Question For Posters Who Are Pro-Choice

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gatorplank, Dec 9, 2013.

  1. gatorplank

    gatorplank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,179
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +392
    A person who is incapacitated with no chance of waking up is much different than a child who will be born into this world 6 months later. A person who has power of attorney is supposed to make decisions that are in the best interest of the incapacitated person. Have you ever heard of someone with power of attorney pulling the plug when the person has a 90%+ chance of becoming not incapacitated just months later? I haven't and I would think it is murder if someone pulled the plug when there was a 90%+ chance of that person becoming not incapacitated and living a fully functional life afterwards.

    She can follow through with the pregnancy and then put the baby up for adoption. Being inconvenienced for 9 months, even if it is not your own fault, is no reason to rob another human being of their right to life. And abortion is not simply pulling the plug. Abortion is bringing weapons of extermination into a mother's womb when the child is most likely going to live.

    Power of attorney is supposed to be used by the representative for the incapacitated person's best interest. Abortion does not work that way. Mothers who would kill their own children do not act on behalf of the interest of the child.
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2013
  2. cjgator76

    cjgator76 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    17,206
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +403
    Agree with the bolded. If it's the mother's call, her reasons are her business.
  3. JerseyGator01

    JerseyGator01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    15,114
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +587
    Gotta love the way people use the phrase "right to choose" with a period immediately following it. Media brainwashing at it's finest on display. Don't think, just abort.
  4. gatorplank

    gatorplank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,179
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +392
    Yes, that is how I would approach it. The only grey area in my opinion is when the mother's life is on the line too. I call it grey because I am not sure how those situations should be handled. Both people have a right to life, so I believe both people should be taken into account somehow. Each situation is probably different.
  5. CHFG8R

    CHFG8R Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    6,469
    Likes Received:
    266
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    St. Augustine, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,181
    I appreciate your honesty. We disagree on the subject, but at least you position is consistent. And damn logical too ;)
  6. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,591
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +585
    The position is logical but not without major issues. What do you do if a woman is hell bent on having an abortion regardless of legality? Do you arrest her and incarcerate until term? House arrest? And a woman who gets pregnant by rape and gets caught having an illegal abortion, could you convict her and send her to prison?

    Let's put it this way. Pregnant woman comes up to you, coat hangar in proverbial hand, and asks you to stop her from getting an abortion. You talk and try your best, but to no avail. Would you be in your legal rights to abduct the woman and hold her against her will to save the baby?

    The rights of the living has to take precedence over the rights of the life wholly dependent on her. I don't like it, but by my logic, it's the only way.
  7. gatorplank

    gatorplank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,179
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +392
    I don't see any problems with the position, Azcat. Inconvenience is probably the number one reason why women kill their babies. If abortion is considered murder, then what is more inconvenient? Keeping the child or going to prison for a very long time? If a woman gets raped, then why would she want to go to prison where she might get raped again?

    When we consider murder we don't take murder off the books just because there might be some instances where we fail to prevent it. So I don't see this being a problem for outlawing abortion.

    To address another point brought up in your post consider this scenario. A father kills his own child. He is not charged by the police yet, but the mother finds out that her husband did this. A week later the father is brutally murdered by the mother. Do we simply excuse what the mother did? Are crimes no longer crimes when the perpetrator is a victim? The last question I just asked you is one that really worries me. I think when you analyze how the left reacts to crimes perpetrated by people who they perceive to be victims the answer is no. Murder is still murder even if the criminal is a victim of rape.

    If Jameis Winston was murdered tomorrow by his accuser we would hold her responsible even if we knew with 100% certainty that Jameis Winston is a rapist. If Jameis Winston's child was murdered in the womb, then why would we discriminate between Jameis Winston's right to life and his child's right to life? Lets hypothetically assume that Jameis actually did rape the girl. In both cases the murderer is a victim of rape, and in both cases allowing the child or rapist to live is a serious inconvenience to the rape victim. If either one of them survives it seriously interferes with this woman's life. So why the double standard?
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2013
  8. Gatormb

    Gatormb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,882
    Likes Received:
    259
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Bradenton, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +817
    Slavery was legal.

    Abortion is legal.

    Being legal doesn't make it "right".

    Ruling in favor of Dream!

    Signed,

    Judge mb. ;)
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. asuragator

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,536
    Likes Received:
    4,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,081
    Funny. But I don't recall actually commenting on slavery, that is to say discussing any alleged comparisons. Only said I thought dreamliner's comments were silly.
  10. Gatormb

    Gatormb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    8,882
    Likes Received:
    259
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Bradenton, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +817
    You thought they were silly but methinks when you posted you hadn't "appreciated" (for lack of a better word) Dream's "wit".

    It's all good. He was "gone" for a while.

    Glad he's back.
  11. asuragator

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,536
    Likes Received:
    4,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,081
    :)
  12. asuragator

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,536
    Likes Received:
    4,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,081
    I got his 'wit." At the time, I just didn't feel up to actually discussing any alleged parallels so I deliberately avoided commenting on slavery. Anyway, suffice it to say that obviously both are choices, and both involve ample numbers of people who've supported or opposed one or the other, or both or neither. However, there are important differences including the right of women having autonomy over their own bodies and their own health decisions. This is qualitatively different than slave holders having legal control (and constitutional backing) over already born humans who were either born to other slaves or ripped from elsewhere to be bought and sold as chattel. It's not an apples to apples comparison.

    But it's not just that. You'd be hard pressed to find any sentient pro choice person who advocates getting an abortion. I know I don't. Most that I know think along the same lines as I do, and wish women wouldn't feel compelled to have to make such decisions. But given the social, health, and even economic pressures that make such a decision extremely personal, many women--a great percentage of whom are quite young--do feel compelled. And the alternative--criminalizing it--while maybe lowering the rate of abortion some, would much more likely just drive it underground thereby making it much more dangerous. I should add that none of this is my being absolute, as late term abortions complicate matters given the nature of biological development of an embryo and the moral questions it raises. But also, even though I support a woman's right to sovereignty over her own body just as I have over mine, as far as individual sovereignty goes for anyone, none of us is actually fully sovereign even over our own bodies, but that is a discussion for another time.

    So it's not like I am mindlessly advocating for abortion then mindlessly saying slavery is abhorrent. Such issues are rarely that unencumbered by important questions about morality, sovereignty/control, and other considerations. I know dream was trying to be funny, it's his shtick. I've been around awhile and I get it (and often find him funny). But reducing it down to bumper sticker jokes and then saying "I caught you being inconsistent" is silly, not least of which because up until this post, I hadn't commented on the slavery comparison except to say the bumper sticker comment was dumb.
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2013
    • Like Like x 1
  13. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,591
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +585
    You are completely leaving out the most pertinent point that the fetus is completely and wholly dependent on it's life to the mother. And if you remove the option of abortion off the table, the pregnant woman is left with no option but to carry to term.

    In the scenario where the father kills his child, the mother has other options other than kill the father. She could call the police, have him arrested, and depending on what state they live in, could even lobby for the death penalty, effectively getting her wish to kill the father legally. But I ask again, if a pregnant woman doesn't want to carry to term, what choices does she have?

    It's not how I react to crimes committed by victims here at issue. It's the biological fact that people should have autonomy over their own bodies. Pregnancy is much more than a simple inconvenience. I don't know if you have any kids or been around many pregnant women, but it's no picnic. I have two kids, with the youngest only 10 weeks old. And while my wife's 2nd pregnancy wasn't complicated, it involved several months of nausea, constant bathroom trips, forced carpooling as she got too big to drive around 7 months, which lead to a lot of missed work making bi-weekly OBGYN appointments after week 32 (my wife is >35 making the pregnancy higher risk). In the end, after a little NICU scare that turned out to be nothing (baby's arm got stuck behind his head during birth, which can lead to broken clavicle, but the baby was fine), we were left with our first son, and about $3,000 in medical bills, even after what insurance covered. Not to mention, my wife was off her feet for a total of about 5 weeks, 1 week before birth, and about 4 weeks to recover.

    But we chose to go through all this together. A women impregnated by rape? What choice did she have? And if you make abortion illegal, you are removing even more choices for her? What right do you have taking autonomy away from a person who did nothing wrong?

    And you ask why a woman who was raped might risk illegal abortion and further rape in prison? Why does anyone do anything desperate? Because desperate times call for desperate measures, and making abortion illegal has never stopped women from seeking abortion. Here are some musings about back alley procedures. Including this fact: Out of the 46 million abortions each year, 20 million take place in countries where abortion is outlawed.

    That's why I'm in the keep abortion safe, legal, and rare camp. I agree that we have a problem with serial abortion and women using it as birth control. But in the end, it's not my decision to make over what they do to their bodies, nor do I believe any person is in position to tell another they have no choice what to do over their respective body. I'd rather we put our effort into ending unwanted pregnancies. Attack the problem not from the supply side, but from the demand side. History has shown that even when you reduce the supply for abortions, the demand barely wavers, and the results aren't good for anyone. But we can have an effect on supply, especially through better education programs. Just look at current teen pregnancy rates, which have been at record lows recently. And why? Better education and access to birth control.

    I understand your position, plank, but your logic flies out the window when there is a desperate pregnant woman who wants nothing but to end her pregnancy. My position is, let's do our best to stop her from getting pregnant in the first place. But if we fail, we still don't have dominion over her body to force her to carry to term against her will.
  14. gatorplank

    gatorplank Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,179
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +392
    Az, do you,think that the U.S. military should supply weapons to terrorists in order to make it safer and less risky for them to commit acts of terrorism? What other choice do they have if they are set on killing infidels? You know they might be exposed to greater health risks than is otherwise necessary if we don't give them safer weapons. We don't want terrorists to die unecessarily do we? They are going to commit terrorism regardless of whether or not we supply them with safer weapons. Yep...so you see Obama knew exactly what he was doing after all when he gave F-16's to the Muslim Brotherhood. Thank goodness that we have someone like Obama as President who will ensure that terrorists have access to safe and affordable weapons.

    Consider this second scenario. To use your own analogy of power of attorney, what you are saying is equivalent to arguing that a son, daughter, or spouse could use power of attorney during quadruple bypass surgery and order the doctors to stop and walk away way from the patient half-way through the procedure. Honest question Azcat. Would you defend that son or daughter's right to choose then? Would you defend that son/daughter and say the fact that he/she inherited the parent's $1,000,000 estate is no one's business but the heir's because it was his/her right to choose?

    If abortion really involves taking a person's right to life, then I don't think what I wrote above is too far off from what you are proposing. I oppose state funded abortion for the same reason that I oppose state funded terrorism. If people are hellbent on going through with illegal activity, then that is on them, regardless of what their circumstances are. We should not be accessories to murder by trying to make America a safer place for those who would violate another's right to life, but that is exactly what America is doing.

    A desperate pregnant woman who wants nothing but to end her pregnancy is a woman who wants nothing, but to shed the innocent blood of her own pre-born baby. I acknowledge that pregnancy is a fearful thing for a woman to have to face, but desperate circumstances do not justify that. I hear you playing the victim card, but for some reason the victim card is only a one way street here. Only in the case of a woman does the victim card allow her to take away all the rights that another human being has. When we consider that both people are human beings we have to prioritize what rights are more important than others. In my opinion, the right to life is the most fundamentally important human right that there is. The right to life is the foundation that all other rights rest upon. All other rights have to yield to the right to life, and that includes a woman's right to control her own body.

    There are only two scenarios that give fair treatment to both the mother and the child with respect to the right to life: Either both people live or both people die. Either both people get the right to life or none of them do. If a woman wants to control her own body and not recognize her pre-born baby's right to life, then that is the price she should have to pay to make it fair for both the mother and the child.
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2013
  15. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,591
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +585
    Plank. You are still not addressing what makes abortion unique, and the most important part of the discussion. That's the fact that the fetus is 100% wholly owes it's survival to the mother. No other single person can take a fetus at less than 20 weeks and nurture said fetus to a newborn baby.

    All your other scenarios are meaningless because it doesn't involve an instance where one life is completely dependent upon only a single, specific individual. Even in the open heart surgery case, the person with the power-of-attorney at the time of the surgery cannot enact said power unless the doctor(s) agree the patient is terminal and has no sound mind and body left. I.e., the power rests in more than one person, and the doctor(s) are tasked with making the person healthy first and foremost. Therefore, the greedy child can and will be overruled by the doctor(s) before the child can give the order to pull the plug.

    But pregnancy is different. A pregnant woman has the right to privacy, and there aren't a team of medical professionals actively engaging the woman to make sure she and the fetus are healthy. And while I agree in principle that the right to life should win out, that right is at odds with a woman's right to determine what she does with her own body. And I'm using pregnancy as the result of rape to show the most extreme case.

    Call it the victim card but what right do you have to tell a woman who got pregnant as the result from rape that her body now belongs to the growing fetus and she has no other recourse?
  16. JerseyGator01

    JerseyGator01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    15,114
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +587
    Peter Singer of Princeton says there isn't any difference in this regarding between a fetus at 9 months and a one-month old. Both are very dependent on others for life.

    Playing the 1% of abortions rape card I see. Who cares about the 99% - straight from the Planned Parenthood playbook.
  17. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,591
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +585
    I agree there isn't a difference between a fetus at older than 36 weeks and a 9 month old. I'd put a distinction at around 20 weeks, as before then, the fetus is not viable outside of the uterus. And therein lies the difference. Before 20 weeks, only 1, specific person can care for the fetus. Between 20 and 36 weeks? Any hospital with a NICU unit can care for the child. And after 36 weeks? Just about any one can care for the kid, including everyone reading this right now. To recap. Fetus younger than 20 weeks = 1 specific individual can care for child. 20 weeks to 35 weeks: Multiple NICU units. After 36 weeks: Hundreds of millions, if not billions of people. I've stated it on other thread and I'll state it here. I'm for abortion restrictions after 20 weeks with allowances only for extreme cases like mother's health.

    As for the rape card, I am using the most extreme example. And even if it only accounts for 1%, the point is, if the fetus has rights as Plank says, then you cannot make exceptions even for the 1%. And if you make exceptions for rape cases, you have to ask yourself, is the fetus born from rape any less innocent than any other? Plank, to his/her credit, is being honest and claiming no exceptions. But my question to him still stands. What right does he/she have to tell a woman pregnant from rape they have no other choice but to carry to term?
  18. JerseyGator01

    JerseyGator01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    15,114
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +587
    Viability has gone down in terms of age and will continue to do so. Technology will make this excuse go away sooner or later. Then what will the lying lawyers who say the fetus is just a "blob of tissue" do? You can't have rights without responsibility. Roe v. Wade encouraged irresponsible behavior moreso than perhaps any court decision in US history.
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2013
  19. AzCatFan

    AzCatFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,591
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +585
    Viability before about 22 weeks is doubtful because the fetus has no avioli, and therefore, cannot breathe. Breathing is essential to human life and at 22 weeks, the fetus is too small for a breathing machine. No, it would take a true, artificial womb to allow for fetuses less than 22 weeks to survive. And while that may be in our future, it's not a reality today. And until that time, 20 weeks works very well for this debate.
  20. JerseyGator01

    JerseyGator01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    15,114
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +587
    You're no thinking it through. I'm done. I've discussed this before many times on this forum but people obviously don't read.

Share This Page