This is a thought I posted on another thread and thought it deserved it's own thread because I would like to get thoughts of others on it. To see if it is a sensible question to others as well as myself.
Whatever you call a baby in the womb, person, fetus, sack of tissue, whatever, it is still alive. Taking in food and growing. And it exist through no choice of it's own.
If a pregnancy is the result of the free will action of a person and that person was not responcible enough to use birth control, which is avalable free of charge in most place, (Planned Parenthood amoung others) should we as a community allow this person the responcible postion of deciding if a living thing should have it's existence ended?
We often hear about freedom and privacy concerning abortion but at what point do we add the word responciblity to the debate?
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
GOD CREATED MAN AND SAM COLT MADE THEM EQUAL
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
I posted the effectiveness rate of the most popular methods of birth control in the last thread about this subject. The pill, the most effective was 97%, so 3% of the time or 3 out of 100 sexual encounters theoretically will produce an unplanned pregnancy. Do you grant abortions only to those who were using birth control that failed? :rolleyes:
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
rachelg wrote: I posted the effectiveness rate of the most popular methods of birth control in the last thread about this subject. The pill, the most effective was 97%, so 3% of the time or 3 out of 100 sexual encounters theoretically will produce an unplanned pregnancy. Do you grant abortions only to those who were using birth control that failed? :rolleyes:
I'm not trying to decide who should have the right to an abortion. I'm not sure myself exactly what my question is. But I've read were 30 to 40 percent of abortions are to women who have had abortions already. Where do we start to hold people responcible and how do we do it.
Your reponce also steers clear of the fact that something is dying that did nothing, not even ask to exist. I don't really expect a difinitve answer to my feelings on this subject. just musing and want to know others thoughts and feelings.
I'm not trying to decide who should have the right to an abortion. I'm not sure myself exactly what my question is. But I've read were 30 to 40 percent of abortions are to women who have had abortions already. Where do we start to hold people responcible and how do we do it.
Your reponce also steers clear of the fact that something is dying that did nothing, not even ask to exist. I don't really expect a difinitve answer to my feelings on this subject. just musing and want to know others thoughts and feelings.
GOD CREATED MAN AND SAM COLT MADE THEM EQUAL
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
I was remarking on your third paragraph about people needing abortions because they didn't bother with birth control. This would only be proof someone was irresponsible if all birth control methods were 100% effective. Condoms were like 87% or instance and is the easiest method to come by. I don't believe you should generalize and say people who need abortions are irresponsible for that reason.
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
rachelg wrote: I was remarking on your third paragraph about people needing abortions because they didn't bother with birth control. This would only be proof someone was irresponsible if all birth control methods were 100% effective. Condoms were like 87% or instance and is the easiest method to come by. I don't believe you should generalize and say people who need abortions are irresponsible for that reason.
Agreed, but when and should we bring personal responciblity into the mix? And if yes, how.
Agreed, but when and should we bring personal responciblity into the mix? And if yes, how.
GOD CREATED MAN AND SAM COLT MADE THEM EQUAL
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
Posted by Jahamaa
If a pregnancy is the result of the free will action of a person and that person was not responcible enough to use birth control, which is avalable free of charge in most place, (Planned Parenthood amoung others) should we as a community allow this person the responcible postion of deciding if a living thing should have it's existence ended?
Ultimately who has the right to decide when to bear a child, the woman or society? Controlling sex education and access to contraceptives and abortion is to control a person's right to choose when and if to have children.
Couple of points. A lot of those opposed to abortion are also opposed to sex education in schools-sweeping generalisation but bear with me.
Does anyone at the end of the day have the right to deny children, particularly females, knowledge of sex and also free access to contraceptives? Unless both are freely available then you are basically exercising the power to control when and if people procreate. By denying knowledge you deprive them of choice, by denying contraceptives you are denying them the right to make their own decisions. It is no ones right to impose their religious or secular views on other people.
You cannot be responsible if you are denied basic knowledge and you get told not to ask.
So if a teenager gets pregnant because they did not understand what might happen, (you can know something but not understand it, ) and if you think the myth you don't get pregnant the first time, or if you do it standing up etc don't get believed just look at the stats. If a teenager wants to have sex but can't obtain contraceptives then just saying they shouldn't is not constructive.
In Scandanavian countries teenage pregnancy is the lowest in the world-they get sex education early on, it is not a mystery, if they want sex they can get contraceptives but far from encouraging early sexual activity the average of first sexual experience is actually higher than in the UK or US. Peer pressure-everbody does it- is easier to resist because girls feel they have the right to turn round and say no it is my choice. Getting pregnant is distinctly uncool and a stupid thing to do. Keeping it a mystery and talking about it in whispers is silly.
Same thing with abortion, if you deny the right of someone not to procreate by using contraceptives then denying someone the right to choose to carry to full term is an easy step. It is not a decision that many will take lightly but it;'s easier to believe someone with "loose" morals is a lesser person not entitled to make the decision.
If someone is religious and chooses not to use the contraceptive pill that is their right, what they don't have is a right to tell everybody else what to do. I happen to think abortion should be a last resort, some will use it as a form of contraception because they are stupid, most it will be an unintentional pregnancy and necessity.
If you will pardon a dig at the catholic church, celibate priests are not the ones to lecture about family values.
In the UK there is a lot of controversy just now about "honour killings" when asian girls are killed by male relatives for dishonouring their family by refusing arranged marraiges or going out with a white boy. Many think such actions justified since the girl is at fault.
An extreme example perhaps but my point is we have similar attitudes if less extreme but there are probably still parents who think they are entitled to disown their daughters for shaming them. a girl that gets pregnant is condemned (in some quarters swweping generalisation again) for bringing shame to the family, an act of foolishness condemns them as sluts for life.
If they are so irresponsible as to get pregnant in the first place why can you trust them to be responsible about abortion? Much better to condemn and help them see the error of their ways.
The abortion debate is a red herring form a wider debate I think.
If a pregnancy is the result of the free will action of a person and that person was not responcible enough to use birth control, which is avalable free of charge in most place, (Planned Parenthood amoung others) should we as a community allow this person the responcible postion of deciding if a living thing should have it's existence ended?
Ultimately who has the right to decide when to bear a child, the woman or society? Controlling sex education and access to contraceptives and abortion is to control a person's right to choose when and if to have children.
Couple of points. A lot of those opposed to abortion are also opposed to sex education in schools-sweeping generalisation but bear with me.
Does anyone at the end of the day have the right to deny children, particularly females, knowledge of sex and also free access to contraceptives? Unless both are freely available then you are basically exercising the power to control when and if people procreate. By denying knowledge you deprive them of choice, by denying contraceptives you are denying them the right to make their own decisions. It is no ones right to impose their religious or secular views on other people.
You cannot be responsible if you are denied basic knowledge and you get told not to ask.
So if a teenager gets pregnant because they did not understand what might happen, (you can know something but not understand it, ) and if you think the myth you don't get pregnant the first time, or if you do it standing up etc don't get believed just look at the stats. If a teenager wants to have sex but can't obtain contraceptives then just saying they shouldn't is not constructive.
In Scandanavian countries teenage pregnancy is the lowest in the world-they get sex education early on, it is not a mystery, if they want sex they can get contraceptives but far from encouraging early sexual activity the average of first sexual experience is actually higher than in the UK or US. Peer pressure-everbody does it- is easier to resist because girls feel they have the right to turn round and say no it is my choice. Getting pregnant is distinctly uncool and a stupid thing to do. Keeping it a mystery and talking about it in whispers is silly.
Same thing with abortion, if you deny the right of someone not to procreate by using contraceptives then denying someone the right to choose to carry to full term is an easy step. It is not a decision that many will take lightly but it;'s easier to believe someone with "loose" morals is a lesser person not entitled to make the decision.
If someone is religious and chooses not to use the contraceptive pill that is their right, what they don't have is a right to tell everybody else what to do. I happen to think abortion should be a last resort, some will use it as a form of contraception because they are stupid, most it will be an unintentional pregnancy and necessity.
If you will pardon a dig at the catholic church, celibate priests are not the ones to lecture about family values.
In the UK there is a lot of controversy just now about "honour killings" when asian girls are killed by male relatives for dishonouring their family by refusing arranged marraiges or going out with a white boy. Many think such actions justified since the girl is at fault.
An extreme example perhaps but my point is we have similar attitudes if less extreme but there are probably still parents who think they are entitled to disown their daughters for shaming them. a girl that gets pregnant is condemned (in some quarters swweping generalisation again) for bringing shame to the family, an act of foolishness condemns them as sluts for life.
If they are so irresponsible as to get pregnant in the first place why can you trust them to be responsible about abortion? Much better to condemn and help them see the error of their ways.
The abortion debate is a red herring form a wider debate I think.
-
A Karenina
- Posts: 968
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 am
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
jahamaa wrote: We often hear about freedom and privacy concerning abortion but at what point do we add the word responciblity to the debate?
I think responsibility should be at the heart of every debate...but then I'm unreasonable like that. (small grin)
If we had 100% effective birth control readily available to all people at all times and each person was educated in the use of those contraceptives, then (in my opinion) the abortion debate could pretty much go away. (Except in cases of rape, ill health, severe deformities, etc). IF we had that kind of birth control, then the number of excuses to have one dwindles away to almost nil...see exceptions in above parentheses.
But I still wouldn't vote against legal abortions. I just can't make that kind of a decision for somebody else.
I think responsibility should be at the heart of every debate...but then I'm unreasonable like that. (small grin)
If we had 100% effective birth control readily available to all people at all times and each person was educated in the use of those contraceptives, then (in my opinion) the abortion debate could pretty much go away. (Except in cases of rape, ill health, severe deformities, etc). IF we had that kind of birth control, then the number of excuses to have one dwindles away to almost nil...see exceptions in above parentheses.
But I still wouldn't vote against legal abortions. I just can't make that kind of a decision for somebody else.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.
Aristotle
Aristotle
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
Florrie wrote: Question is confusing.
I expect you don't mean natural abortion which occures millions of times daily even without the host being aware. Therefore I take it you are referring to assisted abortion?
Is the question directed towards a specific period of gestation?
Freedom and privacy
Do you mean that individuals should not be allowed personal responsibility and should be accountable to the wider community for their personal actions?
Whatever you call a BABY in the womb - whatever, it is still alive!!! = Wrong.
Conception takes on life/living after mytosis (a mass of cells deviding and multiplying); after implantation and after many more developmental processes. A wart on the hand is a mass of cells which dont make another finger.
Florrie, sometimes it is hard to have a discussion on the forum without sounding like a wiseguy or disrespectful I want you to know that that is not my intent. That said, your responce was the same old cliched responce that I hear all the time. and only make sence if your preaching to the choir. they are not disscussins that are going to stand in honest debate.
Your first paragrph, in my opinion, is insulting and to me just an attempt to muddy the issue that I would like to discuss I'm not trying to discuss abortion...right or wrong. Miscarriages are not in the parameters and are outside anyones responciplities.
In your second paragraph you again try to change the focus of the question with cliches. We already hold people responcible for their actions they are called laws.
Your second paragraph says nothing
You hold a future child in the same reguard as a wart?
Here I beleive. you are trying to bring the discussion into the boundaries in which you feel comfortable.
You address none of my questions.
We in America have a multi million dollar abortion industry. It is fed by 4000 abortions a day at an astronomical expense in dollars and , from what I've read, heart ache to the people involved. Ninty nine percent of these abortions are the result of free will actions. You can talk about freedom, privacy whatever.
when you add in the fact they whatever you call the unborn they are our future prodigy, I think the question of responciblity is one that should be asked.
I expect you don't mean natural abortion which occures millions of times daily even without the host being aware. Therefore I take it you are referring to assisted abortion?
Is the question directed towards a specific period of gestation?
Freedom and privacy
Do you mean that individuals should not be allowed personal responsibility and should be accountable to the wider community for their personal actions?
Whatever you call a BABY in the womb - whatever, it is still alive!!! = Wrong.
Conception takes on life/living after mytosis (a mass of cells deviding and multiplying); after implantation and after many more developmental processes. A wart on the hand is a mass of cells which dont make another finger.
Florrie, sometimes it is hard to have a discussion on the forum without sounding like a wiseguy or disrespectful I want you to know that that is not my intent. That said, your responce was the same old cliched responce that I hear all the time. and only make sence if your preaching to the choir. they are not disscussins that are going to stand in honest debate.
Your first paragrph, in my opinion, is insulting and to me just an attempt to muddy the issue that I would like to discuss I'm not trying to discuss abortion...right or wrong. Miscarriages are not in the parameters and are outside anyones responciplities.
In your second paragraph you again try to change the focus of the question with cliches. We already hold people responcible for their actions they are called laws.
Your second paragraph says nothing
You hold a future child in the same reguard as a wart?
Here I beleive. you are trying to bring the discussion into the boundaries in which you feel comfortable.
You address none of my questions.
We in America have a multi million dollar abortion industry. It is fed by 4000 abortions a day at an astronomical expense in dollars and , from what I've read, heart ache to the people involved. Ninty nine percent of these abortions are the result of free will actions. You can talk about freedom, privacy whatever.
when you add in the fact they whatever you call the unborn they are our future prodigy, I think the question of responciblity is one that should be asked.
GOD CREATED MAN AND SAM COLT MADE THEM EQUAL
-
capt_buzzard
- Posts: 5557
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 12:00 pm
Abortion allowed to the Responcible?
The right to choose. Not to be dictated to by any Church or Politicans. Pro Choice for all.