Is abortion a right or murder?

Happy_Killbot

@A_Lesbian_Libral

First just to get this out of the way, I am neither pro-choice or pro-life, but rather I subscribe to a secret third option which I have dubbed pro-freedom, the goal of which is to invert the standard arguments of both primary sides in this debate and show that binary thinking is not the only option, nor is it the best option. This issue is one which I feel I can debate all sides effectively, however I would like to focus on the third option being as many people have (unfortunately) never heard of it.

Abortions occur when a woman is unwillingly pregnant. Thus far, the debate has mostly focused around what should be done about the unwanted baby, with pro-choice crowd asserts that the woman's body belongs to her and thus her bodily autonomy should be respected, while the pro-life crowd believes that the fetus's life has value and should be protected legally. My view is that both of these positions are damage control, that is to say that neither makes any attempt to actually solve the problem, but rather to provide an in situ "band-aid" to make the problem, or rather the consequences of the problem disappear.

So, the problem that we should be focusing on, is not "what should we do with unwanted pregnancies" but rather should be: "How can we as a society minimize or eliminate unwanted pregnancies".

There are several options available for accomplishing this. The first and most obvious being the development of better contraceptives, in particular a male-equivalent contraceptive. For men, there really only exist 3 options for dealing with pregnancy, condoms, vasectomy, and abstinence. These methods all come with various degrees of feasibility, and each has their own problems. However, a male contraceptive drug, which would take the form of either a gel which was rubbed on the shoulders each morning or an implant could reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies by several orders of magnitude depending on effectiveness and acceptance in the general population.

There are several other technologies, such as artificial wombs and genetic inhibitors which could serve a similar purpose in the future, but these technologies are decades away, unlike male-equivalent birth control which theoretically could have been developed a decade ago with the right funding.

One of the most common arguments I get against this position is that it doesn't answer what should happen to the few who do get pregnant despite not wanting to be. I will preemptively counter this by stating my stance, which is that the existing laws are already sufficient to serve as a solution. It is not necessary to either overturn or modify Roe v. Wade to take a complete stance one way or the other.

The fact of the matter is that while we may vie for freedom in a legal sense, it is the reality of our biology which truly limits our freedoms. Only through technological development can we ever hope to achieve greater freedom and a more equal world.

RickeyD

@A_Lesbian_Libral ; Abortion, child murder-infanticide, is murder of innocence and a violation of the mutilated child's 5th and 14th-Amendment due process right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. Roe/73 was and is unconstitutional and must be repealed in light of the fact that life begins at conception.

Life begins at Conception: HHS

In fact, science now confirms that "life" begins at conception: https://www.liveaction.org/news/new-hhs-strategic-plan-protects-american-lives-beginning-conception/

Life begins at Fertilization

http://thefederalist.com/2018/06/25/science-life-begins-makes-pro-choicers-look-terrible/

Pediatricians agree: Life begins at conception:

https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins

Princeton agrees, life begins at conception: https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html

US Government Now Says: Life begins at conception

https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/yw397w/government-hhs-now-says-life-begins-at-conception

Life Begins a Fertilization, video

https://twitter.com/LiveAction/status/1068861776329093121

Fetal Homicide Laws

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

 

Abortion Video, 2013 05/23 Dr. Levantino Testimony before Congress: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8szDctI9lXM

SkepticalOne

A_Lesbian_Libral said:

I think that it's 100% a woman's choice to get an abortion or not. I'm personally not the best at starter arguments, so I am just leaving my view here, and would be very happy to debate with anyone who disagrees's! 

Whenever someone says abortion is murder, I wonder what definition if murder they are operating under. Murder is typically defined as the unjustified killing of a person. Even if we allow personhood and all accompanying rights to a fetus, there is no right to use the body of another person. If a fetus dies because the use of a woman's body was denied to it, then the death cannot be murder.

If you started using my body to maintain your life, I am not murdering you when I protect myself. My rights disallow you to do this to me, and maintaining by bodily sovereignty (even if it causes your death) is not murder, but self-defense. 

John_C_87

A_Lesbian_Libral said:

I think that it's 100% a woman's choice to get an abortion or not. I'm personally not the best at starter arguments, so I am just leaving my view here, and would be very happy to debate with anyone who disagrees's! 

Abortion is an admission to murder while female-specific amputation is a Constitutional right. All women are created equal by their creator and abortion is not the description of the creator of all women. Birth, pregnancy, and lethal force are in this matter. A woman must weigh the risk clearly of all danger in the transportation of a citizen into a nation. Abortion was found to be an invasion of privacy back in 1973 I do not think women should be given the right to invade the privacy of another woman. Sorry.

RickeyD

@John_C_87 ; Murder is not a Constitutional right. Taking innocent life, taking life void due process is murder. There is no such entity as "female-specific amputation"...this demonic jargon is obfuscation for the fool seeking death in sin and Hell.

RickeyD

@John_C_87 ; Murder is not a Constitutional right. Taking innocent life, taking life void due process is murder. There is no such entity as "female-specific amputation"...this demonic jargon is obfuscation for the fool seeking death in sin and Hell.

RickeyD

@John_C_87 ; Murder is not a Constitutional right. Taking innocent life, taking life void due process is murder. There is no such entity as "female-specific amputation"...this demonic jargon is obfuscation for the fool seeking death in sin and Hell.

Ampersand

People often try and pretend that fetuses should have the full rights of human beings and just go on rants about how abortion is murder, but it's common sense that we wouldn't give normal rights or protections to a fetus. We don't give children full rights even after they're born or even once they're teenagers and can think and reason coherently. You can do all kinds of things to your child in terms of having control over their life that if you tried to do to an adult would see you arrested, like sending them to their room and not letting them leave the house which would be false imprisonment if you tried to do it to an adult.

As a society we recognise that certain subsections of humanity should have less rights based on their individual circumstances. Children have their rights restricted and are in large part controlled by their parents because they are developing aren't aren't judged to be fully capable. Similarly people in comas or who have otherwise lost their capacity will often have others ending up acting on their behalf because they are unable to exercise the rights themselves.

The question therefore is what rights if any we should grant a fetus.

Now we obviously don't let born children be killed at the parents request, but fetuses are not the same as babies. Excepting extreme third trimester abortions which are super rare (and illegal depending on where you are) babies have no sentience, no ability to reason, no ability to feel pain, no personality and no other characteristics of personhood that would cause concern over its death. Functionally it's indistinguishable from killing a sea cucumber. People may choose to assign extra value to the death based on personal values like the ability of a fetus to grow into something that has personhood or due to religious rationales, but those are personal subjective values that have no bearing on the nature of the fetus being aborted.

The only clear unarguable issues which apply in the case of an abortion are the mother's wishes. The mother is objectively and undeniably having to carry the fetus and undergo a gruelling months long ordeal and with her right to bodily autonomy there should be no reason for her not to get an abortion.

RoroSandiego

@A_Lesbian_Libral Im the type of person who sees abortion as a neccesarry evil. If women want to have an abortion they should have every right. However I also believe that the fetus is a life and it gets killed. Thats why I say it's a necessary evil. I will advocate against abortion after the 19-20 week because its been proven that the child develops pain receptors around that time and might feel the pain of being ripped to shreds. I stand firmly against abortions after week 19 unless the women has a good argument for it. If her life is on the line then im fine with the abortion but anything less than that and im not fine with it.

RickeyD

@Ampersand; @John_C_87; @Plaffelvohfen;  That "fetus" is a living human being and no one has the "right" to murder same.  Every single one you bloody abortion advocates will be held culpable before our Creator in Eternity for the shedding of innocent blood (Proverbs 6:16-19; Revelation 20:11-15) and you will suffer in Hell commensurate with this sin before the "second death" (Revelation 20:14)...a most horrid sin against God's creation and His plan and purposes for life (Luke 17:1). 

MichaelElpers

@A_Lesbian_Libral What the argument comes down to everytime is whether the fetus is a person? If its not the mother can kill it, if it is she cant.  So when does a fetus become a person?

John_C_87

RickeyD said:

@John_C_87 ; Murder is not a Constitutional right. Taking innocent life, taking life void due process is murder. There is no such entity as "female-specific amputation"...this demonic jargon is obfuscation for the fool seeking death in sin and Hell.

1. Lethal force does not constitute murder.
2. The Minor living Life is not innocent it is presumed innocent.
3. Due process takes place by a Miltary tribunal.
4. Female-specific amputation describes a united state around pregnancy which creates all women equal. Abortion does not create all women equal female-specific amputation does create woman equal.
5. Though your statement is not a fallacy lethal force is a constitutional right dependent on its state of a union to be made by the user.

John_C_87

@SkepticalOne
If a fetus dies because the use of a woman's body was denied to it, then death cannot be murder. 
Yes, it can simply by going before a court of law under the criminal charge of murder based on the admission itself. Women can be found guilty or innocent during any trial however that has nothing to do with the criminal invasion of privacy created by the word abortion. The issue is the baby never invades the women's body even if the pregnancy is due to sexual assault. A woman is conducting a prejudice against another woman by invading her privacy. Like discrimination form men this prejudice is easily stopped when addressed directly.
 

RickeyD

@John_C_87 ; There is a Court where you will stand and give an account for your advocacy of the murder of God's special creation, his children (Revelation 20:11-15). There is no court on Earth that has the right to take a human life void due process...this is murder. Life has been affirmed to begin at conception, even by your own science; therefore, you advocate for the murder of innocent children and for this you will given an account before sentencing to the "second death" in Hell.

Life begins at Conception: HHS

In fact, science now confirms that "life" begins at conception: https://www.liveaction.org/news/new-hhs-strategic-plan-protects-american-lives-beginning-conception/

Life begins at Fertilization

http://thefederalist.com/2018/06/25/science-life-begins-makes-pro-choicers-look-terrible/

Pediatricians agree: Life begins at conception:

https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/life-issues/when-human-life-begins

Princeton agrees, life begins at conception: https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html

US Government Now Says: Life begins at conception

https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/yw397w/government-hhs-now-says-life-begins-at-conception

Life Begins a Fertilization, video

https://twitter.com/LiveAction/status/1068861776329093121

Fetal Homicide Laws

http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx

 

Abortion Video, 2013 05/23 Dr. Levantino Testimony before Congress: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8szDctI9lXM

OBGYN Who Delivered 5,000 Babies: Abortion is “Never” Necessary to Protect a Woman’s Health

https://www.lifenews.com/2019/02/12/obgyn-who-delivered-5000-babies-abortion-is-never-necessary-to-protect-a-womans-health/

Doctor on prenatal surgery: If the baby is a patient, then he’s also a person

https://www.liveaction.org/news/doctor-prenatal-baby-patient-person/?utm_content=80372484&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

John_C_87

RickeyD said:

@Ampersand; @John_C_87; @Plaffelvohfen;  That "fetus" is a living human being and no one has the "right" to murder same.  Every single one you bloody abortion advocates will be held culpable before our Creator in Eternity for the shedding of innocent blood (Proverbs 6:16-19; Revelation 20:11-15) and you will suffer in Hell commensurate with this sin before the "second death" (Revelation 20:14)...a most horrid sin against God's creation and His plan and purposes for life (Luke 17:1). 

Yeah, a lethal force is used by a human fetus and can be directed to a human fetus in return. As the issue is over immigration across a nation's border a military tribunal takes place by the 2nd Amendment of United State's of American Consitution. Every single one you bloody abortion advocate, I don't advocate abortion, I advocate female-specific amputations you are casting judgment me for making a stance on your invasion of privacy. It would be an honor to stand in the underworld holding your place until relieved by you. 

RickeyD

@John_C_87 ; That is a demonic obfuscation i.e. "female specific amputation." That is a lie and words of impotence that represents the mutilation of an innocent child in the womb. Face the facts...you advocate for the murder-mutilation of innocent babies in the womb and you are therefore guilty of espousing the shedding of innocent blood for which you will be held accountable in the Judgment of the Condemned in Eternity.

Ampersand

@RickeyD

I'm not Christian, so like most people on earth your appeals to whatever subset of Christian doctrine you believe in doesn't have any meaning to me.

RickeyD

@Ampersand ; It matters not if you've chosen to die in Hell by rejecting Jesus Christ as Lord relevant to the murder of children in the womb. The moral law that is infused within your heart at conception by our Creator (Romans 2:15) testifies to the "wrong" relevant to murdering innocence; therefore, you will face Judgment with due process and you will be "without excuse" for advocating for the murder of God's children. You can be assured of this truism because even in your servitude to Satan as an atheist, you intuitively know that murdering a child in the womb is wrong.

RickeyD

@Plaffelvohfen; Don't think you will escape that same Judgment as you laugh at the murder of babies in the womb...you will NOT have the last laugh, atheist...you have my word on that!!!

xlJ_dolphin_473

@RickeyD
I think it is both a right and murder, a right to murder, perhaps. There are some situations where murder is justified. Abortion is one.

xlJ_dolphin_473

@RickeyD
I think it is both a right and murder, a right to murder, perhaps. There are some situations where murder is justified. Abortion is one.

Ampersand

@RickeyD ;

Still not Christian, so nothing you said matters seeing as there is no objective validity to Christian doctrine. You realise that if all you do is complain about how god likes abortion and you can't find a cogent argument beyond that, you're never going to actually convince anyone that abortion is bad? I thought you would want to effectively oppose abortion.

John_C_87

RickeyD said:

@John_C_87 ; That is a demonic obfuscation i.e. "female specific amputation." That is a lie and words of impotence that represents the mutilation of an innocent child in the womb. Face the facts...you advocate for the murder-mutilation of innocent babies in the womb and you are therefore guilty of espousing the shedding of innocent blood for which you will be held accountable in the Judgment of the Condemned in Eternity. 

Female-specific amputation, words that might represent the death of a child. Why do you think the law written in Texas on abortion was found to be illegal by the Supreme Court? The admission of abortion made by a woman was not found to be illegal it was the law written that was not legal. Let's face it RickeyD you simply support a prejudice between women and not only will you face accountability in this life it is you who will be judged and condemned eternally.

RickeyD

@John_C_87 ; Again, the laws of men cannot usurp the Law of God. You advocate for the murder of children, this is immoral, vile and disgusting. You represent evil in our day and you will reap what you sow for advocating the shedding of innocent blood. A woman's right to bodily autonomy ends when she agrees to allow a man into her vagina and subsequently receives seed leading to fertilization. At the moment of fertilization, there are TWO-lives in play, each with their own unique DNA, spirit, destiny. You have NO "right" to murder that life and only the Devil, your spiritual father, would suggest you do (John 8:44). 

A_Lesbian_Libral

@RickeyD The first article you provided showed pictures of a fetus, which is formed 8 weeks after conception, even though they are arguing that life begins at conception, which takes away a little of the validity of your argument. The first article also is clearly written by someone with unrealistic views as it mentions that every person's life should end with a "natural death". That alone hurts your credibility because the author or recourses they used believe that everything can be perfect when it can't. The author also showed their naive thinking when 

 I have an article here by Dr. Tomas Ryan, a professor of neuroscience at Trinity College Dublin:
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/the-moment-a-baby-s-brain-starts-to-function-and-other-scientific-answers-on-abortion-1.3506968

As you can see in this article, at conception it is a clump of cells, and at 8 weeks becomes an embryo. It then becomes a fetus at 11-12 weeks, which technically still isn't a baby. The cells only fully become a baby at birth, so therefore no babies are being killed. Brain activity doesn't fully develop until 24 weeks into a pregnancy, and only then could it remotely be called a life.

Abortion: The Facts
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/abortion-referendum/abortion-facts

This article highlights one of my biggest arguments; circumstances.
Abortion is never decided without a reason. There has never been a woman that got pregnant by her significant other, was old enough to do so, and had the money and resources to care for the child that tried to get an abortion. You must take into perspective the situation all women are in when they get abortions. Imagine you are a 12-year-old girl who just got her period. You were walking home from school one day when you get raped. You are already traumatized by such an awful experience, and then you find out you are pregnant. You now have to tell your friends and your school that you got pregnant and can't go, ruining your education and reputation. People on the streets yelling at you and your parents for letting their child be such a whore. Your stomach is bigger than half your body, and the mental/physical pain is the worst thing you've ever experienced. You go to the hospital 5 weeks in, wanting to avoid the bump growing too large, and when you go to try and get the clump of cells removed, the doctor says no. You now have to spend 9 months bearing the feeling of a fetus growing inside your small 12-year-old body. Every day you think about the man who raped you, and the thing he is creating. At the end of the 9 months, you have already tried to commit suicide countless times, but people yell at you for it, not because they want you to live your full life, but because the fetus inside you will never get to see the adoption center. It can go 2 ways from here, both resulting in death. 

You either are lucky enough to afford to get a c-section, go through the crippling thoughts of the fact you are birthing a rapist's baby. Someone who grabbed you by your pigtails and raped you. After seeing the now official baby, you send it to the adoption center, where they will spend their whole life, never getting adopted from the obvious birth defects caused by a child birthing another child. Once you get home from recovery, you immediately kill yourself. This has happened before. Congratulations! You saved a fetus from not having to go through the painful life of an orphan because a not yet existing human is obviously more important than a 12-year-old girl with formed relationships, goals, and potential. 

Or, you could be part of the unlucky group who can't afford a c-section. Now you have to attempt to push out an entire baby from your maturing, small, pre-teen body in a bathtub. Of course, you don't have wide enough hips for that, you are 12. So what happens? The baby dies in the womb. The girl kills herself. THAT is murder. Not taking a clump of cells out of a grieving girl's body before it's too late. 

So think about that. How quickly would you commit suicide?

RickeyD

@A_Lesbian_Libral ; Life begins at conception and our Creator knows us and His plan for our life before we're formed in the womb of our mother. You cannot deny that the unique DNA formed at conception is life...you lie to yourself and God when you do. Life, person-hood, has nothing to do with brainwaves or a heartbeat...it has to do with the constituent elements having been combined to form that brain and heart with "time" as the only mandate for realization of both. Time is not probable cause or reasoning for murdering life.

Have you not been involved in this forum under another name or two?

When Does a Human Person Begin?

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1305-when-does-a-human-person-begin

Eight Minds Changed on Abortion in Seconds

https://www.livingwaters.com/movie/180movie/

Life begins at Fertilization

http://thefederalist.com/2018/06/25/science-life-begins-makes-pro-choicers-look-terrible/

Plaffelvohfen

@A_Lesbian_Libral

Don't even bother with RikeyD, he's clinically psychotic and untreated... But hey, you can play with this nuisance if you like, just don't expect coherency...

RickeyD

@Plaffelvohfen ; You have no argument because your father has no substance.

John_C_87

RickeyD said:

@John_C_87 ; Again, the laws of men cannot usurp the Law of God. You advocate for the murder of children, this is immoral, vile and disgusting. You represent evil in our day and you will reap what you sow for advocating the shedding of innocent blood. A woman's right to bodily autonomy ends when she agrees to allow a man into her vagina and subsequently receives seed leading to fertilization. At the moment of fertilization, there are TWO-lives in play, each with their own unique DNA, spirit, destiny. You have NO "right" to murder that life and only the Devil, your spiritual father, would suggest you do (John 8:44).  

@John_C_87 ; Again, the laws of men cannot usurp the Law of God. You advocate for the murder of children, this is immoral, vile, disgusting “ and a lie or truth.” The axiom that is GOD told me you forgot this.

A woman's right to bodily autonomy ends when she agrees to allow a man into her vagina and subsequently receives seed leading to fertilization. At the moment of fertilization, there are TWO-lives in play, each with their own unique DNA, spirit, destiny. You have NO "right" to murder that life.

My actions unlike yours have nothing to do with the control over a woman’s body. Capital punishment is not a murder, and the dangers women face are many. The child, the minor, by law in your opinion and definition should be allowed to murder a woman in order to ensure the child’s place as citizen and member of your religion.

You are not conspiring with the minor in this matter, you are not a legal advisor to the minor in this matter, your military tribunal has no life-threating vested interest in the life of the child while all religious women and men like you and I kill children on a regular basis by taking up abstinence.

FYI 

For whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. I say the truth and liberty as seeds have been planted, through the words of female-specific amputation. I doubt seriously the fruits of this labor will be reaped by myself. The words planted in your mind are not a lie they mean only the efforts of the sown foreseen by this harvest were never mine to reap in the first place.

At the moment of fertilization, there are TWO-lives in play, each with their own unique DNA, spirit, destiny. You have NO "right" to murder that life and only the Devil, your spiritual father, would suggest you do (John 8:44).

It is only my burden by GOD and legal precedent to ensure privacy to the tribunal. To spite your ignorance of these official matters, I do not desire or need to attend all tribunals for I would be conducting the same injustice under God as you. The invasion of privacy. 

A_Lesbian_Libral

@rickeyD It seems to me that I have won this argument already. You have blatantly ignored the entire second portion of my argument, which to me means there is nothing you can argue about. The fact that you are quoting the bible takes about credibility to your argument, because religion is a fluid thing that can range, and it's not facts. It is your belief. 
And if we are going by your definition of life, then every time you remove lice from your hair, accidentally step on an ant, or if you ever ate meat you have murdered. Is that the point you are trying to convey?

MichaelElpers

@A_Lesbian_Libral
"There has never been a woman that got pregnant by her significant other, was old enough to do so, and had the money and resources to care for the child that tried to get an abortion"? You dont think wealthier people ever get abortions?  That statement just isn true.

"You were walking home from school one day when you get raped. You are already traumatized by such an awful experience, and then you find out you are pregnant."
Im glad you came up with the saddest possible scenario to justify all abortion.  Also not sure how that ruins her reputation, i mean do you think less of people that are raped?  Also regardless of whether your pregnant or not youre still going to remember. A 12 year old most likely wouldnt be able to have a baby without severe health concerns, and therefore pro life position would allow it.  

Regarding the developement of the baby. From conception separate human DNA is developing writing the code for blood type, eye color, the entire human makeup.

If there was person in a coma, and you knew that in 9 months they would live a completely healthy life, would you pull the plug?
You then cite these sources about development and the line you seem to draw is birth.  So even though a 38 week old in the womb is more developed, it is not a person, where as a 25 week old born somehow is...explain that reasoning.

What makes someone a person?
What is crucial morally is the being of a person, not his or her functioning. A human person does not come into existence when human function arises, but rather, a human person is an entity who has the natural inherent capacity to give rise to human functions, whether or not those functions are ever attained. …A human person who lacks the ability to think rationally (either because she is too young or she suffers from a disability) is still a human person because of her nature. Consequently, it makes sense to speak of a human being’s lack if and only if she is an actual person.
And 
It is because an entity has an essence and falls within a natural kind that it can possess a unity of dispositions, capacities, parts and properties at a given time and can maintain identity through change.

This is the only definition i can find that doesnt eliminate some people that are already born.

xlJ_dolphin_473

A_Lesbian_Libral said:

@rickeyD It seems to me that I have won this argument already. You have blatantly ignored the entire second portion of my argument, which to me means there is nothing you can argue about. The fact that you are quoting the bible takes about credibility to your argument, because religion is a fluid thing that can range, and it's not facts. It is your belief. 
And if we are going by your definition of life, then every time you remove lice from your hair, accidentally step on an ant, or if you ever ate meat you have murdered. Is that the point you are trying to convey?

I agree. @RickeyD has very strong and adamant beliefs, infrequently backed with evidence. I think you have won this argument.

John_C_87

What argument there is none with the question?

This is a question of the argument.
 Is Abortion the admission of murder, is it the admission of murder which creates the illegal invasion of privacy?