If the fetus lacks the ability to make choices due to lack of brain functions then why when an abortion is bieng performed the fetus will literally try to move away from the tools and avoid bieng killed. Why does it's heart rate increse, while this is happening. It must have to have some sense of self preservation or enough brain function to try avoid death. Therefore should that unborn baby not have a legal right to be able the chance to be given life?

I believe in methods of preventing unwanted pregnancies. Mind you,if that person is to become pregnant and does not want the baby, there are many people who want to adopt, and that is the better solution. If you really think about it, there's no reason why a pregnancy should not be carried out when there are more than enough options for the mother after the child is born.

See in a scenario like that, it becomes a hard choice to make. The scenario is rare, but it still happens. If it was me having the baby (if I was a woman) and I had someone able to take care of the baby then I wouldn't think twice about giving up my life for it.But thats me not everyone. In a scenario where it will 100% cause death to the mother then I would let her make that choice. That is the only justification in which a mother "should" be able to terminate a pregnancy.

Fuck, it's not being lazy by putting pictures. I never assumed you or Mafoo would change thier opinion over it. There are people as I have stated (mostly younger) who are prochoice and have know idea what the procedure is or how it looks, or what is done to the baby. That is why I posted them, for the uninformed. In all honesty the irresponsible bitch should not have the right to put her own selfish needs before the life of an unborn baby. An unborn baby is still a human being. It is still alive and living. We do not and should not have the right to be able to end that life.

Now, just so it doesn't sound like were just blaming the mother's who abort thier unborn babies. I think the piece of shit guy's who put pressure on thier girlfriends to have an aboprtion if they get pregnant should have a bat taken to thier heads.

Well that unborn baby in your scenario should have a chance to live because it's developed enough to know it's getting harmed. Those types of abortions are horrible, because the way we go about them is horrible. Hopefully the vaporizing nanobots will be invented so the fetus feels no pain of panic.

If you really think about it, you'd know pregnancy sucks, big time, for some women. You'd know they have lifes to live, and don't feel like carrying around someone nature tried to force on them...

If you had the option to remove a growth that gave you cramps, made you hormonal and crazy, made you gain weight, then made you have to go through a lot of pain to squeeze the growth out your vagina, wouldn't you have it removed?

That's the situation for them. They have to pick between ending a conciousness that has no dreams, aspirations, hopes, or memories(other than dark, warm, and growing), or they can choose to suffer through it just to add another consumer into the world.

Let me ask you, what's so precious about human life, if the life doesn't know what life is?

Point 1. And the people on one side of that split decision don't see the undeveloped fetus as being human. Thank you for reinforcing my point. And even if (which I highly doubt) planned parenthood was pro-eugenics at some point it does not mean that the only reason its currently supported is eugenics. If you wish to claim that then back it up with some source or statistics, otherwise I just call straight up BS.

Point 2. Technology and science cannot prove when a human life begins, its a philisophical question rather than a scientific one. It all depends on the question "What is a person?", science simply cannot answer that. The reason some people don't consider it human is not due to their own will, but due to their answer to that question. You are just sticking your fingers in your ears and going "Lalalalala I'm right and everybody else is wrong" rather than actually looking at what other people actually believe.

Point 3. It is just my opinion and in my opinion it is just another surgical proceduce and in my opinon its not a life. We already established our opinions on all those things.

At what stage in a pregnancy can the fetus actually try to preserve it's life by moving away from abortion tools? I may be pro-choice, but I am not inhumane. If there is concrete proof that your scenario can happen at 20 weeks or prior, I will move my scale down to the appropriate time.

In my scenario I gave you, you decided to say the woman could make the choice. That right there is being pro-choice. That is allowing the mother to make the decision regarding the child's life. A pro-life stance would be let nature take it's course because no one can impede on the right's of the unborn child. By saying the mother can make the decisions of the unborn regarding it's life, you too have taken a stance of pro-choice. Now if you believe a woman can make that choice to spare her own life, then why not for other reasons? You've already made it abundantly clear by giving the woman the choice that her decision making is more precious than the fetus' is.

That right there is the copout I hate hearing from pro-lifers. It's the considerations and compromises made based on certain scenarios. "Oh, look. She was raped. Let's allow that woman to have an abortion." Why? That woman's life is not in danger. The fetus is not given a choice. Maybe the fetus doesn't mind growing up knowing it's the product of a rape incident. However the fetus is not given a choice in the matter, and the mother is allowed to terminate a pregnancy to save her mental well being. Most pro-choicers seem fine with that scenario. However, mental health is a grey area, and a woman merely going through with a traditional pregnancy can suffer from it too because of her going through with it. Why can't they get abortions? It's these contradictory areas that I find to be bullshit in the arguments with pro-lifers. It should be all or none. Either defend the rights of the unborn or don't, but making compromises such as these dilutes your stance.

I'm not even sure of the relevance of this first point.  Pro-choicers generally acknowledge that the rights of the child are somewhat contingent upon the acquirement of conciousness, i.e. this is the reason we attach more significance to late term abortion and the same reason we attach less right of life to animals and relatively more to higher order animals.  Movement of the foetus from a noxious stimulus doesn't in any way signify the attainment of conciousness, even the most basic of creatures has the instinct of self preservation, but it doesn't necessarily afford them a right to life in our eyes.

Onyxmeth brings up a good point here and it makes me think that many people would do well to read more about abortion ethics and law and an understanding of how legal systems work before diving into a debate on this issue.  The fact that even pro-lifers are/were willing to allow concessions on their pro-life stance is the crux around which abortion legislation has developed.  You allow an exception to a law in one situation, e.g. abortion in a rape case, where there is no physical risk to the mothers life, then you open to the door for broader applications of the law.

On the other hand if you afford the unborn foetus full right to life from conception, you are infringing upon the liberty of the mother.  By extension you could say that if you are going to give the foetus full right to life then why shouldn't the state  control all aspects of the mother's medical care during pregnancy?  Afterall any bad decision you make could infringe upon the rights of the unborn child.  They could legally stop you from drinking alcohol, smoking, eating fatty foods, taking drugs, determine the time and method of your deliver etc.  Clearly a situation like this is ludicrous and the fact that it doesn't exist proves that in the eyes of most people, even if subconciously, the unborn child does not and can not have the same rights as the mother.  As i said in a previous post, it is impossible to fully reconcile and recognise the rights of two beings living within one body.

Pro-Choice

I just want to know this, do pro-choice people believe a person should take responsibility for their actions?
Getting an abortion is like cheating.. But cheating somebody out of a life. I mean, it's already on it's way.



2 for 2 south park references.

Of course people should take responsibility for their actions but what's the cost of a 5 minute error in judgement for a sixteen year old?  You can't simplify this issue, it isn't simple, if it were we wouldn't be talking about it.

I know it's a complex issue, but if you are stupid enough to get knocked up, you gotta suffer with it.

It's kind of like murder. If you murder someone, you have to deal with the consequences that you have caused for yourself and that persons family. You can't go and unmurder someone. But sadly if something is living, you can take that life away.