Why are people who are pro-life demonized?

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"] Sperm are not autonomous organisms. They do not carry wholly unique DNA and cannot reproduce. Only half of the chromosomes required to create an actual autonomous organism.PernicioEnigma

A fetus is not autonomous, it is dependent on the mother, it cannot reproduce. Sperm and eggs dohave unique dna.

is this suddenly the minority report?

Just a few things I've noticed in this thread

1) Some people are referring to the idea of life starting at conception. If we believe that life begins at conception, then we admit to a morbid viewpoint of life. Approximately 40 percent of zygotes never attach to the uterine wall or abort. If life is to begin at conception, then 40 percent of the time, that "individual" is killed.

2) An issue does arise between man v. woman rights, but I believe it comes down to this: A woman can have control over her body and the mechanisms at work; however, that also means that if a mother carries a child to term, and the father wants nothing of it, he shouldn't be forced to support the child. In the current system, women have the majority of rights before birth and after birth.

3) Someone mentioned that birth is merely just a change in location. True, at around the 8-9 month period, but definitely not the same at the 5-6 month period and the 2-3 month period.

how do people get accidental preganancies in 2013? 

how do people get accidental preganancies in 2013? 

nomsayin

sex

[QUOTE="nomsayin"]

how do people get accidental preganancies in 2013? 

lostrib

sex

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="nomsayin"]

how do people get accidental preganancies in 2013? 

nomsayin

sex

I loled at the irony a bit.

A fetus is not autonomous, it is dependent on the mother, it cannot reproduce. Sperm and eggs dohave unique dna.

MakeMeaSammitch

[QUOTE="nomsayin"][QUOTE="lostrib"]

sex

Cube_of_MooN

I think babies should be aborted, all of them.  I mean THEY ARE SO OBNOXIOUS.

[QUOTE="Cube_of_MooN"][QUOTE="nomsayin"] Yes, but you have to be really careless. Use birth control or a condom, ffs. surrealnumber5

hee hee 

greek birth control is fool proof. surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]greek birth control is fool proof. foxhound_fox

butt sex

[QUOTE="nomsayin"][QUOTE="lostrib"]

sex

Cube_of_MooN

l

butt sex

lostrib

Because they're often massive hypocrites that don't give a f*ck about the child after it's born. It's the same group of people that call for major cuts in Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, or any other type of program that helps children out. Not to mention that many people in this group are against abortion in all cases, even when the fetus is non-viable, or could even kill the mother. The major movement is pro-birth, not pro-life, which is morally abhorrent (coming from the supposedly "moral" Christian right)

Guybrush_3

Two reasons:

1) They think there ideology is the only correct ideology.

2) The point at which cells are thought to become a human being is not uniform.

[QUOTE="nomsayin"][QUOTE="lostrib"]

sex

Cube_of_MooN

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

Because they're often massive hypocrites that don't give a f*ck about the child after it's born. It's the same group of people that call for major cuts in Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, or any other type of program that helps children out. Not to mention that many people in this group are against abortion in all cases, even when the fetus is non-viable, or could even kill the mother. The major movement is pro-birth, not pro-life, which is morally abhorrent (coming from the supposedly "moral" Christian right)

the_plan_man

I said often, not always. It's virtually every republican in the house/senate (what I described is the party platform) and many MANY state level republicans.

I'm not the one who has gone through the experiences that lead up to the decision of choosing an abortion, and perhaps if I did I would understand. Thus I am pro-choice. The reason I disagree with the pro-life crowd is because they believe they can choose what is right for people everywhere without having gone through their experiences, and frankly they never will go through the exact same sets of experiences because that is just the nature of having different lives.

All that being said I think that both pro-life and pro-choice people (those that aren't militaristic idealogues anyway) should be able to agree that we can limit abortion through proper sex-ed, birth control, plan B (yeah that's sorta repetative), and adoption.

Probably because they are all pretty stupid.

Probably because they are all pretty stupid.

Barbariser

most idealogues on any side of an issue are pretty stupid

Every side of any political issue gets demonized by someone.

Actually, Pro-Life has been gaining ground in the past decade, and is staticically in the majority given recent gallop polls.

I believe this is tied to better organization by Pro-Life, modern technology(allowing mothers to see child before born), better support for young single mothers(and allot less negatively recieved than in 60s & 70s), Pro-choice's deteriating woman right's angle(was the big issue for woman's rights during civil rights periode, now it's more meh).

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]greek birth control is fool proof. lostrib

butt sex

dont say that man.

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"] Are you paying attention? I am not saying change abortion laws, just that men having no out affects their views on them.Murderstyle75

No. He should not have the right to stop a woman from getting an abortion under any circumstance. While the fetus is still attached to the woman's body, she must be the one to make the decision. Otherwise, her bodily autonomy is being limited by somebody who is not even carrying the fetus, which makes no sense.

[QUOTE="Murderstyle75"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]But the mens views on it are based on other laws. 

GreySeal9

No. He should not have the right to stop a woman from getting an abortion under any circumstance. While the fetus is still attached to the woman's body, she must be the one to make the decision. Otherwise, her bodily autonomy is being limited by somebody who is not even carrying the fetus, which makes no sense.

Because who are they to tell a woman what she can or can't do with her body. 

Chris_Williams

a womens body doesnt have 2 heads, 4 arms, 4 legs, and 2 beating hearts

[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"]

Because who are they to tell a woman what she can or can't do with her body. 

Flubbbs

a womens body doesnt have 2 heads, 4 arms, 4 legs, and 2 beating hearts

not to mention a penis if the fetus is male.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Murderstyle75"] Men have no in's either though. Like I said before. If a man wants his baby and the woman does not, he should have a legal right to stop the abortion and agree to be that child's sole provider. Just because a man can't get pregnant doesnt mean it should be any less his.El_Zo1212o

No. He should not have the right to stop a woman from getting an abortion under any circumstance. While the fetus is still attached to the woman's body, she must be the one to make the decision. Otherwise, her bodily autonomy is being limited by somebody who is not even carrying the fetus, which makes no sense.

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Murderstyle75"] Men have no in's either though. Like I said before. If a man wants his baby and the woman does not, he should have a legal right to stop the abortion and agree to be that child's sole provider. Just because a man can't get pregnant doesnt mean it should be any less his.El_Zo1212o

No. He should not have the right to stop a woman from getting an abortion under any circumstance. While the fetus is still attached to the woman's body, she must be the one to make the decision. Otherwise, her bodily autonomy is being limited by somebody who is not even carrying the fetus, which makes no sense.

This argument here is the definition of what is wrong with the debate.  Each side wants to make it so black and white when this is far, far from it.  Late term abortions should not be legal under most circumstances.  As far as a mans choice goes, most of the time I would say no.  Nearly all of the situations where abortions are considered its because a mistake was made.  Its easy to put a condom on, for women its not always that easy.  Certainly there are situations where an argument could be made, are they married or at least long term partners, was it planned, etc etc etc.  Though those situations are few and far between.  

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

No. He should not have the right to stop a woman from getting an abortion under any circumstance. While the fetus is still attached to the woman's body, she must be the one to make the decision. Otherwise, her bodily autonomy is being limited by somebody who is not even carrying the fetus, which makes no sense.

toast_burner

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

Toast, do you think there should be any time restrictions on abortion or is all fair game up until birth?

I'm not the one who has gone through the experiences that lead up to the decision of choosing an abortion, and perhaps if I did I would understand. Thus I am pro-choice. The reason I disagree with the pro-life crowd is because they believe they can choose what is right for people everywhere without having gone through their experiences, and frankly they never will go through the exact same sets of experiences because that is just the nature of having different lives.

All that being said I think that both pro-life and pro-choice people (those that aren't militaristic idealogues anyway) should be able to agree that we can limit abortion through proper sex-ed, birth control, plan B (yeah that's sorta repetative), and adoption.

Serraph105

Let me clarify what I was trying to say earlier. You are at the moment of making a very tough decision in your life, but at the last second a man whom you have never met comes through the door, and lets you know he has heard about the choice you have in front of you. Now he is quick to clarify that unless your reasons fall under his three categories of interest he doesn't honestly care what led you to your decision. With all that being said he is now going to make your decision for you regardless of what you want.

This is essentially the process which pro-life supporters are taking when it comes to abortion. Unless your reasons fall under incest, rape, or your own life being in danger from the birth tough sh!t you are having the child whether you want it or not, and no they won't listen to any other reasons. Furthermore unlike my analogy above they won't even send someone in to meet you, they are just going to write down a law on some paper thus removing you or your rights and saying that you are not intelligent enough to make your own decisions.

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

No. He should not have the right to stop a woman from getting an abortion under any circumstance. While the fetus is still attached to the woman's body, she must be the one to make the decision. Otherwise, her bodily autonomy is being limited by somebody who is not even carrying the fetus, which makes no sense.

toast_burner

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] She gave up her 'bodily autonomy' when she decided to let a man put his genetic material into it. A woman shouuld only be able to make such a decision unilaterally when she had no choice in the matter(rape) or when the man isn't involved in the first place(sperm donor).El_Zo1212o

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

[QUOTE="famicommander"][QUOTE="lostrib"]

so what? My sperm cells' DNA is completely unique to it

toast_burner

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="Murderstyle75"] Have you ever used a condom? I'm thinking you have never seen one. Because sperm is not getting through unless it breaks. And even then. A birth control pill is a logical backup plan. Use two or three different forms together and your chances at pregnancy are slim to none. You could even take it a step further and abstain during ovulation as well.Murderstyle75

That is a lovely story :)

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] She gave up her 'bodily autonomy' when she decided to let a man put his genetic material into it. A woman shouuld only be able to make such a decision unilaterally when she had no choice in the matter(rape) or when the man isn't involved in the first place(sperm donor).El_Zo1212o

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

Who cares about life forms? We destroy life forms constantly and think nothing of it. Why is this even part of the debate?

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]This seems unusually close to the whole "she deserved to be raped for dressing like that" argument.

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

toast_burner

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]This seems unusually close to the whole "she deserved to be raped for dressing like that" argument.

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

worlock77

Who cares about life forms? We destroy life forms constantly and think nothing of it. Why is this even part of the debate?

[QUOTE="toast_burner"]

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] She gave up her 'bodily autonomy' when she decided to let a man put his genetic material into it. A woman shouuld only be able to make such a decision unilaterally when she had no choice in the matter(rape) or when the man isn't involved in the first place(sperm donor).El_Zo1212o

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

make birth control OTC, its so difficult to get a perscription to birth control..you need like 2 exams a valid insurance and all this other shit.. and condoms suck and are smelly...so no wonder..

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]This seems unusually close to the whole "she deserved to be raped for dressing like that" argument.

Why does it matter what she did before? It's still her body. 

ghoklebutter

condoms suck and are smelly...so no wonder..

kickingcarpet

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] That's my point- it's not just HER body anymore- when she allowed him to put his genetic material into her, she placed her body in trust to a life form growing inside it. If both of the people involved in creating that life form decide it's too inconvenient to have to care for it for the next 20 or so years, fine. But if either one doesn't agree with the decision to stop it from growing into a human being, both parties should have a choice in the matter- just like they both chose to begin it in the first place. How exactly does that equate to 'she was asking for it'?El_Zo1212o

So it's better to trust the health of the fetus to a mother who doesn't want it? I'm sure that will work out well

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="ghoklebutter"] Nope. It's still a part of her body, so only she has a say in what she does with it. The fact that it's foreign is completely irrelevant.lostrib

So it's better to trust the health of the fetus to a mother who doesn't want it? I'm sure that will work out well

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] It's as much his as hers, genetically. That fact alone should outweigh where it's incubated. You don't get to claim autonomy over your body after you've shared it with a man and decided to grow something that belongs to both of you inside it.El_Zo1212o

So it's better to trust the health of the fetus to a mother who doesn't want it? I'm sure that will work out well

I said fetus, not child. The mother carries the fetus