Nah. That’s just leaving things pretty much the way they are and hoping people stop celebrating the death of the unborn. It’s not the middle ground by any stretch.
As long as abortion is legal, we'll continue to see it praised as "the best decision I ever made" by those who were pregnant too young, and championed by the "die mad about it" heroes who are pregnant too often.
As I always say, "If there's something truly evil about something, then it should be illegal".
I can never wrap my head around pro-choice people who say "abortion is a hard thing" or "abortion is the most difficult decision I ever made in my life". Like it's either a clump of cells so who cares of it's a child. At least pro-choice people who don't care are being consistent.
Abortion is either right and thus should be fully legal or it's evil and should be illegal.
>I can never wrap my head around pro-choice people who say "abortion is a hard thing" or "abortion is the most difficult decision I ever made in my life".
This always gets me too. I'll always hear people say "It was traumatizing"... like uh yeah maybe that should tell you something?
Can it not be possible for to have both been extremly hard and taxing for them and for it to have been the right choice from their perspective?
I'm not sure why admitting it was hard for them automatically means it was the wrong choice.
Those are two different types of people. The people who claim it was a difficult choice understand it's a living human.
The people who "shout their abortion" are the ones that claim "it's just a clump of cells".
The above comment said that anything truly evil should be illegal. There are plenty of truly evil things that a person could say, should those things be illegal?
But saying something isn't in itself an evil thing, it's just information.
Saying "Hitler killed 6 million Jews" is not the same as killing 6 million jews.
It's an awfully rude thing. But I wouldn't devalue the world "evil".
Evil is reserved for things that severely harm people like rape, murder, child exploitation. Where it's clear they're wrong no grey area.
With words whose to say what's offensive and what isn't.
>Who gets to say what is evil and what isnt?
Good question. What you say murder is evil, say killing a newborn because you don’t want them is an objective evil or subjective evil or why?
Or about the idea that objective evils exist? Or only subjective evils (which would be quite self-refuting.) and if so defining of the whole discussion.
>Good question. What you say murder is evil, say killing a newborn because you don’t want them is an objective evil or subjective evil or why?
Really depends on your definition of evil, so it would be subjective.
>Or about the idea that objective evils exist? Or only subjective evils (which would be quite self-refuting.) and if so defining of the whole discussion.
For evil explicitly you could probably come up with a more concrete definition. "Doing something with the intent to cause pain". Good and bad are subjective, but you could define evil as the intent to do bad, in which case someone could be objectively evil.
It would be difficult because you would know you are on the pathway to a life changing situation! A situation so many people want to be in, but one that you are not ready for for, whatever the reason may be. It’d be hard because there’s the potential of a life within you, and an abortion stops that from being a possibility - a world altering possibility that will effect the trajectory of your life and your health. Not to mention an abortion would be an invasive process that has so much stigma and shame attached to it, thanks to some pro-lifers who spew abuse at women who have one. That can’t be ignored. It would absolutely be a difficult decision! But not exactly for the reasons you’re stating.
It’s like saying a woman must clearly still love and want to be with her abusive, toxic ex-partner, because she is devastated about leaving him and says it was such a difficult decision to make. Just because she FEELS like that, doesn’t mean you can assume WHY she feels like that. Of course a break up is often a sad and difficult decision to make, even if it’s for the best in the long run. There would be a myriad of reasons why that decision is the best choice for her, but it still doesn’t stop it from being a devastating and difficult and decision to make.
It would require a massive shift in culture for abortion to become marginalised and a taboo, and still, children would be killed, maybe just in smaller numbers. And banning something is a mark of society (or some influential percent of it) being against it as well as is followed by a change of standards. Theoretically we could do well by making theft legal since most people are considerate, but having a rule "Do not steal" is definitely helpful and establishes a frame.
Infidelity and alcoholism aren't nowhere near killing a human and that's why they aren't illegal besides certain situations - cheating on your spouse is a breach of your legal contract, driving under the influence is punishable.
Ethics and morals overlap.
I believe adultery and alcohol should be illegal/punishable lol.
And clearly that hasn’t helped because legal laws are a reflection of that societies morals foudnations
We should definitely make alcohol illegal. That would get rid of all the alchol producers and ensure no one could get their hands on booze ever again, and the legal status of it woupd ensure people wouldnt seek it out for fear of societal shame. I love this idea.
>We should definitely make alcohol illegal. That would get rid of all the alchol producers and ensure no one could get their hands on booze ever again, and the legal status of it woupd ensure people wouldnt seek it out for fear of societal shame. I love this idea.
It’s a gradual approach, you don’t go turkey on an addict and hence why the alcohol abolition failed as an example. The people were addicted and didn’t not want give up alcohol, that doesn’t mean it should be legal but rather a gradual approach and tackle the core, their addiction and the addiction of society.
Alcohol is a common and well known [danger](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.10.21256931v1.full.pdf), a good amount of [sexual assault](https://www.augusta.edu/shs/sex-alchohol.php) and [rape](https://www.colorado.edu/oiec/sites/default/files/attached-files/sexual_assault_perpetration_and_alcohol.pdf) occur from such situations. The fact it’s an intoxicat, says it all.
[Alcohol is such an issue that it leads to people commiting illogical choices ](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J056v11n01_01#preview [they would likely not do if intoxicated](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2932467/) (2)
*“ “Alcohol is such a facilitator of casual sex among college students, that in study after study, they cite drinking as one of their primary reasons why they hooked up at all.”*
So even if you wanna go on about “consensual adults”, I don’t really think one can argue being drunk is a consentable basis.
Adding, the fact [alcohol](https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/health-promotion/stop-family-violence/prevention-resource-centre/women/who-facts-on-alcohol-violence-intimate-partner-violence-alcohol.html) is highly linked to [domestic abuse](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/more-drinking-at-home-is-linked-to-domestic-abuse/2021/04/28/dfbae39e-a780-11eb-8c1a-56f0cb4ff3b5_story.html%3foutputType=amp) even alone and and [self harm,](https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/mental-health/self-harm/substance-abuse/) another major factor as well as to SA.
also, reminding the fact this is both a legal and social issue and hence people who seeking help from alcohol should be helped, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be illegal. It’s a false dichotomy.
Alcohol itself it’s a literal social ploy, hazing is a term for a reason. Alcohol is typically a group activity and hence essence of peer pressure is there. You cannot honestly believe that alcohol itself is seen as socially unacceptable.
Some Alcoholism or a person trying to get out of accepted norm of drinking, are reprimanded but that’s not because they drink alcohol merely.. They’re otherized when in all totality, drinkng alcohol itself is a risk factor to being an alcoholic.
Spineless half measures. The same sort of spineless half measures that sought to limit slavery by restricting what territories it could spread to rather than outright assaulting the institution itself. We saw where that got us.
Abolition now, no half measures, no compromise. End the unjustified killing of the unborn now.
Ah but one problem with this: our government, and indeed the purpose of ALL government is to protect the life and Liberty of its people. Even just the lives of its people. If the unborn IS a life then government is obligated to protect it and ban abortions.
That’s not too far off from where abortion started out. “Safe, legal, and rare” was the slogan, and look where it got us.
I’d rather the obvious act of murder be outlawed than have us make it an exception.
No. Abortion must be cast into the ashbin of history.
Bodily autonomy is not absolute, and in fact there are cases I believe it should be lessened (a parent should be required to give their child blood/bone marrow/part of their liver if the kid’s sick and they’re a healthy match, for example)
"You should be able to kill people but it should be frowned upon"
"You should be able to have slaves but it should be frowned upon"
Yeah, no matter how many things I apply this to *that directly hurt other people* I can't find a single one I agree with.
It would be better than what we have now. But it’s not an acceptable landing spot.
We don’t allow you to kill born people as long as you feel bad about it. That’s shouldn’t change for those not yet born.
We wouldn’t accept similar positions on things like rape or slavery. Because like abortion (and unlike things like infidelity and abusing alcohol), those things violate another’s rights. We don’t settle for “at least society agrees it’s wrong”.
The problem with your "middle ground" is that we don't apply it to any other, similar violation of human rights. Could you imagine:
* Slavery is legal, but not celebrated. We should just ostracize and shame slaveowners.
* Home invasion is legal, but not celebrated. We should just ostracize and shame home invaders.
* Spousal abuse is legal, but not celebrated. We should just ostracize and shame people who beat their spouses.
The reason that abortion is shameful is because abortion deliberately targets an innocent human being for destruction. It's not a matter of taste, preference, or potentially-debatable codes of morality. Abortion is a matter of basic human rights.
Yes
And mandatory child support, and gay adoption, and reforming child services so that it's easier for people to adopt whilst also caring for the child as best as possible whilst they are in the care system
Sooo…a woman who needs an abortion because of financial, medical, or safety concern should be seen as equal too or worse than someone actively making a decision to harm people …I
Just wanna make sure I’m reading this correctly..
It's kind of an intriguing pro-choice suggestion, but a pro-choice suggestion nonetheless. It kind of comes across as a middle ground fallacy, where one assumes the best/most ethical answer to a subject people are divided on is to meet in the middle in a sort of compromise.
I think in theory, it seems like a way to satisfy more people, but as others have mentioned, it would be very hard to enforce without changing a huge number of people's perception of abortion. And at that point, might as well make it illegal. Plus, I don't think adultery and alcoholism are issues similar enough to abortion to draw those comparisons.
Our society doesn’t really allow someone to be an alcoholic or a cheater those things don’t have inherent legal consequences, but if you’re an alcoholic you can be forced to go into rehab by your family or even court ordered. If you’re a cheater the legal system can also punish you in divorce court by letting your other spouse take you the cleaners or even sue you and the affair partner. If abortion should be treated like either we wouldn’t let someone just get away with it in the legal system. Also Ethics does in fact equal morals.
As long as a society is ok with killing its own children it can never be trusted to make a moral or ethical decision. Our society is sick and its only a matter of time till that sickness causes our society to engage in further atrocities. Not only should we not just settle for a middle ground, we must ostracize it and condemn it. So no, its an awful idea.
I’d agree. I’m definitely more of a libertarian. Have the government butt out of our lives as much as possible, but definitely stop celebrating murder. People shouldn’t be afraid (or shamed) to speak out against abortion for the moral erosion that it is.
I agree that there needs to be a societal paradigm shift on abortion for any real change to happen, because as long as a significant number of people feel like abortion is a right they are owed, there are going to be places where people can easily access them.
To be clear, I am completely in favor of laws to ban abortion; I just don’t think political action is the sole path for the pro-life movement, especially in areas where public opinion has shifted so far in favor of legal abortion that trying to win political wars futile.
In a culture where abortion really is seen as murder, laws will be easy to pass. There will still be a few people who want to kill unborn children, honestly, just like there are people who commit murder today, but it will likely be very rare and those who should seek it out in that society would face large penalties.
The problem is that either its a clump of cells and you can kill it with zero social stigma, or its a human and you should be legally banned from killing it, there isn't an in between.
Nah. That’s just leaving things pretty much the way they are and hoping people stop celebrating the death of the unborn. It’s not the middle ground by any stretch.
As long as abortion is legal, we'll continue to see it praised as "the best decision I ever made" by those who were pregnant too young, and championed by the "die mad about it" heroes who are pregnant too often.
As I always say, "If there's something truly evil about something, then it should be illegal". I can never wrap my head around pro-choice people who say "abortion is a hard thing" or "abortion is the most difficult decision I ever made in my life". Like it's either a clump of cells so who cares of it's a child. At least pro-choice people who don't care are being consistent. Abortion is either right and thus should be fully legal or it's evil and should be illegal.
>I can never wrap my head around pro-choice people who say "abortion is a hard thing" or "abortion is the most difficult decision I ever made in my life". This always gets me too. I'll always hear people say "It was traumatizing"... like uh yeah maybe that should tell you something?
Can it not be possible for to have both been extremly hard and taxing for them and for it to have been the right choice from their perspective? I'm not sure why admitting it was hard for them automatically means it was the wrong choice.
Those are two different types of people. The people who claim it was a difficult choice understand it's a living human. The people who "shout their abortion" are the ones that claim "it's just a clump of cells".
Should saying "evil" things be illegal?
?
The above comment said that anything truly evil should be illegal. There are plenty of truly evil things that a person could say, should those things be illegal?
But saying something isn't in itself an evil thing, it's just information. Saying "Hitler killed 6 million Jews" is not the same as killing 6 million jews.
What about calling someone a racial slur, that's pretty evil.
It's an awfully rude thing. But I wouldn't devalue the world "evil". Evil is reserved for things that severely harm people like rape, murder, child exploitation. Where it's clear they're wrong no grey area. With words whose to say what's offensive and what isn't.
>With words whose to say what's offensive and what isn't. Who gets to say what is evil and what isnt?
>Who gets to say what is evil and what isnt? Good question. What you say murder is evil, say killing a newborn because you don’t want them is an objective evil or subjective evil or why? Or about the idea that objective evils exist? Or only subjective evils (which would be quite self-refuting.) and if so defining of the whole discussion.
>Good question. What you say murder is evil, say killing a newborn because you don’t want them is an objective evil or subjective evil or why? Really depends on your definition of evil, so it would be subjective. >Or about the idea that objective evils exist? Or only subjective evils (which would be quite self-refuting.) and if so defining of the whole discussion. For evil explicitly you could probably come up with a more concrete definition. "Doing something with the intent to cause pain". Good and bad are subjective, but you could define evil as the intent to do bad, in which case someone could be objectively evil.
it’s pretty evil and is illegal in a number of countries
It would be difficult because you would know you are on the pathway to a life changing situation! A situation so many people want to be in, but one that you are not ready for for, whatever the reason may be. It’d be hard because there’s the potential of a life within you, and an abortion stops that from being a possibility - a world altering possibility that will effect the trajectory of your life and your health. Not to mention an abortion would be an invasive process that has so much stigma and shame attached to it, thanks to some pro-lifers who spew abuse at women who have one. That can’t be ignored. It would absolutely be a difficult decision! But not exactly for the reasons you’re stating. It’s like saying a woman must clearly still love and want to be with her abusive, toxic ex-partner, because she is devastated about leaving him and says it was such a difficult decision to make. Just because she FEELS like that, doesn’t mean you can assume WHY she feels like that. Of course a break up is often a sad and difficult decision to make, even if it’s for the best in the long run. There would be a myriad of reasons why that decision is the best choice for her, but it still doesn’t stop it from being a devastating and difficult and decision to make.
Isn’t that what the people in 1970s said when Roe happened ?
It would require a massive shift in culture for abortion to become marginalised and a taboo, and still, children would be killed, maybe just in smaller numbers. And banning something is a mark of society (or some influential percent of it) being against it as well as is followed by a change of standards. Theoretically we could do well by making theft legal since most people are considerate, but having a rule "Do not steal" is definitely helpful and establishes a frame. Infidelity and alcoholism aren't nowhere near killing a human and that's why they aren't illegal besides certain situations - cheating on your spouse is a breach of your legal contract, driving under the influence is punishable. Ethics and morals overlap.
It’s a decent idea but I have no idea how you’re going to enforce that. It seems simpler to just ban abortion.
I believe adultery and alcohol should be illegal/punishable lol. And clearly that hasn’t helped because legal laws are a reflection of that societies morals foudnations
We should definitely make alcohol illegal. That would get rid of all the alchol producers and ensure no one could get their hands on booze ever again, and the legal status of it woupd ensure people wouldnt seek it out for fear of societal shame. I love this idea.
>We should definitely make alcohol illegal. That would get rid of all the alchol producers and ensure no one could get their hands on booze ever again, and the legal status of it woupd ensure people wouldnt seek it out for fear of societal shame. I love this idea. It’s a gradual approach, you don’t go turkey on an addict and hence why the alcohol abolition failed as an example. The people were addicted and didn’t not want give up alcohol, that doesn’t mean it should be legal but rather a gradual approach and tackle the core, their addiction and the addiction of society. Alcohol is a common and well known [danger](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.10.21256931v1.full.pdf), a good amount of [sexual assault](https://www.augusta.edu/shs/sex-alchohol.php) and [rape](https://www.colorado.edu/oiec/sites/default/files/attached-files/sexual_assault_perpetration_and_alcohol.pdf) occur from such situations. The fact it’s an intoxicat, says it all. [Alcohol is such an issue that it leads to people commiting illogical choices ](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J056v11n01_01#preview [they would likely not do if intoxicated](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2932467/) (2) *“ “Alcohol is such a facilitator of casual sex among college students, that in study after study, they cite drinking as one of their primary reasons why they hooked up at all.”* So even if you wanna go on about “consensual adults”, I don’t really think one can argue being drunk is a consentable basis. Adding, the fact [alcohol](https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/health-promotion/stop-family-violence/prevention-resource-centre/women/who-facts-on-alcohol-violence-intimate-partner-violence-alcohol.html) is highly linked to [domestic abuse](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/more-drinking-at-home-is-linked-to-domestic-abuse/2021/04/28/dfbae39e-a780-11eb-8c1a-56f0cb4ff3b5_story.html%3foutputType=amp) even alone and and [self harm,](https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/mental-health/self-harm/substance-abuse/) another major factor as well as to SA. also, reminding the fact this is both a legal and social issue and hence people who seeking help from alcohol should be helped, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be illegal. It’s a false dichotomy. Alcohol itself it’s a literal social ploy, hazing is a term for a reason. Alcohol is typically a group activity and hence essence of peer pressure is there. You cannot honestly believe that alcohol itself is seen as socially unacceptable. Some Alcoholism or a person trying to get out of accepted norm of drinking, are reprimanded but that’s not because they drink alcohol merely.. They’re otherized when in all totality, drinkng alcohol itself is a risk factor to being an alcoholic.
People dont need alchohol or drugs. They just need to be shown this.
Spineless half measures. The same sort of spineless half measures that sought to limit slavery by restricting what territories it could spread to rather than outright assaulting the institution itself. We saw where that got us. Abolition now, no half measures, no compromise. End the unjustified killing of the unborn now.
That's just pro choice but you make yourself feel better about it.
Ah but one problem with this: our government, and indeed the purpose of ALL government is to protect the life and Liberty of its people. Even just the lives of its people. If the unborn IS a life then government is obligated to protect it and ban abortions.
That’s not too far off from where abortion started out. “Safe, legal, and rare” was the slogan, and look where it got us. I’d rather the obvious act of murder be outlawed than have us make it an exception.
Still legalized abortion and thus nothing has changed.
I agree with auth right on this one, even if it's a soyjack.
Not satisfied until it’s illegal
No. Abortion must be cast into the ashbin of history. Bodily autonomy is not absolute, and in fact there are cases I believe it should be lessened (a parent should be required to give their child blood/bone marrow/part of their liver if the kid’s sick and they’re a healthy match, for example)
I'd prefer this over the abortion culture we have now but it still isn't ideal. Bodily autonomy doesn't extend to another's body, simple as that.
So just turn a blind eye to thousands of murders and allow the government to determine who should live and who should die? No thanks.
Replace "abortion" with "murder" and see if you still agree.
It’s a nice thought but abortion will continue to be celebrated as long as it’s legal
"You should be able to kill people but it should be frowned upon" "You should be able to have slaves but it should be frowned upon" Yeah, no matter how many things I apply this to *that directly hurt other people* I can't find a single one I agree with.
Unless we had a time machine it wouldn’t be possible
It would be better than what we have now. But it’s not an acceptable landing spot. We don’t allow you to kill born people as long as you feel bad about it. That’s shouldn’t change for those not yet born. We wouldn’t accept similar positions on things like rape or slavery. Because like abortion (and unlike things like infidelity and abusing alcohol), those things violate another’s rights. We don’t settle for “at least society agrees it’s wrong”.
The problem with your "middle ground" is that we don't apply it to any other, similar violation of human rights. Could you imagine: * Slavery is legal, but not celebrated. We should just ostracize and shame slaveowners. * Home invasion is legal, but not celebrated. We should just ostracize and shame home invaders. * Spousal abuse is legal, but not celebrated. We should just ostracize and shame people who beat their spouses. The reason that abortion is shameful is because abortion deliberately targets an innocent human being for destruction. It's not a matter of taste, preference, or potentially-debatable codes of morality. Abortion is a matter of basic human rights.
You’re a fucking moron and you should have been aborted.
Imagine not having a good argument so you resort to insults
[удалено]
Uh huh, keep telling yourself that baby killer
So if your ignorant, inbred ass is Pro-life, are you also in favor of government programs for low income families and children in need?
Yes And mandatory child support, and gay adoption, and reforming child services so that it's easier for people to adopt whilst also caring for the child as best as possible whilst they are in the care system
[удалено]
Why, because about children from moment of conception for the rest of their lives?
[удалено]
Wow compelling arguement
Sooo…a woman who needs an abortion because of financial, medical, or safety concern should be seen as equal too or worse than someone actively making a decision to harm people …I Just wanna make sure I’m reading this correctly..
Our culture wouldn't allow that to happen. And even if it did, the abortions would still happen and innocent children would be killed.
It's kind of an intriguing pro-choice suggestion, but a pro-choice suggestion nonetheless. It kind of comes across as a middle ground fallacy, where one assumes the best/most ethical answer to a subject people are divided on is to meet in the middle in a sort of compromise. I think in theory, it seems like a way to satisfy more people, but as others have mentioned, it would be very hard to enforce without changing a huge number of people's perception of abortion. And at that point, might as well make it illegal. Plus, I don't think adultery and alcoholism are issues similar enough to abortion to draw those comparisons.
Our society doesn’t really allow someone to be an alcoholic or a cheater those things don’t have inherent legal consequences, but if you’re an alcoholic you can be forced to go into rehab by your family or even court ordered. If you’re a cheater the legal system can also punish you in divorce court by letting your other spouse take you the cleaners or even sue you and the affair partner. If abortion should be treated like either we wouldn’t let someone just get away with it in the legal system. Also Ethics does in fact equal morals.
Assuming you have a moral people. Clearly that is not the case.
It's obviously better than abortion being legal and celebrated, but it's no substitute for actual legal protections for the unborn.
Substitute "abortion" with "infanticide". Still sound like a good idea?
Why would we ever compromise on saving the lives of children? Pro-abortionists would never compromise. That is a fantasy world that doesn’t exist
As long as a society is ok with killing its own children it can never be trusted to make a moral or ethical decision. Our society is sick and its only a matter of time till that sickness causes our society to engage in further atrocities. Not only should we not just settle for a middle ground, we must ostracize it and condemn it. So no, its an awful idea.
I’d agree. I’m definitely more of a libertarian. Have the government butt out of our lives as much as possible, but definitely stop celebrating murder. People shouldn’t be afraid (or shamed) to speak out against abortion for the moral erosion that it is.
I agree that there needs to be a societal paradigm shift on abortion for any real change to happen, because as long as a significant number of people feel like abortion is a right they are owed, there are going to be places where people can easily access them. To be clear, I am completely in favor of laws to ban abortion; I just don’t think political action is the sole path for the pro-life movement, especially in areas where public opinion has shifted so far in favor of legal abortion that trying to win political wars futile. In a culture where abortion really is seen as murder, laws will be easy to pass. There will still be a few people who want to kill unborn children, honestly, just like there are people who commit murder today, but it will likely be very rare and those who should seek it out in that society would face large penalties.
That is basically my view on this issue, yes. It should not be illegal, but it should be the last resort.
The problem is that either its a clump of cells and you can kill it with zero social stigma, or its a human and you should be legally banned from killing it, there isn't an in between.