Abortion

[Baby Duck]

no just not so many babies born who aren't going to be cared for as well as those who are truly wanted...or
should I say that are going to be cared for properly.
we all know this.. we don't want to admit it do we?

So your argument is if its not wanted and because there is a dearth of folks unwilling to adopt, just kill it and move on...and also, the birth canal is some magical passage that bestows personhood on a baby, and prior to that its a blob of cells. Right. Gotcha.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Niximus]

At what stage if the pregnancy can you start claiming it as a dependant?

 

[Power Raid]

So your argument is if its not wanted and because there is a dearth of folks unwilling to adopt, just kill it and move on...and also, the birth canal is some magical passage that bestows personhood on a baby, and prior to that its a blob of cells. Right. Gotcha.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

As horrible as that is, it is better than the alternative

 

[Cmarsh]

no just not so many babies born who aren't going to be cared for as well as those who are truly wanted...or
should I say that are going to be cared for properly.
we all know this.. we don't want to admit it do we?

Of coarse I know that and am aware of that.

It's plainly clear that a significant proportion of children are not wanted and neglected after they are born as well. Because of this should we get rid of those 'problems' as well?

I've never really got the whole this baby is a parasite on my body so I have the right to get rid of it argument either. After birth, a child is totally dependent on its parent(s) for several years anyway. Does that fact give someone the right to kill that child also?

 

[Pie eyed]

And people always intimate the Irish are stupid.
Thumbs up for common sense.
Hopefully the religious right cease to exert their medieval hocus pocus permanently on the Emerald Ilse.

 

[Baby Duck]

As horrible as that is, it is better than the alternative

The lesser of two evils is still a choice for evil.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Power Raid]

The lesser of two evils is still a choice for evil.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

George W Bush thinks in terms of good and evil

So to does the church. Perhaps they think it’s evil because there is one less vulnerable child they can F.

Even if you look at it as murder, do you really want murderers as parents?

Having an abortion is a serious decision and no not one to be taken lightly. However if you look at the rise of our society, it marries the rise of women and their control over their bodies.

 

[faible]

George W Bush thinks in terms of good and evil

So to does the church. Perhaps they think it’s evil because there is one less vulnerable child they can F.

Even if you look at it as murder, do you really want murderers as parents?

Having an abortion is a serious decision and no not one to be taken lightly. However if you look at the rise of our society, it marries the rise of women and their control over their bodies.

Whilst I think that having more autonomy and control over ones own body and decisions is a positive thing, I do understand that position that many people (religious and otherwise) hold that at a certain point, abortion is taking a life.

It's what point we consider it to be a life that varies; some say the moment of conception, others say birth, most seem to fall somewhere in between.

If I go a beat a pregnant woman and cause her to lose the unborn child / fetus, am I a murderer? If that same woman chooses to abort the same child / fetus at the exact same point of gestation, is she a murderer? If the answers to those two questions differ, then how can we (being society) hold contradictory views?

 

[Niximus]

Whilst I think that having more autonomy and control over ones own body and decisions is a positive thing, I do understand that position that many people (religious and otherwise) hold that at a certain point, abortion is taking a life.

It's what point we consider it to be a life that varies; some say the moment of conception, others say birth, most seem to fall somewhere in between.

If I go a beat a pregnant woman and cause her to lose the unborn child / fetus, am I a murderer? If that same woman chooses to abort the same child / fetus at the exact same point of gestation, is she a murderer? If the answers to those two questions differ, then how can we (being society) hold contradictory views?

Welcome to the world of ethical dilemmas where things aren't black and white.

FWIW I don't believe that there is anywhere in Australia where you could be charged with murder for causing a miscarriage.

For a hypothetical if you have a woman who learns she is 10 weeks pregnant. The doctor discovers an abnormality that gives a 90% chance that both the mother and fetus will not survive the pregnancy. You won't find too many 'pro-life' people who wouldn't make an exception and allow that woman to terminate to save her own life.

Change the scenario slightly. There has been an accident and a woman has been flung over the side of a bridge, she is hanging on by her fingertips. Her 10 year old child was also flung off and she is clinging to her mother's feet. The mother's grip is slipping, she'd be able to hold her own weight long enough for help to arrive, but there's a 90% chance that with the extra weight of a child she will lose her grip and they will both fall to their deaths. You are not close enough to get there in time to assist (nobody is) but you have a rifle and are a very good shot. Is it OK to shoot the kid and save the mother's life? Is it different if she has the gun instead and shoots the kid to save her own life.

If you consider the 10 week old fetus to have equal personhood to the 10 year old child then these situations are functionally identical
- 10% chance of the child surviving
- 90% chance that both mother and child die if no action is taken
- 100% chance that the mother survives if the child is killed.

Only the most hardcore would force the first mother to attempt to carry that pregnancy and almost certainly lose her own life, even fewer if that woman is a loved one of theirs rather than a stranger. Most of us would at least hesitate before shooting the 10 year old though despite the outcomes being exactly the same.

The point of these isn't that it should be legal to terminate only if the mother's life is in danger, it is that most of us see a difference in these two scenarios because we do place a different value on the fetus and the child.

 

[Power Raid]

Whilst I think that having more autonomy and control over ones own body and decisions is a positive thing, I do understand that position that many people (religious and otherwise) hold that at a certain point, abortion is taking a life.

It's what point we consider it to be a life that varies; some say the moment of conception, others say birth, most seem to fall somewhere in between.

If I go a beat a pregnant woman and cause her to lose the unborn child / fetus, am I a murderer? If that same woman chooses to abort the same child / fetus at the exact same point of gestation, is she a murderer? If the answers to those two questions differ, then how can we (being society) hold contradictory views?

From a personal perspective, I see the termination of life as a killer. The definition of whether one has murdered is a legal one and one for the courts to decide.

Nevertheless all killing is a major decision whether it is the slaughter of animals, an abortion, a soldier in combat, self defence, carrying out a death sentence etc etc. I'd hope in all cases, the decision is well considered before carrying out the act.

I just sit in the camp where I'd hope we provide the support for women, to make an educated decision and provide the best/ appropriate health and economic support for whatever decision she makes. We know back yard jobs happen anyway without an approved system which is not good for women. Given that is the case, I support a regulated, non-judging and supportive system.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

So your argument is if its not wanted and because there is a dearth of folks unwilling to adopt, just kill it and move on...and also, the birth canal is some magical passage that bestows personhood on a baby, and prior to that its a blob of cells. Right. Gotcha.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Are you in favour of wider access to contraception and better sex education for tweens/early teens?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

And people always intimate the Irish are stupid.

The Poms perpetuated that for centuries to dehumanise us.

 

[Power Raid]

The Poms perpetuated that for centuries to dehumanise us.

lol..........is that a monkey?

what year was that from?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

lol..........is that a monkey?

what year was that from?

Victorian-era Punch magazine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punch_(magazine)

Punch; or, The London Charivari was a British weekly magazine of humour and satire established in 1841 by Henry Mayhew and engraver Ebenezer Landells. Historically, it was most influential in the 1840s and 1850s, when it helped to coin the term "cartoon" in its modern sense as a humorous illustration.

After the 1940s, when its circulation peaked, it went into a long decline, closing in 1992. It was revived in 1996, but closed again in 2002.

and the images

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=anti-Irish+Punch+caricatures&t=ffnt&ia=images&iax=images

 

[Baby Duck]

Are you in favour of wider access to contraception and better sex education for tweens/early teens?

Im in favour of changing the public perspective of sex back to being primarily for procreation. That wont happen though because its not meant to happen, unless theres another world war on the planning table. In my opinion teaching children about sex at that age only adds fuel to the fire because they are not mature of mind enough to understand the consequences. You can tell them, but then they go home and watch movies/tv shows where sex is portrayed as casual and purely something you do for fun. Then they jump on the internet which is 98% pr0n and easily accessible. There is a whole bunch of factors that contribute to women feeling like abortions are the best and only way to go. If we address those things women simply wouldnt feel the need to have an abortion. Often it comes down to convenience, financial issues and a lack of support that are put before the life of the child. Bodily autonomy is a nonsense reason put out there just so people will get behind and rationalise what is tantamount to infanticide. Personally I think its just a population control measure marketed as a womens rights/freedom issue. In the past it was done under the guise of pleasing non-existent gods, but still a population control method.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[M Malice]

In my opinion teaching children about sex at that age only adds fuel to the fire because they are not mature of mind enough to understand the consequences. You can tell them, but then they go home and watch movies/tv shows where sex is portrayed as casual and purely something you do for fun. Then they jump on the internet which is 98% pr0n and easily accessible. There is a whole bunch of factors that contribute to women feeling like abortions are the best and only way to go. If we address those things women simply wouldnt feel the need to have an abortion. Often it comes down to convenience, financial issues and a lack of support that are put before the life of the child. Bodily autonomy is a nonsense reason put out there just so people will get behind and rationalise what is tantamount to infanticide. Personally I think its just a population control measure marketed as a womens rights/freedom issue. In the past it was done under the guise of pleasing non-existent gods, but still a population control method.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Sounds good to me.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Im in favour of changing the public perspective of sex back to being primarily for procreation. That wont happen though because its not meant to happen, unless theres another world war on the planning table. In my opinion teaching children about sex at that age only adds fuel to the fire because they are not mature of mind enough to understand the consequences. You can tell them, but then they go home and watch movies/tv shows where sex is portrayed as casual and purely something you do for fun. Then they jump on the internet which is 98% pr0n and easily accessible. There is a whole bunch of factors that contribute to women feeling like abortions are the best and only way to go. If we address those things women simply wouldnt feel the need to have an abortion. Often it comes down to convenience, financial issues and a lack of support that are put before the life of the child. Bodily autonomy is a nonsense reason put out there just so people will get behind and rationalise what is tantamount to infanticide. Personally I think its just a population control measure marketed as a womens rights/freedom issue. In the past it was done under the guise of pleasing non-existent gods, but still a population control method.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Thanks for the honest reply. Yeah, sex-for-procreation-not-for-pleasure was a KEY plank in religious opposition to the populace accessing both contraceptives and abortion. Sex is fun, though! Why did 'God' invent orgasms and clitorises and G-Spots and all the other erogenous zones on a human body if procreation was the only thing that mattered?

It's interesting that you take the non-religious approach and still end up favouring sex for procreation only.

I think preventing the pregnancy is a much better path to go down than abortion, for what it's worth. Abortion is the last resort. I one hundred percent back sex-for-pleasure, but I always make sure the chance of a partner falling pregnant is as close to zero as I can manage. In this mindset I feel I have no right to 'impose' a child on somebody else.

Like in most things, education is key here. We need to reach out to kids who otherwise would be learning from easily accessible internet pr0n and getting the wrong ideas about something that is otherwise so right.

 

[Baby Duck]

Thanks for the honest reply. Yeah, sex-for-procreation-not-for-pleasure was a KEY plank in religious opposition to the populace accessing both contraceptives and abortion. Sex is fun, though! Why did 'God' invent orgasms and clitorises and G-Spots and all the other erogenous zones on a human body if procreation was the only thing that mattered?

It's interesting that you take the non-religious approach and still end up favouring sex for procreation only.

I think preventing the pregnancy is a much better path to go down than abortion, for what it's worth. Abortion is the last resort. I one hundred percent back sex-for-pleasure, but I always make sure the chance of a partner falling pregnant is as close to zero as I can manage. In this mindset I feel I have no right to 'impose' a child on somebody else.

Like in most things, education is key here. We need to reach out to kids who otherwise would be learning from easily accessible internet pr0n and getting the wrong ideas about something that is otherwise so right.

I think sex for procreation should be stressed ahead of sex for fun. Im not some ultra uptight prude, but I do think far too much emphasis is put on meaningless casual sex. Its an obsession that is not healthy imo and causes a bit of a breakdown in society. Its a fleeting moment of pleasure that when done for its own sake is not nourishing emotionally at all. So basically what im saying is that sex in the confines of lasting and loving relationships is great, meaningless encounters with people you just met is detrimental. The whole free sex thing was pushed as far back as the 1800's because it was well understood to be caustic to strong cultures.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Power Raid]

I think sex for procreation should be stressed ahead of sex for fun. Im not some ultra uptight prude, but I do think far too much emphasis is put on meaningless casual sex. Its an obsession that is not healthy imo and causes a bit of a breakdown in society. Its a fleeting moment of pleasure that when done for its own sake is not nourishing emotionally at all. So basically what im saying is that sex in the confines of lasting and loving relationships is great, meaningless encounters with people you just met is detrimental. The whole free sex thing was pushed as far back as the 1800's because it was well understood to be caustic to strong cultures.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

true but it's like banning bottled water only to find out soft drink consumption goes up

A part of the journey in life is "getting it" out of your system. People should bonk as much as they want, enjoy group sex, threesomes, sex whilst doing a hand stand and whatever floats your boat.

Then one day they'll wake up and realise exactly what you are saying. It is far better to realise this before you are ready to invest into a long term relationship and a family. After all 99% of divorces relate to money and infidelity.

So if kids focused on the long term goals of education and the long slog of career building, they can balance that out with the short term satisfaction of sex. Then when they're financially stable and no longer interested in banging anything that moves, they are probably marriage material as they have eliminated 99% of the cause of divorce.

 

[CheapCharlie]

I think sex for procreation should be stressed ahead of sex for fun. Im not some ultra uptight prude, but I do think far too much emphasis is put on meaningless casual sex. Its an obsession that is not healthy imo and causes a bit of a breakdown in society. Its a fleeting moment of pleasure that when done for its own sake is not nourishing emotionally at all. So basically what im saying is that sex in the confines of lasting and loving relationships is great, meaningless encounters with people you just met is detrimental. The whole free sex thing was pushed as far back as the 1800's because it was well understood to be caustic to strong cultures.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Sex usually diminishes in a 'lasting' relationship. The longer the relationship, the less sex that is happening
Relationships for many would be better if after a few years a side girl/guy was found for the purposes of sexual gratification

 

[Power Raid]

I think sex for procreation should be stressed ahead of sex for fun. Im not some ultra uptight prude, but I do think far too much emphasis is put on meaningless casual sex. Its an obsession that is not healthy imo and causes a bit of a breakdown in society. Its a fleeting moment of pleasure that when done for its own sake is not nourishing emotionally at all. So basically what im saying is that sex in the confines of lasting and loving relationships is great, meaningless encounters with people you just met is detrimental. The whole free sex thing was pushed as far back as the 1800's because it was well understood to be caustic to strong cultures.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

oh and I agree re your comments on strong cultures

look at the wealthiest societies on earth, they all come from chaste societies and cold climates. This suggests to me that the qualities of planning, self control and co-operation that are required to survive are also the same qualities required to thrive.

If a man chopped enough fire wood to last a day, he would have the rest of the day to bang chicks. but when the winter comes, he will not only find women (who seek security) will go next door to the guy that worked hard enough to keep her and her future offspring warm all winter.

However, in chaste societies when the women goes next door, the "tart" would not be welcomed. Thus a chaste society, in a cold climate, creates a resonance where men's who have self control and plan for the longer term are valued by women and same to the other way around.

In modern society, I think we can have a balance where keeping an eye on long term goals and long term satisfaction is still the key to life. but you can have a little fun as long as you keep it discrete and don't let it effect your long term aspirations.

 

[Run n Spread]

oh and I agree re your comments on strong cultures

look at the wealthiest societies on earth, they all come from chaste societies and cold climates. This suggests to me that the qualities of planning, self control and co-operation that are required to survive are also the same qualities required to thrive.

Yes but historically they then went off to conquer warmer climates with resources and got rich that way. Then banged everything that moved. Their wealth didn't come from cultural superiority.

Cold climates don't have the resources and weather to generate wealth so they all sat around indoors and thought of how to build boats and weapons to take the wealth of those who had the resources. Those who had the natural resources were too busy having fun to worry about that. Their lands provided for them.

Anyway the debate always gets way off course. What does it matter what someones own opinion is on sex? Don't we live in a society of individual agency and choice based on respecting community benefit?

Thus abortion just needs to be concerned about the rights of perspective parents who don't want children, the rights of a woman to her own body and at what stage independent life is it's own sentient being. Create a law from there.

If others than want to then preach about the virtues of celibacy or sex 8 times a day go for it.

 

[xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Relationships for many would be better if after a few years a side girl/guy was found for the purposes of sexual gratification

Jumped onto an alias because I wanted to make a point I shouldn't on my main.

My wife and I are mid-30s and started dating when I was a teenager. We were monogamous for 12 years before we decided that we wanted to explore sex a bit differently. That conversation eventually led to us swinging and we're loving it.

Sex between us is just as special as ever, we're as close and in love as we've always been it's just that sometimes we have a little fun with other people.

Some people do put too low a value on sex, but there's also a lot putting too high a value on it. Casual sex isn't going to cause the downfall of civilization as some would believe.

 

[Baby Duck]

oh and I agree re your comments on strong cultures

look at the wealthiest societies on earth, they all come from chaste societies and cold climates. This suggests to me that the qualities of planning, self control and co-operation that are required to survive are also the same qualities required to thrive.

If a man chopped enough fire wood to last a day, he would have the rest of the day to bang chicks. but when the winter comes, he will not only find women (who seek security) will go next door to the guy that worked hard enough to keep her and her future offspring warm all winter.

However, in chaste societies when the women goes next door, the "tart" would not be welcomed. Thus a chaste society, in a cold climate, creates a resonance where men's who have self control and plan for the longer term are valued by women and same to the other way around.

In modern society, I think we can have a balance where keeping an eye on long term goals and long term satisfaction is still the key to life. but you can have a little fun as long as you keep it discrete and don't let it effect your long term aspirations.

I mean any culture that has families as a foundational building block, which is basically all of them. The family unit is a very natural thing. Free and casual sex destroys the bonding process and therefore contributes to the erosion of the family. There has been a big effort to conflate love and sex which also contributes to the cultural decay we have now.

I recently watched planet of the apes for like the 50th time, this quote I found amusing given where we are now: "Imagine me needing someone. Back on Earth I never did. Oh, there were women. Lots of women. Lots of love-making but no love. You see, that was the kind of world we'd made. So I left, because there was no one to hold me there."

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[cartwright]

Married women, in strong relationships have abortions too.