Warning! Do not take offense on the veiws expressed. It is merely their opinion and not to be taken to heart.
Pro-choice or pro-life? What is your standing?

Not sure how long this'll stay, but I'll post anywho :P

Up until my junior year in high school, I was pro-life. I hadn't really thought about it until then, just claimed the position as to have something in common with my family, but that was the year I did an essay on it as an assignment. I needed sources, but almost all of them were Christian extremists; given that I had not been a Christian for several years at that point, it was difficult for me to pretend I didn't see a problem with that. And it amazed me, on how many points I had to just shut my brain (and humanity) down in order to continue supporting them. My (pro-life) teacher loved it, gave me the highest score in the class, but that was it for me. I've since been trying to make up for those years I clung to such an archaic and harmful belief.

In my opinion, it is impossible to be pro-woman and pro-life. My reasoning for this is, nearly everyone, from gun enthusiast to pacifist, believes that people have a right to protect themselves and their property, with deadly force if necessary. This right is not negated by the fact that your assailant might not kill you, nor is it affected by whether or not the assailant knows what they're doing and can control their actions (someone having a psychotic episode, for instance). It also doesn't matter if the person in question was doing something that they knew could ultimately end in an attack (for those who argue that women who choose to have sex accept all the possible consequences thereof). Abortion is, at its most basic level, self-defense. A woman is defending herself, her body, from an unwanted intrusion that can cause her great harm and pain, possibly kill her, and which has the potential to destroy her life. Even if fetuses were people -- and I posit that they are not, by any truly working definition of the term -- and even if they had the same rights as adults, a woman's right to defend herself would not be questioned. The only reason it is, is because it is women involved. For quite some time, our social value and worth have been based on our reproduction. Pregnant women are possessions of the state, not their own person. Taking back control of our reproduction is an affront to this idea, and people respond by being horrified in a way they would not be if someone shot a fully-grown, feeling adult in the head because he stole a wallet or walked too quickly toward the shooter.

I agree with all that Philomel has said, wholeheartedly. I don't feel as if there's anything more to say - she hit the nail on the head, quite literally.

Yeah, I agree with Phil as well, nothing I'd like to add right now, but I may come back later.

Philomel, I haven't heard the stance of "abortion as self-defense" but it, too, sums up my thoughts. :) Children are an incredible responsiblity and if a woman isn't prepared for that commitment, then she and her child will have a rough road ahead of them. Unplanned pregnancies are responsible for dashing the mother's dreams of education, her health, her wealth, and pretty much everything else the mother has to sacrifice for the child. If a woman isn't ready to have a child, she should be granted the right to postpone or never go through having a child. That and I feel that the unborn child is a part of the mother, a parasite feeding off of her (sounds harsh, but that's what it's technically doing...) until it's born. I suppose abortion is like a person cutting off a leg. The limb can't function on its own, therefore it is a part of the human's body and is that human's property.

Originally Posted by Facade

I agree with all that Philomel has said, wholeheartedly. I don't feel as if there's anything more to say - she hit the nail on the head, quite literally.

I only, came to comment on this.
Please, please, please, use literally correctly. Do not attach it to expressions which are purely figurative regarding the situation. Literally is to be added on when you use a figurative expression that happens to also be at least semi-factual. A good measure is if you leave literally off of your sentence, will people think you have made a bad pun? If so, then feel free to add literally, otherwise, you are just watering down the language and removing the meaning from your speech. An example:
GOOD:
A man buys a stuffed cat toy for his child for Christmas, as he is carrying it in the shopping bag he drops it and it falls out right in front of his kid. You say, "Well, I guess the cat's out of the bag, literally."
BAD:
Your best friend's new employee went to do a meeting to impress some of their clients, and no pants were removed in the process, yet when your friend relates it to you, they say, "They were so great, the literally charmed the pants off of everyone."

Feral, be nice :P Lest I remind you of your thodes.

Oooooooh Feral's burnin' bitches up in dis place... literally.

nothing to add exept pro-life

Originally Posted by Breybrey130

nothing to add exept pro-life

So you're saying you're pro life for no reason?

I think pro-choice. It is within the hands of the mother. It is her body and her life. And I do not really think it is murder or killing a baby. There are laws that the pregnancy must be terminated early, so it is not killing a baby because there is no baby.
But why should a mother, a baby, and an entire family suffer when their problems could easily be solved. It is sometimes in the babies best interest.
Suppose the mother is only fifteen. The father wants nothing to do with her. And the pregnant girls parents will not help. She wants to keep the baby, but knows she can not. So she decides to have an abortion. She knows that if she keeps the baby she will have to quit school and collect food stamps and welfare. So yea now shes a burded because she kept the baby. If she would have given the baby away, she can live her life.

I'm pro-choice as well for many reasons stated above.

I also feel like people don't really realize, or give much weight, to the fact that it isn't just single or young women getting abortions. There are also married couples, engaged couples, medically endangered women, and mothers who already have children who also decide that abortion is an option. And it's a very terrible and difficult decision that nobody should have to go through.

To be very honest, I don't feel like there is a lot of compassion on the pro-life side of the argument (which is ironic). I feel like some people who are pro-life are quick to label someone as 'irresponsible,' a 'slut,' a 'whore,' or give an implication that they are 'murdering' a 'baby' without really taking into consideration all of their circumstances. I especially think it's cruel when I hear people say things like "These are mothers murdering their own babies," when some of these women already have children at home and probably feel bad enough making their decision as it is.

I also don't think it's caring or right for people who disagree with abortion to be hazing and protesting in front of planned parenthood clinics. Surprisingly, abortions are /not/ the only things that happen at these places. The one nearest to me also offers women contraceptives, OBGYN care, prenatal checkups, pregnancy tests, and counseling. Furthermore, even though I think pro-life isn't right about their stance, I would never think to protest outside of a church or try to coerce someone into having an abortion just because of my moral agenda. My motto is that if you don't like abortions, then don't get one.

Originally Posted by Deviant

I'm pro-choice as well for many reasons stated above.

I also feel like people don't really realize, or give much weight, to the fact that it isn't just single or young women getting abortions. There are also married couples, engaged couples, medically endangered women, and mothers who already have children who also decide that abortion is an option. And it's a very terrible and difficult decision that nobody should have to go through.

To be very honest, I don't feel like there is a lot of compassion on the pro-life side of the argument (which is ironic). I feel like some people who are pro-life are quick to label someone as 'irresponsible,' a 'slut,' a 'whore,' or give an implication that they are 'murdering' a 'baby' without really taking into consideration all of their circumstances. I especially think it's cruel when I hear people say things like "These are mothers murdering their own babies," when some of these women already have children at home and probably feel bad enough making their decision as it is.

I also don't think it's caring or right for people who disagree with abortion to be hazing and protesting in front of planned parenthood clinics. Surprisingly, abortions are /not/ the only things that happen at these places. The one nearest to me also offers women contraceptives, OBGYN care, prenatal checkups, pregnancy tests, and counseling. Furthermore, even though I think pro-life isn't right about their stance, I would never think to protest outside of a church or try to coerce someone into having an abortion just because of my moral agenda. My motto is that if you don't like abortions, then don't get one.

Nicely stated. :]
I concur.

@Philomel: I was nice o-o, also what are thodes? OMG Are they on my back? getemoff getemoff getemoff

@Lorika: You saw that? Crap, now I have another witness for Gio Rigino to take care of...

And I guess I will add my thoughts to the topic while I'm here.
For me, as someone who rejects power in all institutionalized forms, I am completely against laws banning abortions. I believe the woman's rghts and wishes are to be considered first, then their partner(s), then a sperm donor if applicable, then lastly their surrounding community, who I believe have the right to voice their views in a polite and non-coercive manner. Personally, to a non-partner I care not what their decision is unless it is obvious they repeatedly fornicate without protection and have numerous abortions, though I would not wish to force my opinion on them it would certainly affect the way I interact with them. I am not really sure how I would feel if it was a fetus of my sperm under question. I really have no wish to be a father but I would not let that move me to persuade my partner towards an abortion, and I could possibly change my mind on wanting to be a father later in life or in the situation of a pregnancy. Again though, I would not try to persuade my partner and only give my opinion if they asked for it. (which they probably would)

All I know is how I feel about it. I can see from both points of view. I'm not 100% Pro-life or Pro-choice but I think I lean more towards Pro-life. Yes, I do believe that a women is entitled to make her own decisions when it concerns her body. But I don't agree with those who engage in unprotected sex with the mindset that they can just abort the baby on the off chance of getting accidentally impregnated. Having the ability to control what you allow done to your body is a right but you still have to take responsibility for your actions. This doesn't mean I think that a woman is irresponsible if she has an abortion. Just that the attitude of being able to abort as needed makes me think that you can take preventive measures. Ones that have to be cheaper than an abortion.

Personally, I don't think I could bring myself to have an abortion. But everyone is different in their views on this so it's not my place to judge. *shrugs* The government shouldn't have any say in what a woman does to her body. But I do feel that the other involved parties i.e the father of the child should have some say in it. Yes, he doesn't have to carry the child nine months but he's just as responsible as the woman is. Now on the matter of rape victims, I see nothing wrong with abortion. The child's going to be a constant physical memory of the trauma and who knows how that would impact how the mother's or child's emotional being. Though... Adoption should be an alternative that is looked into just as much as abortion.

I do like reading everyone's posts and thoughts on this. The self defense one is really good and very interesting. Definitely something to take into consideration.

:oops: I apologize if I said something to offend anyone. I normally don't come into the debating forum.

Originally Posted by Feral Fantom

I only, came to comment on this.
Please, please, please, use literally correctly. Do not attach it to expressions which are purely figurative regarding the situation. Literally is to be added on when you use a figurative expression that happens to also be at least semi-factual. A good measure is if you leave literally off of your sentence, will people think you have made a bad pun? If so, then feel free to add literally, otherwise, you are just watering down the language and removing the meaning from your speech. An example:
GOOD:
A man buys a stuffed cat toy for his child for Christmas, as he is carrying it in the shopping bag he drops it and it falls out right in front of his kid. You say, "Well, I guess the cat's out of the bag, literally."
BAD:
Your best friend's new employee went to do a meeting to impress some of their clients, and no pants were removed in the process, yet when your friend relates it to you, they say, "They were so great, the literally charmed the pants off of everyone."

Seems someone doesn't have a sense of humor. :P
I don't want to promote the use of non sequiturs (see? I can put on an unnecessary air as well! :D) in the debate forum, however I felt that this heeded a response. I said 'literally' in a context that was related more to the topic of death, actually. Hammering a nail into the head of a living thing tends to denote a death, right?

...We're on the topic of abortion, to say the very least. Not the topic of literal versus figurative. This isn't ENG 101, it's a debate topic. Please steer clear of taking the contextual meaning of my words and consulting the nearest rubric. Your textbook won't always add up with the double entendres of a bitter old lady such as myself*.

*Mind you, I'm not an old lady in the world of Real. But that's beside the point, yes?

P.S. If there was any nod at all to my own knowledge of the English language in my original post, you would have found it in my use of the modifier 'quite' before 'literally'; you don't usually see the two together when discussing something figurative that is misrepresented as literal, now do you?

I'm pro-choice as well, for many of the reasons stated above.

Although the woman getting an abortion should keep her partner's view on the situation in mind, I don't believe that he should truly have any right to make the decision. My friend had an abortion and it may be where we live or just this particular clinic, but she had to claim that the father was unknown because otherwise they wanted a signature from him. Some men are just not sympathetic enough to make that decision. The mother's wellbeing isn't something to be left up to someone else. They may be a great, responsible father, but they could also be a number of other things including ignorant and stubborn. Yes, it's shocking, but some men are very anti-abortion and they will overlook the wellbeing of the mother of their child because they don't even want to consider an abortion, and if a relationship has ended between the father and the mother, this is an even bigger risk. It should be purely the mother's choice at the end of the day, and completely up to her if she wants to include anyone else in making the decision. A sperm donor... Well, they have absolutely nothing to do with it in a typical situation other than fertilizing an egg, so I don't really believe it should even be brought up to them. I don't hear of a lot of sperm donors who stick around after the fact, and often times they don't even meet the mother, they just make donations to the bank. Forgive me if I'm wrong about that, I'm not very well studied in sperm donors.

There's no perfect birth control besides abstinence, which is something not a lot of people practice. Some people aren't responsible in taking precautions, I agree, but some people really do try to prevent a pregnancy and fail. Shit happens. It's your life though, so you do what you have to do in order to be happy.

This is an extremely touchy subject for a lot of people, so I'll just state what I personally believe. Don't say I'm wrong if you disagree, because in fact nothing I say will be objectively untrue.

I'm Christian. I'm very Christian. I was agnostic for a while, and then decided on (biblical)Christianity. Most people I've met who say they are Christian(I can't be sure if they actually are or not) Say that Abortion is always wrong, in every case, and that no one should ever ever do it, because it is murder. Many of them say that life begins at conception.

Biblically speaking That's not true, and here's why:

Leviticus 17:10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

If I remember correctly from human biology the fetus has not been infused with blood for up to... two weeks? At least a few days, I couldn't find the exact article I was looking for (looked at the mayo clinic, w.h.a., etc. nobody seemed to have it.)

Therefore I'm for contraception, up to and including the morning after pill. However after the zygote is infused with blood I believe it is alive, and don't think it should be killed. (excluding cases like rape or incest, because a beginning like that would be terrible for any life)

That's just my personal beliefs, Your opinions are valid too. This can't actually be definitively, objectively argued in my opinion.

Psst, quote-tag the bible quote, Sarofset. ;)

Also, I think that's actually a very interesting way of thinking of it. I've never heard anyone talk about "the blood."

Something similar to saro's blood thingy is the development of something called the "primitive streak," which develops after several days post-implantation. This is one of the MANY stages in development which philosophers, ethicists and scientists alike have tried to pinpoint as the time when it becomes immoral to kill the embryo.

Originally Posted by Facade

Seems someone doesn't have a sense of humor. :P
I don't want to promote the use of non sequiturs (see? I can put on an unnecessary air as well! :D) in the debate forum, however I felt that this heeded a response. I said 'literally' in a context that was related more to the topic of death, actually. Hammering a nail into the head of a living thing tends to denote a death, right?

...We're on the topic of abortion, to say the very least. Not the topic of literal versus figurative. This isn't ENG 101, it's a debate topic. Please steer clear of taking the contextual meaning of my words and consulting the nearest rubric. Your textbook won't always add up with the double entendres of a bitter old lady such as myself*.

*Mind you, I'm not an old lady in the world of Real. But that's beside the point, yes?

P.S. If there was any nod at all to my own knowledge of the English language in my original post, you would have found it in my use of the modifier 'quite' before 'literally'; you don't usually see the two together when discussing something figurative that is misrepresented as literal, now do you?

assuming you really do just have an odd interpretation of hitting the nail on the head and are not grasping for straws I apologize. Also, I'm not really sure what you mean by unnecessary air. If I am ever ingenuine it is for the use of "A Modest Proposal" style satire or plain ole sarcasm. The only reason I felt compelled to reply was that it touches a nerve for me as when people use literally to simply mean figuratively in my view it cheapens the use of it for legitimate wordplay and clarification. Also, note that I used no rubrics or textbooks for my post please and thank you.

I was about to post this in the Big Bang thread, since we're discussing Catholic stuff over there, but it really is more appropriate over here so this is where I'll put it.

*cutnpasta*

On a related note - though this may belong more in the new Abortion thread, I'm gonna write it here. The general Catholic rule is that life is life, including potential life, and embryos should not be killed. Only God can take life away. However, there is a rule of by-product. If the embryo or baby dies as a result of an unrelated procedure - one intended for a higher purpose - there is no negative moral backlash. The example given in my textbook was a woman with a cancerous womb needing surgery which would, as a by-product, destroy her unborn foetus. The INTENTION here is to save the woman's life, not to destroy the baby. Therefore, it's okay that the baby dies.

Another interesting point - soul implantation, also a factor in determining personhood of a foetus. Traditionally, the male soul is said to be implanted at 40 days, the female at 90.

*lights the fuse of a feminist debate, muahahahahahahahahahaa*

Actually, I just plain find that fact interesting. It doesn't necessarily imply that the male soul is any more important than the female. (If anything, it implies that the male comes prematurely ;D) All it implies is that there is a definite, substantial difference between these two insubstantial things. Fascinating, no?

One would think that the bible indicates life at conception, based on its assumption that male semen contains the essence of life, and to spill it on the ground is a sin.

It's unfortunate that, during the times the bible was written, people had no idea that women were more than simply incubators, or perhaps there would have been similar rules that women must try to conceive between each period she has or it would be a waste of an egg. But they had no idea.

I'm very much pro-choice, except in the instance of women who have unprotected sex, get pregnant and thing "oh no worries, I'll just get an abortion."

For me abortion isn't an easy way out. It's an option if a mistake occured, and the woman knows that there is no way she could 1. take care of a child, and 2. there is no way she could put her life on hold during a pregnancy only to give a child up for adoption.
And really, there are enough kids as it is in the system, why add more?

Originally Posted by Syraannabelle

I'm very much pro-choice, except in the instance of women who have unprotected sex, get pregnant and thing "oh no worries, I'll just get an abortion."

As much as I sympathize with this point of view (I think I saw it once more in this thread earlier), the only problem is that there is no way to screen for this kind of thing without making the women having abortions for other reasons feel more alienated than they already do. :/ The thing is just that most women are already really devastated for having to make that decision in the first place. I certainly wouldn't want to put anything in place that makes them feel worse than they already do.