Poll: Abortion, Roe v. Wade

[Ahleckz]

one question that we should all ask our selfs, when do you that think or believe that life starts?
This is a questioned I asked myself once and at the time I was very much it’s the women choice. I changed my opinion on this subject after asking myself that question, what was also the around the time I become a father myself.
There has to be compromise, somewhere in the debate, hence why I think here in the U.K. we have a good time limit. Allows the women to see a doctor, think it over and to discuss it with the potential father? (If they choice to do so)

I don’t think it’s relevant to this debate. I assume you’re trying to suggest you shouldn’t have an abortion if you consider the foetus to be a life. I don’t think that’s a fair argument.
A woman should have a right to abort (up to an agreed period, generally down to viability) regardless.

Also, it should always be the woman’s choice. Any man trying to change that choice is wrong and is amount to abuse. Forcing a woman to give birth when they don’t want to is not right. By all means, discuss and share your view but if they say they want to abort then the father must respect that opinion.

 

[krooton]

I don’t think it’s relevant to this debate. I assume you’re trying to suggest you shouldn’t have an abortion if you consider the foetus to be a life. I don’t think that’s a fair argument.
A woman should have a right to abort (up to an agreed period, generally down to viability) regardless.

Also, it should always be the woman’s choice. Any man trying to change that choice is wrong and is amount to abuse. Forcing a woman to give birth when they don’t want to is not right. By all means, discuss and share your view but if they say they want to abort then the father must respect that opinion.

Exactly, her body, her choice.

 

[inflames]

I don’t think it’s relevant to this debate. I assume you’re trying to suggest you shouldn’t have an abortion if you consider the foetus to be a life. I don’t think that’s a fair argument.
A woman should have a right to abort (up to an agreed period, generally down to viability) regardless.

Also, it should always be the woman’s choice. Any man trying to change that choice is wrong and is amount to abuse. Forcing a woman to give birth when they don’t want to is not right. By all means, discuss and share your view but if they say they want to abort then the father must respect that opinion.

Well just you stretched what I said and changed that to fit your narrative.

Of coarse it relative to the debate, when does it become a life. I am certainly not pro life, before I accused of that. There has to agreed period. I certainly agree a man should not force the women either way.

 

[Ahleckz]

Well just you stretched what I said and changed that to fit your narrative.

Of coarse it relative to the debate, when does it become a life. I am certainly not pro life, before I accused of that. There has to agreed period. I certainly agree a man should not force the women either way.

Explain the relevance of the question to the discussion at hand then. I don’t think I stretched anything, just second guessed where your line of questioning was taking us.

Force/coerce/encourage. All the same. We’ve had an MP say today that women shouldn’t have full agency over their bodies. And people ask why we should care about this decision in the US.

 

[inflames]

Explain the relevance of the question to the discussion at hand then. I don’t think I stretched anything, just second guessed where your line of questioning was taking us.

Force/coerce/encourage. All the same. We’ve had an MP say today that women shouldn’t have full agency over their bodies. And people ask why we should care about this decision in the US.

Yes you guessed / assumed. Let’s start again shall we?


I ask when does the foetus become a life, as once it’s deemed a life. It would have rights to live yes/no? If it’s a life, we have to two people rights to talk about. The women rights, as it’s her body and the rights of the foetus.

 

[dowie]

How is state government getting to decide what one can or cannot do with their own body any less overreach than federal government doing the same?

It's the same thing, except that some of the states will choose to restrict freedoms. It's regressive and will cause deaths, unwanted children and generally be a burden. And they won't stop there either, next they'll go after contraceptives, gay rights, trans rights and so on, they've said as much.

If federal government choosing is overreach, then so is state. If you follow it to the logical conclusion it should be down to the individual... which is pro choice.

It isn't, you're referring to a possibly flawed/mistaken or at best ambiguous argument. To be charitable, the SC is part of the government in the US. The argument is that it is overreach for them to legislate from the bench on this matter as it isn't covered by the constitution.

Congress could legislate on this (and arguably has had several decades to do so) if they don't then it's a matter for individual states to legislate on.

 

[dowie]

except its not.

from your own link the success rate at 14 years after surgery is 50%, which is on par with regular getting pregnant sex anyway

whereas :

Female sterilisation

Find out how female sterilisation (also called “getting your tubes tied” or tubal ligation) works to prevent pregnancy, how it’s done and what to expect after surgery.

www.nhs.uk

is a lot more permanant.

While technically reversible it should be treated as permanent when choosing to have one, it's not a viable option for temporary contraception if you want to have kids later and that's what you should be advised by any doctors AFAIK.

 

[Ahleckz]

Yes you guessed / assumed. Let’s start again shall we?


I ask when does the foetus become a life, as once it’s deemed a life. It would have rights to live yes/no?

When it is born, it has rights. This is pretty much the view of most international rights bodies.
Even If you decide an unborn has rights, then it doesn’t really matter as they can not be absolute. The rights of the woman are of greater importance.
Finally, it doesn’t matter. The topic at hand is a legal decision and it’s not the job of the judiciary to decide on questions of morals which is what you’re asking.

 

[Deleted User 234324]

Explain the relevance of the question to the discussion at hand then. I don’t think I stretched anything, just second guessed where your line of questioning was taking us.

Force/coerce/encourage. All the same. We’ve had an MP say today that women shouldn’t have full agency over their bodies. And people ask why we should care about this decision in the US.

Not entirely true, he said "that some women think they have an absolute right to bodily autonomy, in the case of abortion, that right is qualified by the fact another body is involved"

 

[ANDREW GREEN]

How long are we talking?
At what point does it become a baby?
Entire topic for debate in itself don’t you think ?

Would you do it? Would you put forceps up a woman a pull a developing baby out limb by limb?
It’s hardly the ‘woman’s choice’ at that stage is it? It’s a medical professionals choice.

The fetus develops consciousness with its highly elaborate content, begins to be in place between the 24th and 28th week of gestation. The fetus can feel pain after 20 weeks. So I personally believe 20 weeks and not 24 weeks should be the cut off for abortions.

My ex and I lost a by misscarriage at 3 months. We saw it and burried it. It did not have limbs for your information. It was around the size of my thumb maybe smaller.

There's nuances too, and I'd like you to ask yourself the following questions:

1. Do you force a rape victim to give birth to their rapists child?
2. Do you force a woman who's lost all her pregnancies to have another still birth have another still birth because you outlaw abortion?
3. Do you force a woman to go through with a pregnancy that will threaten her life?

I personally find all of those scenarios distopian.

 

[Malevolence]

These are not chickens. This image confuses the average American.



And yes, I know they're not fertilised. It's tongue in cheek.

 

[Deleted User 234324]

These are not chickens. This image confuses the average American.

Nope....


But they could have been the best chickens in the world, we will never find out now! Needs some pepper though!

 

[Calabi]

Yes you guessed / assumed. Let’s start again shall we?


I ask when does the foetus become a life, as once it’s deemed a life. It would have rights to live yes/no? If it’s a life, we have to two people rights to talk about. The women rights, as it’s her body and the rights of the foetus.

I mean you can be really technical and say at the moment the cells start dividing the fetus is life(although the definitions and questions of what and where life is are complicated but its irrelevant to this topic). You could also define it as a parasite as its completely reliant on the mother and takes nutrients from the mother and is harmful to the mother(it is not a separate organism nor a person until it leaves the womens body and is able to survive on its own).

But these definitions and arguments are nonsense distractions created by US evangelicals and the other crazy's whom only desire is to control women's bodies. The simple and only factor that matter is that it's the women's body and so its her choice.

 

[ANDREW GREEN]

Those cartoons are false depictions of how the fetus looks at that age

 

[ANDREW GREEN]

Yes you guessed / assumed. Let’s start again shall we?


I ask when does the foetus become a life, as once it’s deemed a life. It would have rights to live yes/no? If it’s a life, we have to two people rights to talk about. The women rights, as it’s her body and the rights of the foetus.

It's technically alive earlier but from an ethical standpoint I would go by:

The fetus develops consciousness with its highly elaborate content, begins to be in place between the 24th and 28th week of gestation. The fetus can feel pain after 20 weeks. So I personally believe 20 weeks and not 24 weeks should be the cut off for abortions.

 

[C Kent]

Those cartoons are false depictions of how the fetus looks at that age

the 2 trimester one is pretty accurate is it not? Here's a premature birth of 21 weeks

Spoiler: Warning, picture may be disturbing to some.

 

[inflames]

It's technically alive earlier but from an ethical standpoint I would go by:

The fetus develops consciousness with its highly elaborate content, begins to be in place between the 24th and 28th week of gestation. The fetus can feel pain after 20 weeks. So I personally believe 20 weeks and not 24 weeks should be the cut off for abortions.

I agree with this statement and personally would like to see the cut off point being 20 weeks. As compromise 24 weeks is acceptable, beyond that only in emergencies.

 

[bigmike20vt]

the 2 trimester one is pretty accurate is it not? Here's a premature birth of 21 weeks

FGS family forum...,...!

 

[SkodaMart]

The fetus develops consciousness with its highly elaborate content, begins to be in place between the 24th and 28th week of gestation. The fetus can feel pain after 20 weeks. So I personally believe 20 weeks and not 24 weeks should be the cut off for abortions.

My ex and I lost a by misscarriage at 3 months. We saw it and burried it. It did not have limbs for your information. It was around the size of my thumb maybe smaller.

There's nuances too, and I'd like you to ask yourself the following questions:

1. Do you force a rape victim to give birth to their rapists child?
2. Do you force a woman who's lost all her pregnancies to have another still birth have another still birth because you outlaw abortion?
3. Do you force a woman to go through with a pregnancy that will threaten her life?

I personally find all of those scenarios distopian.

No. See my original comments

 

[Diddums]

It's like watching a first world country argue with America a third world country. The amount of stupid in this thread is surpassed only by the demonstration of lack of common sense.

Nice to see @deuse topping the leaderboards though.