to fix broader Family Court issues.
So the guy has to accept and be responsible for his actions but not the woman?
That argument doesn't make sense. She has to either abort it or take it to term in which case she then has to offer it for adoption or raise it. She's still left with a choice and has to take responsibility for those actions.
What are you going to do with a guy that says "don't have an abortion" but then won't pay child support?
How doesn't it make sense?
Because you accepted the risk of her conceiving and leaving the decision what followed to her. That's why.
I thought the guy had no say in the decision. Or at least he shouldn't.
-
@Siam said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rembrandt said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@No-Quarter said in US Politics:
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Rembrandt said in US Politics:
Seems super bizarre to me. I'd say the overwhelming majority of people would agree at least on a fundamental level that abortion itself is a bad thing if not wrong.
Perhaps in Georgia. Most people I know keep their personal opinions to themselves if they don't outright support a woman's right to choose. Particularly men.
It's not a man vs woman thing. In fact studies have found that overall women are more pro-life than men, so I don't think men should feel like they can't have an opinion on this. It's a complex moral debate.
I don't see how men have a say on women's bodies, particularly women they don't know.
Here's how simple it is, if you're opposed to abortion, don't have one.
Having been on the less "pure" side of the issue, the above is spot on
It's way too much of a mind fuck for anybody to decipher so live and let live will always be the only solution.
In this modern world, reasonable term abortion must be an option to couples and individuals
Edit: dark pun not intended 🙂
I do agree, though that argument doesn't wash with pro-lifers. They are against abortion because they believe human life begins at conception, so see it as murder. Technically they are correct, although there is a world of difference between a first trimester fetus and third trimester. So the question is really: at what point is abortion murder, if at all? That's a difficult question to answer, and the best we can do is either say unborn children have no rights, or we draw a somewhat (but not completely) arbitrary line around the first or second trimester.
The debate is no less polarized among women because the two sides aren't really arguing the same issue.
-
@No-Quarter good summation. Reckon most abortion participants were pro life before pro choice became the infinitely best solution to a, all things considered, pretty minor cock up.
I was.
-
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Siam said in US Politics:
@antipodean well then there's no one left with a valid say. A caucus of women and their friends?
It's a discussion I leave entirely to women solely because I'll never have to make that decision. Personally I'm pro-choice because I recognise the reality of the situation. A dear friend of mine for a long time is very opposed to abortion and that's her choice. I respect it.. We don't discuss it. I get involved when men start insisting they can tell women what to do with their bodies.
I get involved precisely because abortion is women insisting they have the right to decide what they do with other peoples bodies. In this case use suction to break thier lImbs off causing great pain, and pull them out of a womb in pieces.
No women or wannabe white knight can make me shut up about the murder of an innocent young human. -
I completely forgot about this thread. Seems my position hasn't changed much in the last year and a bit.
-
@No-Quarter good summation. Reckon most abortion participants were pro life before pro choice became the infinitely best solution to a, all things considered, pretty minor cock up.
I was.
I tend to think it really is a 'walk a mile in my shoes' type situation.
Many people are not 'pro abortion' but accept the need for 'pro choice' often through personal experience.
-
A big issue I have currently is this #shoutyourabortion crowd. Almost seems to be an attempt at glamorising it or passing it off as just some medical procedure. Women I know who have been through it even a couple decades ago still can't talk about it without crying, that is some serious trauma that may not be adequately conveyed by a trusty woke society. As I said earlier abortion is a bad choice but people need to know the truth of as to how bad it is and then can fairly weigh that up with the alternative and decide the best option for them. It's amazing the amount of people that are completely oblivious to the procedure in the later term, if someone is for that legally then I think they should know exactly what they are for.
-
@Rembrandt said in Abortion:
Seems super bizarre to me. I'd say the overwhelming majority of people would agree at least on a fundamental level that abortion itself is a bad thing if not wrong. The real question is whether it is less bad or wrong than the alternative.
To add to that there is a nuance to the debate, at least outside the woke and ultra conservative bubbles.
Most people (myself included) are tolerant of abortion legislation which is somewhat more lax than their own personal views/moral compass - because life happens and there but the grace of God go I...
Where that line is, as @No-Quarter says is somewhat arbitrary but judging various other social norms around 1/2 trimester seems fair.
-
@antipodean said in Abortion:
She has to either abort it or take it to term in which case she then has to offer it for adoption or raise it. She's still left with a choice and has to take responsibility for those actions.
This seems like a superior position than having no choice and having to take responsibility for a decision which is not yours, no?
-
The how late is too late question has an important practical component. Having established that the whole issue is ultimately unique to every participant faced with this hideous decision, the timing of the decision needs illuminating.
Surely the abortion verdict weighs heavily in the air immediately the pregnancy is confirmed. I'd postulate that's most common, an assault, a one nighter, a pill slip up in a fledgling relationship, fuckbuddies, a knee trembler in the bogs, many obvious situations where 18 years together bringing up a guilt kid is never a good option.
I dread evidence that women are "sitting" on a pregnancy waiting months to decide whether to terminate or not. That sounds deranged.
Would be interested in requests for termination and pregnancy development. Fuck I hope people aren't waiting 3 months (or more, jesus!) to weigh up the pros and cons of parenthood
-
@Rembrandt women crying after the choice they made is a measure of character not the brutality of the procedure, ( ditto skites). Shit happens to everyone in life, coping with it is the trick. If crying is their coping, then I don't mean to be harsh
-
@antipodean said in Abortion:
She has to either abort it or take it to term in which case she then has to offer it for adoption or raise it. She's still left with a choice and has to take responsibility for those actions.
This seems like a superior position than having no choice and having to take responsibility for a decision which is not yours, no?
It's not a brilliant solution granted but it's better than the alternative.
-
Anyone read the chapter in Freakanomics where they put forward the idea that the drastic drop in crime is in relation to Abortion becoming legal. I believe statistics show children who are adopted out or not wanted by their parents are far more likely to engage in crime and end up in the justice system. Once these poverty stricken woman had an option to abortion many took it resulting in a drop in crime 15 years later.
http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/
I think many of us let our own biases influence us when talking about this subject. Many of us have no idea what true poverty is like for children or being in a home that is surrounded by drug use, alcoholism and violence. I would assume any woman who chooses to have an abortion has thought pretty hard about said decision and it would be a last resort. Unless we can somehow magically experience life as she does how can we really be in a position to judge.
-
Party in Sweden proposing right of men to "abort" responsibility for a child.
-
Anyone read the chapter in Freakanomics where they put forward the idea that the drastic drop in crime is in relation to Abortion becoming legal. I believe statistics show children who are adopted out or not wanted by their parents are far more likely to engage in crime and end up in the justice system. Once these poverty stricken woman had an option to abortion many took it resulting in a drop in crime 15 years later.
http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/
I think many of us let our own biases influence us when talking about this subject. Many of us have no idea what true poverty is like for children or being in a home that is surrounded by drug use, alcoholism and violence. I would assume any woman who chooses to have an abortion has thought pretty hard about said decision and it would be a last resort. Unless we can somehow magically experience life as she does how can we really be in a position to judge.
The poverty argument is the reason why I believe women shouldn’t only be allowed to abort in the third trimester right up until birth, the choice should be extended beyond to infants, toddlers, through kindy and right up to primary school — at least. Circumstances change, a parent gets divorced or loses a job, maybe even hits the bottle or gets hooked on meth & fentanyl. It’s definitely a hardship, and we need to be sensitive to these hardships. Those kids are more than likely going to become criminals and hooked on drugs themselves. Which is why when such circumstances arise, it should be permissible — possibly even recommended by the state — for a legal guardian to exterminate the problem. It does sound a bit rough solution for the sensitive types, especially the religious, but then we would have to assume any mother-or-father who chooses this drastic option has thought pretty hard about said decision. It would be a last resort — I call it the pro-choice final solution.
-
Anyone read the chapter in Freakanomics where they put forward the idea that the drastic drop in crime is in relation to Abortion becoming legal. I believe statistics show children who are adopted out or not wanted by their parents are far more likely to engage in crime and end up in the justice system. Once these poverty stricken woman had an option to abortion many took it resulting in a drop in crime 15 years later.
http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/
For a long time that was my basis for my stance on abortion but I see it has since been somewhat debunked. Pinker makes some really good points which the freakonomics authors dubiously left out.
-
Some interesting stats I was not aware of. No idea if they are 100% accurate but if they are is worth reading.
https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/In 2008, 51% of women having abortions used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant.
Oral contraceptives, the most widely used reversible method of contraception, carry failure rates of 6 to 8% in actual practice.I also read close to 30% of woman have experienced stealthing where the male removed the condom without their consent.
The majority of woman are unmarried and in there 20's
From 1973 through 2011, nearly 53 million legal abortions occurred in the U.S
So anytime a woman chooses to have sex with a fertile man she has a real risk of getting pregnant. It appears millions of woman have fallen pregnant whilst using birth control and do not want to have children.
It is very hard to debate this topic as we all have our strong opinions and we will defend our position strongly.