Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, it really isn't. It's too long, too wordy, and incredibly condescending in tone. I am pro-choice, myself, and found myself wanting to argue with you, just to take you down a peg. Your self-congratulatory, "aren't I clever" attitude is unlikely to convince anyone of the merits of your POV.
Totally agree, and too much use of "logic" and "common sense", none of which are facts in and of themselves. You also seem to be using the "value of life" as a foundation for your case, which again is totally subjective.
This line caused me to dismiss this individual: "If she has a second child it lacks the disability she has done the exact equivalent of giving that first child a new body without the disability. Again just...this is all logic 101"
Totally agree, and too much use of "logic" and "common sense", none of which are facts in and of themselves. You also seem to be using the "value of life" as a foundation for your case, which again is totally subjective.
Why are so many against abortion when we have hundreds of thousand children waiting to be adopted. Do they just want to add to the pool? Why isn't anyone looking out for them. Makes no sense to me.
There are 7.5 billion humans on the Earth right now. At the rate our population is exploding, we will double that in a mere 63 years. But no one ever wants to talk about that when they are proclaiming that every fertilized egg must be allowed to grow to maturity. It's preposterous.
With all the means to prevent unplanned pregnancy, there is simply no excuse for having nearly 1,000,000 abortions a year in America. I would think even pro-choice people would be horrified by this. No one wants someone they love to be faced with an unwanted pregnancy:
With all the means to prevent unplanned pregnancy, there is simply no excuse for having nearly 1,000,000 abortions a year in America. I would think even pro-choice people would be horrified by this. No one wants someone they love to be faced with an unwanted pregnancy:
Thanks for posting that. I did not necessarily agree with much of what he said but he presented his beliefs in a sane and cogent way that I appreciate. But he started off with the declarative statement that abortion is clearly wrong, which leaves not much room for a real discussion. And that the answer to an unplanned pregnancy used to be marriage, and that maybe that still was a good answer. Which in my opinion only leads to bad marriages and more divorce, which clearly is not a good outcome for anyone involved.
However he made one point which I thoroughly agree with.
He said we need to have a real discussion about sexuality and human behavior which we, as a country, are not mature enough to have yet, and I would absolutely agree with that. You talk about having the means to prevent unplanned pregnancy, and that is true. But our inability as a culture to have this frank discussion on human sexuality prevents us from providing the necessary tools to deal with what are very human biological functions; and at a young age, so they have an understanding of it, and how to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, when the time comes. Just say no, as we all know, does not work at any age.
And as a companion piece to comprehensive sex ed, also making readily available, free of charge, any and all birth control, along with emergency contraceptives (more commonly known as the morning after pill).
If you really want to prevent unplanned pregnancies, both education and free access to birth control and emergency contraception, is essential. But those things are fought against, usually on religious or moral or economic grounds, in this country. And until we get past that, abortion will, unfortunately, continue to be necessary.
I seriously wonder how many pro lifers would bring a baby to term if it was the result of rape or incest. You all know talk is cheap and people would like to say what they think others want to hear. Especially the more opinioniated. Truth be told. I'm sure a lot of thought would be given to having such a baby. Just remember, you take a woman's right to choose out of the equation then you have NO options. If you don't believe in abortion, DON'T have one but why would you want to limit other women's options?
I think it is quite sad that you don't see the irrationality, and even evil, in what you are saying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53
Well, let's say there is a lab fire and you can only save one..... some embryos in a petri dish or a woman working in the lab?
You are making a false equivalence. This isn't a question of morality, but only of pragmatism. They couldn't actually save the lives of the embryos even if they tried. They are already dead. Or at least, 99.9999% would have died, so it is a pointless endeavor.
A more honest scenario might be, if a pregnant woman shows up at a hospital, and there was a complication in her pregnancy. Let us pretend that she was seven-months pregnant, and in this case, the doctors could either save her, or they could save her baby. Who should the doctors save?
That isn't such an easy answer, and over our history, this question has been answered differently by different people. And even today, many women would rather sacrifice their own lives, so that their unborn children can live.
I read a story the other day how a pregnant woman with cancer, refused chemo, because it would have killed her baby.
Was she a fool? Had you been in her shoes, would you have aborted the baby and taken the chemo?
There are noteworthy reasons why the pro-life side often claims pro-choicers are guilty of murder, but the pro-choice side never claims the same of the pro-lifers. Why is that, I wonder? After all, if abortion were banned, people would die. There are plenty of life-shortening, life-hindering results of babies born into unfortunate homes, homes of drug abusers, or young teen moms, or abusive parents too.
I am a pro-choice libertarian. It almost seems like you are a pro-life person trying to make the worst possible argument for abortion and bring people over to the pro-life side.
I think that women have a right to do what they want with their bodies, not the governments business up to the point where the unborn baby can survive outside the womb. Then it is two separate humans and both have rights.
But to say that abortions are good because the pregnant mom is in a bad situation and it does not deserve to live is just not right. Look at how many people, Oprah comes to mind as one example who came from impossible situations and made something of themselves. Basically you are saying abort all the kids from poor neighborhoods, meaning abort minority kids. Pretty horrible thing to say.
My advice instead of patting yourself on the back for such a great read, go back and re-do your post. Shorten it, be more coherent and less self righteous and condescending.
Thanks for posting that. I did not necessarily agree with much of what he said but he presented his beliefs in a sane and cogent way that I appreciate.
Yes, I agree he really did present it really well, as he always does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
But he started off with the declarative statement that abortion is clearly wrong, which leaves not much room for a real discussion.
Perhaps, but he did say that just because it's wrong doesn't mean it should be illegal. I am kind of on that same wavelength. I believe abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. I think the leaders of the pro-choice movement are not really interested in making abortion rare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
And that the answer to an unplanned pregnancy used to be marriage, and that maybe that still was a good answer. Which in my opinion only leads to bad marriages and more divorce, which clearly is not a good outcome for anyone involved.
That's not the whole story, at all. There also used to be a thing called adoption. It still exists. I think marriage can be a good answer to an unplanned pregnancy. I don't think shotgun weddings automatically lead to bad marriages and divorce. I think people who made bad decisions have bad marriages and divorces. People just don't magically make better decisions in the future because they had an abortion. I get it--that's not always true. But the larger issue that Peterson raised is on point....We're not mature about our sexual relationships in the Western World. And that's what we need to be addressing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
However he made one point which I thoroughly agree with.
He said we need to have a real discussion about sexuality and human behavior which we, as a country, are not mature enough to have yet, and I would absolutely agree with that. You talk about having the means to prevent unplanned pregnancy, and that is true. But our inability as a culture to have this frank discussion on human sexuality prevents us from providing the necessary tools to deal with what are very human biological functions; and at a young age, so they have an understanding of it, and how to prevent an unwanted pregnancy, when the time comes. Just say no, as we all know, does not work at any age.
And as a companion piece to comprehensive sex ed, also making readily available, free of charge, any and all birth control, along with emergency contraceptives (more commonly known as the morning after pill).
I agree with all of this, but even this is not enough. I am all for birth control. But as Peterson said...people are willing to perform sexual acts that they don't even want to talk about. Something is messed up with that. I also think sex is a big deal. Yet it is generally trivialized as entertaining fun in mainstream media today. Constant exposure to the entertainment industry's take on sex pretty much warps and corrupts people. I know it messed my brain up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
If you really want to prevent unplanned pregnancies, both education and free access to birth control and emergency contraception, is essential. But those things are fought against, usually on religious or moral or economic grounds, in this country. And until we get past that, abortion will, unfortunately, continue to be necessary.
Simply promoting birth control is not enough. I think you missed that aspect of his answer. Maybe that's kind of what religious people are trying to get at. There's a whole ethical aspect to sex that is ignored if just reduced to birth control. Maybe you don't like religious terms and terminology...maybe that turns you off. I think religious people are too rigid. But liberal people are too "anything goes". Sexual ethics aren't talked about in a sane way by either liberals or conservatives and I think that's what Peterson was trying to get at.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
