Pro-life/Pro-choice poll

[Sid]

I'm not extremist, I don't chain myself outside a hospital with a banner, however, at the moement I don't have time to fight the cause. I would like to think that when I'm a little older I would join one of the support groups, such as SPUC - Society for the Protection of Unborn Children. I would like to see the laws around abortion changed. For a start 22 weeks is a joke, but mainly, those who are allowed to have abortions. I believe that it should only be in the extreme circumstances that a woman should apply for an abortion. Abortions are far too frequent these days.

Quoting flarewearer from 12:01, 7th Apr 2006

Quoting Sid from 11:57, 7th Apr 2006
because at the end of the day, I am pro-life, that will not change.

I'm not trying to be pedantic, but are you pro-life to the point of "doing something" about pro-choice or is this just your own personal views. I think it's only the former that most people have a problem with (i.e. the pro-lifers who seek to remove the choice). I don't think anyone is suggesting it's wrong for you to personally be pro-life, and if they are they are as bad as the evangelical pro-lifers.

[hr]

[Rufus]

Does anyone else start to hear 'On and on and on' by Abba in their heads when they read this thread?

No? Alright then.

[exnihilo]

D'you know, I don't think I hold one single opinion that I absolutely will not consider changing in any regard. I hold a number of beliefs, certainly, but I am open to having the error of them shown, some of them I even think it would be hard or impossible to demonstrate the error of, but still I don't hold any to the absolute exclusion of what anyone else might say. Just an observation.

[Cain]

Who was it who said "When the facts change, I change my opinions. what do you do?"

[hr]

I hold an element of surprise

[ezra]

at the end of the day, I am pro-life, that will not change

Oh, Sid, you make me wonder. Munchingfoo's been perfectly reasonable; he's not trying to 'prove his own intelligence', he's just pointing out that there are serious holes in your argument - which you yourself haven't noticed.

For instance: either you think that embryos are the kind of thing that can be murdered, or you don't. But if their moral status is on a par with newborn children, or adults, you get impaled on one or other horn of the 'burning fertility clinic' dilemma.

If you think that they are merely potential lives, then you've got a problem: at what point does the potential life come into being, and why think that it has moral status? Each hypothetical sperm & egg combination is a potential life, but you don't seem to want to invest such combinations with moral status. Aren't you even slightly bothered by the thought that your position might be less straightforward than you make out?

[smiley]

Sid, I'm interested to know what your stance is on the morning after pill?

What if a couple are having sex, using precautions but the condom splits. Do you think it is ok for the woman to take the morning after pill or do you think she should just wait and hope that she isn't pregnant? Do you also consider using the morning after pill a form of murder?

[Rufus]

Kurwa mac!

[Manic23]

I was at a party and this feller said to me
"Something bad is happening, I'm sure you do agree
People care for nothing, no respect for human rights
Evil times are coming, we are in for darker nights"
I said, "Who are you to talk about impending doom"
He got kinda wary as he looked around the room
He said, "I'm a minister, a big shot in the state"
I said, "I just can't believe it, boy I think it's great
Brother can you tell me what is right and what is wrong"
He said, "Keep on rocking baby, 'til the night is gone"

On and on and on
Keep on rocking baby
'Til the night is gone
On and on and on
'Til the night is gone
On and on and on
Keep on rocking baby
'Til the night is gone
On and on and on
'Til the night is gone

Over in the corner I could see this other guy
He was kinda flirty, he was giving me the eye
So I took advantage of the fact that I'm a star
Shook my hair and took a casual stroll up to the bar
And as sure as hell this guy was coming up to me
He said, "Who am I and who are you and who are we
What's our situation, do we have some time for us"
I said I was not exactly waiting for the bus
He said, "If you're going somewhere can I come along"
I said, "Keep on rocking baby, 'til the night is gone"

On and on and on
Keep on rocking baby
'Til the night is gone
On and on and on
'Til the night is gone
On and on and on
Keep on rocking baby
'Til the night is gone
On and on and on
'Til the night is gone

[Rilla]

My friend, o lawdy,
Went to take care of her own body,
And she got shot down in the road
She looked up before she went,
Said, This isn't really what I meant
And the daily news said, Two with one stone

[hr]

Time Dedicated to You.

[flarewearer]

Quoting smiley from 14:41, 7th Apr 2006
Sid, I'm interested to know what your stance is on the morning after pill?

An interesting question, as the action of such pills can either be to prevent fertilisation (which I'm sure some people would be alright with) or to prevent implantation after fertilisation (which others may not be).

[hr]

[Dom]

Quoting Rufus from 15:03, 7th Apr 2006
Kurwa mac!

haha. good to see.

[Sigsworthy Craggs]

SID - "I don't think it makes you a horrible person, I think it makes you in the first place irresponsible for getting pregnant (unless you were extremely unlucky), and secondly selfish. I too am in my final year and have my whole life ahead of me, if I were unlucky and fell pregnant I'd have the child and keep it, without a doubt."

If you were in your final year it would be incredibly selfish to keep the child. You would not have a stable job (and would probably not get one with an unfinished degree), therefore you would have no money to support your child. Thus, the child would suffer and not have access to the many things you would have been abble to provide it with had you given birth in later life and had the means to provide for it more fully.
A single mother, with no job, no way of affording a home so probably having to live at home with parents who were looking forward to a nice quiet retirement but now have to deal with a screaming baby and new mother.
Hardly a great start in life for the child.
Not thinking of the child prospects, only yourself because you wanted to keep it, very selfish indeed.

[ForgoneConclusion]

Technically it's not the same child your talking about. The one you "chose not to have" is not the one that you could give birth to later and support properly, since the genetic make up of the child would be different due to different sperm and eggs.

I am pro-choice by the way, just think a lot of people forget that all eggs can develop in to something that experiences consciousness, and very few of them do. Hence the earlier flippant hitler remark.

[Sid]

I thought we were done with this thread.

A lot of what you say is true. However, all you have focused on is the materialistic side of things. Just because the child misses out in a financial sense it doesn't mean to say that it would be loved any less. I think as long as you could love your child and bring it up porperly with good values is the main thing. And also, a life is better than no life.

Quoting Sigsworthy Craggs from 23:20, 9th Apr 2006
SID - "I don't think it makes you a horrible person, I think it makes you in the first place irresponsible for getting pregnant (unless you were extremely unlucky), and secondly selfish. I too am in my final year and have my whole life ahead of me, if I were unlucky and fell pregnant I'd have the child and keep it, without a doubt."

If you were in your final year it would be incredibly selfish to keep the child. You would not have a stable job (and would probably not get one with an unfinished degree), therefore you would have no money to support your child. Thus, the child would suffer and not have access to the many things you would have been abble to provide it with had you given birth in later life and had the means to provide for it more fully.
A single mother, with no job, no way of affording a home so probably having to live at home with parents who were looking forward to a nice quiet retirement but now have to deal with a screaming baby and new mother.
Hardly a great start in life for the child.
Not thinking of the child prospects, only yourself because you wanted to keep it, very selfish indeed.

[Arashi]

Quoting Sid from 00:25, 10th Apr 2006

And also, a life is better than no life.

Ok, this sentiment is exactly the problem I have with a debate on this subject. Humans are so fearful of the idea of death that we go to huge lengths to prevent it, or rather forstall it because, let's face it, we're all going to die at some point or another. So I ask you, what makes you (or anyone for that matter, truthfully) so certain that any life at all is truly better than no life. How can anyone be knowledgeable in this area? Quite simply, we cannot.

As such, I personally abstain from judgement, of any kind, apart from the firm belief in freedom of choice as a basic human right.

[Cain]

Quoting Sid from 00:25, 10th Apr 2006

And also, a life is better than no life.

Would you rather have no use of your body at all and be unable to move your arms, legs, fingers, eyebrows, eyes, swallow for yourself, go to the bathroom yourself, breathe without the support of a machine and be unable to communicate to your family while still having fully functioning brain activity, thus being stuck inside your body, or be dead?

having said that, you've already told me what your answer would be.


[hr]

I hold an element of surprise

[macgamer]

Quoting Arashi from 01:02, 10th Apr 2006
As such, I personally abstain from judgement, of any kind, apart from the firm belief in freedom of choice as a basic human right.

Relativism doesn't work, particularly when taken to its logical conclusion, which is essentially the idea that "if they think it is right then that is their decision and it must be respected" ad infinitum.

If you are to hold to relativism then there are no objective morals.

If someone considers murder or genocide a moral good then by relativism that decision and belief is to be respect and defended.

I don't see how relativism helps the greater good in any instance.

There must be objective 'rights and wrongs' for society to function correctly, relativism will undo all that.

[Arashi]

Quoting macgamer from 00:08, 11th Apr 2006

Quoting Arashi from 01:02, 10th Apr 2006
As such, I personally abstain from judgement, of any kind, apart from the firm belief in freedom of choice as a basic human right.

Relativism doesn't work, particularly when taken to its logical conclusion, which is essentially the idea that "if they think it is right then that is their decision and it must be respected" ad infinitum.

If you are to hold to relativism then there are no objective morals.

If someone considers murder or genocide a moral good then by relativism that decision and belief is to be respect and defended.

I don't see how relativism helps the greater good in any instance.

There must be objective 'rights and wrongs' for society to function correctly, relativism will undo all that.

I said I believed that freedom of choice was a basic human right - I didn't say that no one can ever be wrong. It just means that they can choose to do so. It's like the idea of letting a child grow up by letting him or her make their own decisions. It may be the wrong decision, but there's no way to learn unless these steps are made.

[Senethro]

Ok, which unregistered luser hellbumped this?

[Amorphous]

Quoting Senethro from 19:42, 15th Apr 2006
Ok, which unregistered luser hellbumped this?

IT LIIIIVES!

Or does it? Can the ongoing existence of a messageboard thread be considered 'life'? Let's discuss.