Better Restated Abortion Question

David Sklansky · #1 07-31-2007, 03:58 PM

Ignore the first one as I was unclear.

If technology advances to the point where even young embryos can be saved after an abortion, will pro choicers claim woman will have the right to tell the surgeons not to save it?

Lestat · #2 07-31-2007, 04:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Ignore the first one as I was unclear.

If technology advances to the point where even young embryos can be saved after an abortion, will pro choicers claim woman will have the right to tell the surgeons not to save it?

[/ QUOTE ]

If they're the ones who will have the responsibility to care and provide for it, I think the answer is yes.

What bugs me about these abortion debates is that rarely do they ever get to the heart of the problem. Sex education, contraception, and family planning. Education in these areas would eliminate the need for most abortions. The wrong questions are being asked, and the wrong topics are being discussed.

TheOneWizard · #3 07-31-2007, 04:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ignore the first one as I was unclear.

If technology advances to the point where even young embryos can be saved after an abortion, will pro choicers claim woman will have the right to tell the surgeons not to save it?

[/ QUOTE ]

If they're the ones who will have the responsibility to care and provide for it, I think the answer is yes.

What bugs me about these abortion debates is that rarely do they ever get to the heart of the problem. Sex education, contraception, and family planning. Education in these areas would eliminate the need for most abortions. The wrong questions are being asked, and the wrong topics are being discussed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the general approach to such situations would be the mother is giving the baby away for adoption or whatever. The technology solution seems to null arguments of "My body, my choice" which is essentially what the pro-choice crowd has been shouting for years.

Otherwise you're certainly right that the vast majority of situations can be avoided with education.

guids · #4 07-31-2007, 04:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ignore the first one as I was unclear.

If technology advances to the point where even young embryos can be saved after an abortion, will pro choicers claim woman will have the right to tell the surgeons not to save it?

[/ QUOTE ]

If they're the ones who will have the responsibility to care and provide for it, I think the answer is yes.

What bugs me about these abortion debates is that rarely do they ever get to the heart of the problem. Sex education, contraception, and family planning. Education in these areas would eliminate the need for most abortions. The wrong questions are being asked, and the wrong topics are being discussed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely, the pro-choicers feel it is much more important to selfishly focus on themselves and bitch about choices, and the pro-lifers even though they educate are too ignorant to furnish any practical solutions.

Stu Pidasso · #5 07-31-2007, 04:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If technology advances to the point where even young embryos can be saved after an abortion, will pro choicers claim woman will have the right to tell the surgeons not to save it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. People have abortions because they do not want a specific potential person to become an actual person.

Stu

Taraz · #6 07-31-2007, 06:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If technology advances to the point where even young embryos can be saved after an abortion, will pro choicers claim woman will have the right to tell the surgeons not to save it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. People have abortions because they do not want a specific potential person to become an actual person.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

You keep saying this, but that doesn't make it true.

Lestat · #7 07-31-2007, 08:04 PM

<font color="blue"> I think the general approach to such situations would be the mother is giving the baby away for adoption or whatever. </font>

Of course, this is ideal. Unfortunately, it's not always feasible. Healthy white babies are in high demand, but I don't think that's the case for say, African American babies or those of poor health.

I happen to be pro-choice. But that doesn't mean I like abortion or even think it should be a first option. I think the problem should be dealt with at it's core. Don't make unwanted babies! I also think pro-lifers put way too much emphasis on abortion and not nearly enough on preventing unwanted pregnancies.

PLOlover · #8 07-31-2007, 08:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If they're the ones who will have the responsibility to care and provide for it, I think the answer is yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

the father has no legal say in abort/noabort , but must pay child support.

based on this i would say the mother couldn't insist on death for the embryo, and could still be held financially liable for the child.

Lestat · #9 07-31-2007, 08:07 PM

<font color="blue"> I agree completely, the pro-choicers feel it is much more important to selfishly focus on themselves and bitch about choices, </font>

Uh, I think it's the other way around. Feel free to prove me wrong. I'm a pro-choicer and I'm not bitching about choices. I'm bitching about not enough available education to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

It's the pro-lifers who back away from discussions of contraception and sex education in schools, etc. They mainly want to bitch about abortion itself and the rights of a 3 day old fetus. Well, by that time, it's too late.

Stu Pidasso · #10 07-31-2007, 09:58 PM

[ QUOTE ]

You keep saying this, but that doesn't make it true.

[/ QUOTE ]

You keep saying its false does not make it false....touche.

Why do women have abortions then? Becuase the fetus the woman is carrying is going become a person who will in some way complicate their lives. A woman has an abortion to ensure that person does not come into existance. Any other excuse givin for an abortion is just a sugar coat of the above.

Stu