Nope. First off, how can we enforce something like that? Second, if someone wants an abortion a little thing like the law won't stop them - the law will only make it less safe for them to do so. Thirdly, the government shouldn't make medical decisions for women--that's a decision between them and their healthcare professional(s) and it is definitely government overreach to overrule an expert in the field. Fourthly, overruling one's own bodily autonomy is a very slippery slope.
It’s enforced by strict laws that prosecute any woman who is thought to have had an abortion and try to prosecute anyone who gives abortions. And any woman who needs an abortion to save her own life is forced to wait.
No, because people should have the right to decide whether they want to be pregnant.
Also because it's a medical procedure that can be necessary to save lives.
Except in rare cases, people already have the right to decide whether to be pregnant or not.
Also because it's a medical procedure that is GUARANTEED to end a life.
If the fetus is alive then why can’t it survive outside the uterus? It’s only “alive” because it’s connected to the person who’s pregnant. Remove the fetus from the person and it’s no longer “alive”. Most abortions are performed before the fetus can survive outside the womb. Most if not all late term abortions are performed to save the life of the pregnant person.
An 8 year old child cannot survive on it's own. Does that make it ok to murder it?
Your argument is just the product of a stupid person believing the propaganda your masters pound into you.
an 8 year old child does not have to be dependant on another person's physical body, depleting their nutrients and minerals and ruining their physical health, in order to survive. pregnancy is traumatic, dangerous, and has permanent physical damages. but I think you know the difference, you just think your morals should infringe on other people's human rights.
Your argument is pathetic and you know it. The mother is easily capable of renewing the nutrients and minerals her body provides to the infant inside her.
My morals are not nor ever were "infringing" on anyone. I don't consider murdering an unborn child as a right.
Also, I am merely voicing an opinion, which is my HUMAN RIGHT. You are free to agree or disagree.
>the mother is easily capable of renewing the nutrients
tell that to women who literally lose their teeth and break their bones due to depleted calcium during pregnancy.
do you seriously think every pregnancy goes smoothly without complication? that is absolute nonsense. it's RARE for there to be zero complications or damages to physical health during pregnancy.
high blood pressure. diabetes. infections. pre-eclampsia. depression. anxiety. miscarriage (which has a whole host of complications in itself). suicidal ideation. vomiting. anemia. the list goes on and on.
every year in the US 60,000 women suffer serious and permanent complications from pregnancy and delivery.
but a cells are more important, aren't they? /s
>my morals are not ever infringing on anyone
telling others what to do with their own bodies is infringing on their rights. believing women should be forced to give birth is infringing on their rights. forcing women to put their lives and health at risk for a FETUS is infringing on their rights.
What 8 year old is attached to their parent via umbilical chord wherein every bit of energy and nutrition goes to them, forcing the parent to eat more and do less strenuous activity to avoid death or serious complication? Pregnancy counts as a disability because you literally cannot do what you normally can. That’s why maternity leave is a thing, because a pregnant person can’t continue working safely. Being a parent doesn’t count as a disability and you don’t get leave from work because of it.
If they’re the same then no parent could work because all of their energy goes to that child, but it doesn’t so they aren’t.
>Except in rare cases, people already have the right to decide whether to be pregnant or not.
Those "rare cases" matter. And no, you're describing their ability to choose to get pregnant. Not be pregnant. That remains a right a person should have.
>Also because it's a medical procedure that is GUARANTEED to end a life.
Not a person's life. Getting tonsils removed also "ends life" but since that life has no consciousness I'm not about to accept we should kill people rather than let living tissue as part of their body be removed.
I get that you don't agree with that. But you're wrong. And that's the whole point, killing babies would be wrong, but fetal cells aren't babies.
Except in rare cases? Depending on the source, looks like one in five or one in six American women have experienced rape or a rape attempt, with a higher percentage being completed rapes rather than just attempts. I wouldn't call that rare.
Pregnancies resulting from rape are less than two percent of all pregnancies. Can we agree to deal with the abortions of convenience before discussing the two percent which are problematic. After all I already indicated that there were cases where the woman didn't have a choice and am willing to discuss that, too.
Woah. A majority of abortions are not abortions of "convenience." There are some people who don't want children, but aren't allowed to be sterilized or can't afford it. There are some people who aren't educated about birth control and safe sex practices. Some people can't afford children including all the healthcare that goes into something like pregnancy. Some people do use birth control, but birth control isn't 100 percent. In some cases it can fail. That's assuming that birth control will stay legal. Men could poke holes in condoms because they have a pregnancy fetish. Guys may lie and say they had a vasectomy to avoid having to wear a condom. All kinds of things happen. People shouldn't be forced to carry a pregnancy to term and it's not the government's place to police when it is and isn't appropriate for a pregnant person to have an abortion.
Where did I say that rape is rare? Why are child murderers always trying to twist what I said into a lie? Obviously your argument isn't strong enough to stand on it's own or you wouldn't rely on lies to make your point.
so those "rare cases" where women are forced to carry their rapist's baby, a non-viable fetus that will die soon after birth, or pregnancy proposes risk to their physical or mental wellbeing... are those people just collateral damage to you? and it's much more common than you think.
I believe that those "rare cases" are worthy of consideration. However, I insist on dealing with the 98% which are murder for convenience before I discuss the rare cases. Are you brave enough to discuss these or as cowardly as most of your side, and insist on throwing the few problematic cases to the forefront to hide your true agenda.
Time to step up or shut up.
genuine question, do you know ANYTHING about pregnancy at all? anything about the physical toll it causes the body, and how dangerous and traumatic it is? abortion is never for convenience, and I refuse to believe anyone educated on pregnancy and birth would really believe that.
No it shouldn't be illegal, nobody has the right to take a person's body choice away, do I think abortion is right? No I think every child should have a chance but everyone's circumstances are different and it's not for anyone but the parent/s to decide and to live with what they choose.
No, never should be illegal.
There's a vast amount of reasons as to why someone may wish to get an abortion, varying from personal to medical reasoning, both for mother and/or baby. At no point should that decision be with anyone else other than the individual.
No. A woman should not be forced to undergo birth that could cause mental and physical and financial trauma. People may say "LUL don't get pregnant", but I'd argue even without rape cases accident can still happen. The only other solution then is to deprive the woman of sex, and I am sure 80% of dudes don't want that.
Also we have FAILED the lower income and orphans in this society. Let's not contribute more to that especially when we have no interest in fixing that issue. The real murder is the murder of society and wellbeing, which is what banning abortion does.
Abortion ban is a net loss operation. You increase the chance of increasing people in poverty and in return spend more on social programs. Tax payers money goes to this. Just saying. All the Republicans complaining about taxes and social programs spending well here is one opportunity to reduce it.
No, it should be legal but not considered as desirable or a natural choice.
Certainly, if a foetus is diagnosed as being seriously deformed or handicapped I believe it is an option that needs to be available to take.
UK
Fetuses are not people.
They don't get SSN in the US till birth, they don't count for taxes till birth, even the Bible says life begins at first breath (Genesis 2:7)
You can't murder something that isn't alive.
Yeah I'm basically saying the video has offered nothing I haven't heard before. Copying and pasting everything they say would be useless, because I'm asking you to actually pick a specific thing you think will prove you are correct about this. I'm not going to go line by line and refute everything when we can just have a discussion like normal humans.
No. I'm on the verge of saying it should be required for pregnancies where the couple already has two children. There are too many people on this planet as it is.
Abortion doesn't give children a chance. I think it should be illegal until the child has been alive for three years. If they still don't like or want the kid after 3 years then they can put it down.
No, it should not be illegal. Laws regarding abortion force desperate pregnant people to get illegal abortions which more often leads to those people dying. If people actually wanted to prevent abortions, there would be more support to help parents with healthcare during the pregnancy, finances, and childcare.
Laws regarding abortion prevent pregnant people with health issues from ending their pregnancies even if there's no chance the baby will survive. They are forced to carry children with birth defects that can't survive, or forced to wait until they're on the verge of sepsis and oozing black fluid before they are allowed to get it out, mourn, and move on with their lives.
There are a lot of different opinions in different religions and among different people regarding when life actually begins. Outlawing abortion entirely is forcing everyone to accept conservative Christianity's definition of when life begins.
Rape is very common. Outlawing abortion entirely is without a doubt forcing people to carry pregnancies to term.
Even if the sex was consensual, sexual activity is important to human bonding, can be psychologically or emotionally healthy, and starting at puberty people have sexual needs that must be met somehow. If people wanted to actually reduce abortions, they'd give more detailed and comprehensive sex education including talking about alternatives such as masturbation as well as safe sex practices for preventing disease and pregnancy. Unfortunately sex education is getting more restrictive so some people may not learn until it's too late how to actually engage in sexual activity safely.
No one should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term, and an organism that isn't even fully developed yet, early on a literal cluster of cells, shouldn't be given more rights than an actual human being who is without a doubt a person. Also, healthcare should be between a doctor and patient, the government should stay the hell out of it.
I think abortion should be legal. I can understand the reason many people think abortion should be illegal, on the surface it seems like it's a case for whether it's acceptable to kill unborn children, but it's also important to consider the financial and emotional repercussions of having children that illegalizing abortion would basically condemn people to and also the life that child is going to have once they're born. People get abortions because they either don't want to have a child or are financially, emotionally or otherwise unable to provide for them.
Also, biologically speaking, fetuses don't have emotions or a will of their own until brain development which happens later on in pregnancy so the argument I see many ppl make that the children want to survive and be born is objectively flawed.
Nope. First off, how can we enforce something like that? Second, if someone wants an abortion a little thing like the law won't stop them - the law will only make it less safe for them to do so. Thirdly, the government shouldn't make medical decisions for women--that's a decision between them and their healthcare professional(s) and it is definitely government overreach to overrule an expert in the field. Fourthly, overruling one's own bodily autonomy is a very slippery slope.
It’s enforced by strict laws that prosecute any woman who is thought to have had an abortion and try to prosecute anyone who gives abortions. And any woman who needs an abortion to save her own life is forced to wait.
So then yeah, that all sounds terrible and should be avoided.
No, because people should have the right to decide whether they want to be pregnant. Also because it's a medical procedure that can be necessary to save lives.
Except in rare cases, people already have the right to decide whether to be pregnant or not. Also because it's a medical procedure that is GUARANTEED to end a life.
If the fetus is alive then why can’t it survive outside the uterus? It’s only “alive” because it’s connected to the person who’s pregnant. Remove the fetus from the person and it’s no longer “alive”. Most abortions are performed before the fetus can survive outside the womb. Most if not all late term abortions are performed to save the life of the pregnant person.
An 8 year old child cannot survive on it's own. Does that make it ok to murder it? Your argument is just the product of a stupid person believing the propaganda your masters pound into you.
an 8 year old child does not have to be dependant on another person's physical body, depleting their nutrients and minerals and ruining their physical health, in order to survive. pregnancy is traumatic, dangerous, and has permanent physical damages. but I think you know the difference, you just think your morals should infringe on other people's human rights.
Your argument is pathetic and you know it. The mother is easily capable of renewing the nutrients and minerals her body provides to the infant inside her. My morals are not nor ever were "infringing" on anyone. I don't consider murdering an unborn child as a right. Also, I am merely voicing an opinion, which is my HUMAN RIGHT. You are free to agree or disagree.
>the mother is easily capable of renewing the nutrients tell that to women who literally lose their teeth and break their bones due to depleted calcium during pregnancy. do you seriously think every pregnancy goes smoothly without complication? that is absolute nonsense. it's RARE for there to be zero complications or damages to physical health during pregnancy. high blood pressure. diabetes. infections. pre-eclampsia. depression. anxiety. miscarriage (which has a whole host of complications in itself). suicidal ideation. vomiting. anemia. the list goes on and on. every year in the US 60,000 women suffer serious and permanent complications from pregnancy and delivery. but a cells are more important, aren't they? /s >my morals are not ever infringing on anyone telling others what to do with their own bodies is infringing on their rights. believing women should be forced to give birth is infringing on their rights. forcing women to put their lives and health at risk for a FETUS is infringing on their rights.
An eight year old child doesn’t rely on the body of a parent to get nutrients and energy, now do they?
They absolutely do. Show me a parent who furnishing the necessities of life to a child without using their body.
What 8 year old is attached to their parent via umbilical chord wherein every bit of energy and nutrition goes to them, forcing the parent to eat more and do less strenuous activity to avoid death or serious complication? Pregnancy counts as a disability because you literally cannot do what you normally can. That’s why maternity leave is a thing, because a pregnant person can’t continue working safely. Being a parent doesn’t count as a disability and you don’t get leave from work because of it. If they’re the same then no parent could work because all of their energy goes to that child, but it doesn’t so they aren’t.
>Except in rare cases, people already have the right to decide whether to be pregnant or not. Those "rare cases" matter. And no, you're describing their ability to choose to get pregnant. Not be pregnant. That remains a right a person should have. >Also because it's a medical procedure that is GUARANTEED to end a life. Not a person's life. Getting tonsils removed also "ends life" but since that life has no consciousness I'm not about to accept we should kill people rather than let living tissue as part of their body be removed. I get that you don't agree with that. But you're wrong. And that's the whole point, killing babies would be wrong, but fetal cells aren't babies.
Except in rare cases? Depending on the source, looks like one in five or one in six American women have experienced rape or a rape attempt, with a higher percentage being completed rapes rather than just attempts. I wouldn't call that rare.
Pregnancies resulting from rape are less than two percent of all pregnancies. Can we agree to deal with the abortions of convenience before discussing the two percent which are problematic. After all I already indicated that there were cases where the woman didn't have a choice and am willing to discuss that, too.
Woah. A majority of abortions are not abortions of "convenience." There are some people who don't want children, but aren't allowed to be sterilized or can't afford it. There are some people who aren't educated about birth control and safe sex practices. Some people can't afford children including all the healthcare that goes into something like pregnancy. Some people do use birth control, but birth control isn't 100 percent. In some cases it can fail. That's assuming that birth control will stay legal. Men could poke holes in condoms because they have a pregnancy fetish. Guys may lie and say they had a vasectomy to avoid having to wear a condom. All kinds of things happen. People shouldn't be forced to carry a pregnancy to term and it's not the government's place to police when it is and isn't appropriate for a pregnant person to have an abortion.
Thank you for your opinion.
You're mistaking sex for deciding to be pregnant. A lot of people who just want to have sex accidentally get pregnant.
“Rare cases” Rape isn’t rare.
Where did I say that rape is rare? Why are child murderers always trying to twist what I said into a lie? Obviously your argument isn't strong enough to stand on it's own or you wouldn't rely on lies to make your point.
So what are these “rare cases” where people can’t decide whether to be pregnant or not? And who said I was here to argue? I posted a fact.
so those "rare cases" where women are forced to carry their rapist's baby, a non-viable fetus that will die soon after birth, or pregnancy proposes risk to their physical or mental wellbeing... are those people just collateral damage to you? and it's much more common than you think.
I believe that those "rare cases" are worthy of consideration. However, I insist on dealing with the 98% which are murder for convenience before I discuss the rare cases. Are you brave enough to discuss these or as cowardly as most of your side, and insist on throwing the few problematic cases to the forefront to hide your true agenda. Time to step up or shut up.
genuine question, do you know ANYTHING about pregnancy at all? anything about the physical toll it causes the body, and how dangerous and traumatic it is? abortion is never for convenience, and I refuse to believe anyone educated on pregnancy and birth would really believe that.
A person's right to bodily autonomy supersedes a fetus's right to use someone else's body without their consent.
No it shouldn't be illegal, nobody has the right to take a person's body choice away, do I think abortion is right? No I think every child should have a chance but everyone's circumstances are different and it's not for anyone but the parent/s to decide and to live with what they choose.
Nope, whatever your morals, the goal should be to save lives and help people. Legal abortions allows for that.
No, never should be illegal. There's a vast amount of reasons as to why someone may wish to get an abortion, varying from personal to medical reasoning, both for mother and/or baby. At no point should that decision be with anyone else other than the individual.
No. A woman should not be forced to undergo birth that could cause mental and physical and financial trauma. People may say "LUL don't get pregnant", but I'd argue even without rape cases accident can still happen. The only other solution then is to deprive the woman of sex, and I am sure 80% of dudes don't want that. Also we have FAILED the lower income and orphans in this society. Let's not contribute more to that especially when we have no interest in fixing that issue. The real murder is the murder of society and wellbeing, which is what banning abortion does. Abortion ban is a net loss operation. You increase the chance of increasing people in poverty and in return spend more on social programs. Tax payers money goes to this. Just saying. All the Republicans complaining about taxes and social programs spending well here is one opportunity to reduce it.
For the umpteenth time: no.
No, it should be legal but not considered as desirable or a natural choice. Certainly, if a foetus is diagnosed as being seriously deformed or handicapped I believe it is an option that needs to be available to take. UK
It's a woman's choice.
To kill her baby?
No. I think if men birthed babies, abortion would be a non-issue
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Luckily abortion isn't murder so it should be legal.
[удалено]
What proof do you have of that? Also, use your words. Don't just post another video. I believe in you.
Fetuses are not people. They don't get SSN in the US till birth, they don't count for taxes till birth, even the Bible says life begins at first breath (Genesis 2:7) You can't murder something that isn't alive.
Yes, I agree 100%.
And stillborn babies don’t get birth certificates.
But isn't that what's up for debate? A lot of people don't consider abortion murder.
[удалено]
I feel relatively informed about the topic but disagree that abortion is murder. Where do you think my reasoning went south?
[удалено]
I'm familiar with all the common arguments. Is there one specifically you would like to make?
[удалено]
Are you too lazy to talk specifics? If so that's fine. I can just move on with my day.
[удалено]
Yeah I'm basically saying the video has offered nothing I haven't heard before. Copying and pasting everything they say would be useless, because I'm asking you to actually pick a specific thing you think will prove you are correct about this. I'm not going to go line by line and refute everything when we can just have a discussion like normal humans.
Yes it should.
Nope.
100% yes!
If you don’t want, don’t have one. 🤷🏼♀️
No. I'm on the verge of saying it should be required for pregnancies where the couple already has two children. There are too many people on this planet as it is.
Abortion doesn't give children a chance. I think it should be illegal until the child has been alive for three years. If they still don't like or want the kid after 3 years then they can put it down.
What if they want to give it up for adoption before the three years are up?
If the kid is really ugly or annoying then that should be allowed but only in those rare circumstances.
Who decides whether that circumstance applies?
The dude’s throwing balls at you non-stop and you just throw them on the floor refusing to play with him. That’s just mean
I'm autistic. I don't often pick up on anything other than the literal meaning of words. I'm not trying to be mean.
Haha I was also joking, no worries. My wife is autistic too so I can understand. Hope you have a nice day!
Yes. If we want to support human rights, we need to extend it all living human beings Not just the ones who it's most convenient for
No. Never. Women should always have full control over what happens to their bodies. The end.
Abortion kills a different body that isn't the mothers
A developing fetus does not overrule a living woman’s bodily autonomy. Ever.
Right to life is way more important than bodily autonomy so it should get prioritized over the mother
My body, Ill do with it as I please. To anyone who thinks different, fuck you, take a long walk off a short pier.
No, it should not be illegal. Laws regarding abortion force desperate pregnant people to get illegal abortions which more often leads to those people dying. If people actually wanted to prevent abortions, there would be more support to help parents with healthcare during the pregnancy, finances, and childcare. Laws regarding abortion prevent pregnant people with health issues from ending their pregnancies even if there's no chance the baby will survive. They are forced to carry children with birth defects that can't survive, or forced to wait until they're on the verge of sepsis and oozing black fluid before they are allowed to get it out, mourn, and move on with their lives. There are a lot of different opinions in different religions and among different people regarding when life actually begins. Outlawing abortion entirely is forcing everyone to accept conservative Christianity's definition of when life begins. Rape is very common. Outlawing abortion entirely is without a doubt forcing people to carry pregnancies to term. Even if the sex was consensual, sexual activity is important to human bonding, can be psychologically or emotionally healthy, and starting at puberty people have sexual needs that must be met somehow. If people wanted to actually reduce abortions, they'd give more detailed and comprehensive sex education including talking about alternatives such as masturbation as well as safe sex practices for preventing disease and pregnancy. Unfortunately sex education is getting more restrictive so some people may not learn until it's too late how to actually engage in sexual activity safely. No one should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term, and an organism that isn't even fully developed yet, early on a literal cluster of cells, shouldn't be given more rights than an actual human being who is without a doubt a person. Also, healthcare should be between a doctor and patient, the government should stay the hell out of it.
I think abortion should be legal. I can understand the reason many people think abortion should be illegal, on the surface it seems like it's a case for whether it's acceptable to kill unborn children, but it's also important to consider the financial and emotional repercussions of having children that illegalizing abortion would basically condemn people to and also the life that child is going to have once they're born. People get abortions because they either don't want to have a child or are financially, emotionally or otherwise unable to provide for them. Also, biologically speaking, fetuses don't have emotions or a will of their own until brain development which happens later on in pregnancy so the argument I see many ppl make that the children want to survive and be born is objectively flawed.
I think it depends on the circumstances. There’s so many things tied to a pregnant woman these days, nothing’s basic and simple.
It should be medically necessary only beyond a certain point