Abortion Conpromise?

Perhaps once a fetus is considered "viable", it has rights separate from the mother.

perhaps, in this age of DNA, we can stop pretending that the word "viable" is a green light to snuff out a genetically distinct human being while so many birth control options are available.

Birth control can fail and in the end - no one has the right to control another person's body.

True, but that is a risk one has to take. Its the catch 22.
 
Perhaps once a fetus is considered "viable", it has rights separate from the mother.

perhaps, in this age of DNA, we can stop pretending that the word "viable" is a green light to snuff out a genetically distinct human being while so many birth control options are available.

Birth control can fail and in the end - no one has the right to control another person's body.

there are many methods of birth control that can be used in tandem; along with choices of activity that do not cause pregnancy. No one should have the right to snuff out human life because they are too lazy to be personally responsible. If you can't avoid pregnancy using all the tools at your disposal than you are not only lying to yourself but your would be progeny, itself genetically distinct from the mother, pays the ultimate price for said irresponsibility.
 
perhaps, in this age of DNA, we can stop pretending that the word "viable" is a green light to snuff out a genetically distinct human being while so many birth control options are available.

Birth control can fail and in the end - no one has the right to control another person's body.

True, but that is a risk one has to take. Its the catch 22.

man, shut the fuck up. you add about as much to this thread as a gnat dick does a porn shoot.
 
i have never understood why the fetus pays for the rape or incest...why abortion in those circumstances?

why not all or nothing......why if there is a birth defect...are we now promised perfect infants?
why if the mother's life is at risk? why is her life more important than the fetus?
 
i have never understood why the fetus pays for the rape or incest...why abortion in those circumstances?
Because forcing a woman to have a baby under those circumstances creates a moral situation that people can't overcome. Similar to pro-choicers trying to rationalize late term abortions under all circumstances.

why not all or nothing......why if there is a birth defect...are we now promised perfect infants?
There is no perfect infant, but if there is a detected defect then it should be the parent's choice not to go through with the pregnancy

why if the mother's life is at risk? why is her life more important than the fetus?
For obvious reasons.
 
perhaps, in this age of DNA, we can stop pretending that the word "viable" is a green light to snuff out a genetically distinct human being while so many birth control options are available.

Birth control can fail and in the end - no one has the right to control another person's body.

there are many methods of birth control that can be used in tandem; along with choices of activity that do not cause pregnancy. No one should have the right to snuff out human life because they are too lazy to be personally responsible. If you can't avoid pregnancy using all the tools at your disposal than you are not only lying to yourself but your would be progeny, itself genetically distinct from the mother, pays the ultimate price for said irresponsibility.

It is nothing so simple as lazyness. It's the mother's body and if she is unwilling to continue a pregnancy - the decision is hers, up to a point. You can take the fetus and put it in an artificial womb but you can't force her to carry an unwilling pregnancy.

When does an impregnated egg become a person with "interests"?
 
Last edited:
How is this for a comprise. Parasite removal. No one will argue removing a parasite.


par·a·site
   /ˈpærəˌsaɪt/ Show Spelled[par-uh-sahyt] Show IPA
–noun
1.
an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
2.
a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.
3.
(in ancient Greece) a person who received free meals in return for amusing or impudent conversation, flattering
 
perhaps, in this age of DNA, we can stop pretending that the word "viable" is a green light to snuff out a genetically distinct human being while so many birth control options are available.

Birth control can fail and in the end - no one has the right to control another person's body.

True, but that is a risk one has to take. Its the catch 22.

Well, I agree that when ever two people agree to consentual sex, they agree to the risk of pregnancy.

What I can't agree to, no matter how much I might disagree with the actions of those two people - is that anyone, but the woman, can make decisions about her body and life in the end. It's her decision, and she pays either way.
 
Birth control can fail and in the end - no one has the right to control another person's body.

True, but that is a risk one has to take. Its the catch 22.

Well, I agree that when ever two people agree to consentual sex, they agree to the risk of pregnancy.

What I can't agree to, no matter how much I might disagree with the actions of those two people - is that anyone, but the woman, can make decisions about her body and life in the end. It's her decision, and she pays either way.

I completely agree with Shogun on this. For me, it comes down to the fact that another life has been created, that is the root issue. It is clearly defined by science that the development of a new life begins at conception. I think we should take the safe course and do our best to allow this new life to continue living. Viability, "interests", or whatever else people want to argue to justify the termination of a new human just clouds the root issue for me. Women cannot change the fact that their bodies were naturally built to "house" (my apologies for lack of a better term here, I mean no offence) new lives as these new lives initially develop.
 
Perhaps once a fetus is considered "viable", it has rights separate from the mother.

perhaps, in this age of DNA, we can stop pretending that the word "viable" is a green light to snuff out a genetically distinct human being while so many birth control options are available.

Birth control can fail and in the end - no one has the right to control another person's body.

Self respect and personal responsibility don't have to fail. You shouldn't have the right to butcher a genetically distinct individual just because you failed to think before you fuck.
 
Birth control can fail and in the end - no one has the right to control another person's body.

there are many methods of birth control that can be used in tandem; along with choices of activity that do not cause pregnancy. No one should have the right to snuff out human life because they are too lazy to be personally responsible. If you can't avoid pregnancy using all the tools at your disposal than you are not only lying to yourself but your would be progeny, itself genetically distinct from the mother, pays the ultimate price for said irresponsibility.

It is nothing so simple as lazyness. It's the mother's body and if she is unwilling to continue a pregnancy - the decision is hers, up to a point. You can take the fetus and put it in an artificial womb but you can't force her to carry an unwilling pregnancy.

When does an impregnated egg become a person with "interests"?


The idea that it is "her body" ends at the fact of a genetically distinct zygote. It's not HER DNA that she is sucking out with a vacuum. Abortion options have been limited and will continue to be the case.

My standard revolves around a discernible heartbeat which indicates enough nerve function to count. All this "her body" bullshit totally ignores the science behind meiosis.
 

Forum List

Back
Top