• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

Opinion To Be or Not To Be (An Abortion Thread)

birdup.snaildown said:
@deficiT



Most people where, in the US or the world?
You could be right. I don't know. Just asking what you mean.



Some people certainly do. I've literally said the words I'm pro-life in certain contexts and people have gone fucking apeshit. Try it as a social experiment and you will see what I mean.





I've seen numerous videos of people chanting happily for abortion.

...

I'm not sure what you're saying, generally. Is there a problem with me expressing my opinion? Should neither side of the debate express their opinion? Or is it just a problem when the government gets involved. I never said it should be illegal. Neither did @JessFR. We're just saying how we feel.
Click to expand...

You're not sure what I'm saying? Did you read it?

If the shoe doesn't fit, don't try to put it on.
 
@birdup.snaildown I never said you can't express yourself. I just noted the hypocrisy that is common with most pro-lifers and right wingers in America. They tend to not give two shits about the baby once it's born.

If that's not you, then you're not the subject of the post.
 
deficiT said:
it's fucked to think you can force a baby to be born into poverty or some other bad condition just because you think it's right. But applying your understanding of "what a human life" is, onto everyone else, isn't cool.
Click to expand...

I'm not forcing anyone to be born or pushing my understanding of what a human life is onto anyone else... but I guess you're talking about the government? As I said, nobody in this thread has suggested that abortion should be illegal, except maybe @TripSitterNZ but he's crazy.

deficiT said:
It seems to me like the moral conservatives start to get bored with that "life" they want to save as soon as the baby is born. How many serious pro-lifers actually have a stance to eliminate poverty, homelessness, etc.? Not many, most of you don't even think people should get paid a decent minimum wage.
Click to expand...

The long-term solution to poverty and homelessness isn't as obvious as most people think. Welfare systems have been devastating to certain communities. They have made homelessness and poverty worse. Logically housing people who are homeless and giving poor people money should fix the problem, but that's not what happens.
 
birdup.snaildown said:
I'm not forcing anyone to be born or pushing my understanding of what a human life is onto anyone else... but I guess you're talking about the government? As I said, nobody in this thread has suggested that abortion should be illegal, except maybe @TripSitterNZ but he's crazy.



The long-term solution to poverty and homelessness isn't as obvious as most people think. Welfare systems have been devastating to certain communities. They have made homelessness and poverty worse. Logically housing people who are homeless and giving poor people money should fix the problem, but that's not what happens.
Click to expand...
Again I was just speaking generally against the pro-lifers that are in government.

Welfare systems haven't been devastating to communities lol; rampant profiteering by the corporations that control the government, and the lack of concern for human life has devastated communities.
 
deficiT said:
But applying your understanding of "what a human life" is, onto everyone else, isn't cool.
Click to expand...

That's assuming the conclusion. Frustratingly this is an issue I find debating with pro choices over and over again.

It's not just that they don't agree, they honestly don't seem to comprehend the philosophical problems with their arguments.

If life did begin at conception, it you believe that's where human rights start. Just forget for a moment if that's actually literally true or not, just suppose it is for arguments sake.

If it is, then you can't argue that it's not the states business what people do with their bodies if what they do with their bodies will end someone else's life. No?

If a fetus really is a life, with a right to continued existence as any other person, then the mother of that life doesn't have an arbitrary right to destroy it.

But pro choices frustratingly again and again seem to think it's just a question of everyone adhering to their own beliefs.

NO I'm sorry but that simply doesn't work because the very belief that people should just adhere to their own beliefs IS ALREADY ASSUMING YOUR BELIEF TO BE CORRECT.

To assume that pro lifers should just not get abortions already in and of itself assumes the pro choice argument to be the correct one.

Get what I'm saying here?
 
birdup.snaildown said:
Yes, they have. It's well documented. Look into it.
Click to expand...

I think you're gonna have to look into it because that's just a ridiculous notion and sounds incredibly like bourgeois propaganda. The lack of jobs, education, and support for the working class has nothing to do with welfare, and everything to do with 21st century robber barons run amok.
 
@deficiT

I have already looked into it. When I was first made aware of the phenomenon, I doubted it like you are doubting it now. On the surface it doesn't appear to make sense. Give poor people money and they end up having less money? How is that possible? I recommend checking out Thomas Sowell, an African American economist from Stanford who writes about this issue extensively. It actually makes perfect sense and, as I said, it is well documented.
 
JessFR said:
That's assuming the conclusion. Frustratingly this is an issue I find debating with pro choices over and over again.

It's not just that they don't agree, they honestly don't seem to comprehend the philosophical problems with their arguments.

If life did begin at conception, it you believe that's where human rights start. Just forget for a moment if that's actually literally true or not, just suppose it is for arguments sake.

If it is, then you can't argue that it's not the states business what people do with their bodies if what they do with their bodies will end someone else's life. No?

If a fetus really is a life, with a right to continued existence as any other person, then the mother of that life doesn't have an arbitrary right to destroy it.

But pro choices frustratingly again and again seem to think it's just a question of everyone adhering to their own beliefs.

NO I'm sorry but that simply doesn't work because the very belief that people should just adhere to their own beliefs IS ALREADY ASSUMING YOUR BELIEF TO BE CORRECT.

To assume that pro lifers should just not get abortions already in and of itself assumes the pro choice argument to be the correct one.

Get what I'm saying here?
Click to expand...
I get what you're saying and that's all well and good for determining who's winning a logical argument, but when it comes to actually governing in the world; the pro-choice argument that abortions should be available for those who need them is still correct.

It is the pro-lifers who are intruding into other peoples lives, you are the one's starting the problem with it. Abortions happened and have happened for centuries*, regardless of legality. You are the one's trying to criminalize it. So YOU are the one that has to present your argument as to why.

And so far nothing pro-lifers say trumps the fact that people should have safe, legal access to abortions.
 
deficiT said:
I get what you're saying and that's all well and good for determining who's winning a logical argument, but when it comes to actually governing in the world; the pro-choice argument that abortions should be available for those who need them is still correct.

It is the pro-lifers who are intruding into other peoples lives, you are the one's starting the problem with it. Abortions happened and have happened for decades, regardless of legality. You are the one's trying to criminalize it. So YOU are the one that has to present your argument as to why.

And so far nothing pro-lifers say trumps the fact that people should have safe, legal access to abortions.
Click to expand...

*I* have no interest in criminalizing it. Even if I did believe in banning abortions I still wouldn't believe in making criminals of women who obtained them illegally.
 
Last edited:
JessFR said:
*I* have no interest in criminalizing it. Even if I did believe in banning abortions I still wouldn't believe in making criminals of women who obtained them illegally.
Click to expand...
I know I was speaking generally.
 
deficiT said:
It is the pro-lifers who are intruding into other peoples lives, you are the one's starting the problem with it. Abortions happened and have happened for decades, regardless of legality. You are the one's trying to criminalize it. So YOU are the one that has to present your argument as to why.
Click to expand...

The estimated rate of total performed abortions is massively higher in countries with access to legal abortions. The argument that the legalization of abortion has not increased the number of abortions (but, simply made them safer) has been thoroughly debunked.

If you think about it on a personal level, would you be just as likely to have an abortion if you had to seek out an illegal backyard method?

Historically abortion was performed after birth. We don't call it abortion. We call it infanticide, but it is essentially the same thing isn't it? The historical rate of infanticide was around 50%. It varies depending on culture. The rate of abortion among African American communities in NYC is around 50%. I don't think this is a co-incidence. They are the same. Technology now allows us to abort children before they are born.

It is the pro-lifers who are intruding into other peoples lives, you are the one's starting the problem with it. Abortions happened and have happened for decades, regardless of legality. You are the one's trying to criminalize it. So YOU are the one that has to present your argument as to why.
Click to expand...

I don't think @JessFR is trying to criminalize anything. I'm certainly not. We're just having a discussion.

I was speaking generally.
Click to expand...

But you keep saying "you".
 
The state has a right, one nearly everyone accepts, to look out for the best interests of members of society unable to look out for themselves.

We do it with things like child abuse, elder abuse.

The only difference with abortion is that not everyone believes the victim in that case actually has the human rights yet to be able to be a victim yet.

And that's a valid position to take, I don't agree with it but it's a perfectly valid opinion to have with its own merits. But I don't see how it's default.

Exactly when, by "default" does a human gain personhood and rights? At birth? Why then, what's changed in the fundamental nature of that human that makes it a human with rights the hours before birth vs after, and why?
 
Children didn't have rights historically. Parents could abuse them as they saw fit. Women didn't have rights either. Black people didn't have rights in many countries. Homosexuals didn't have rights.

As time goes on, we recognize more and more that people are people. Every human deserves to be treated as such. Unborn babies are the only group of people that the left is actively taking rights away from.

@JessFR, nice to be on the same side of an argument again. This is the first time you've crossed over to the right. Usually it is me crossing over to your side.
 
I wouldn't go quite that far. :P

They honestly believe that there's no life that early in conception. Why wouldn't they think it should be purely up to the woman of that were the case?

That's what I'd believe if I didn't think life started at conception.

I don't begrudge pro choicers for their beliefs, only for their assumption theirs should be presumed correct.

This is why I've never liked the argument that abortion is murder. Murder conventionally requires intent, and there can be no intent to kill a human life they honestly don't recognize.
 
There is no sensible argument that life begins at any point other than conception.

People often believe what they want to believe in order to justify their position, rather than acknowledging the truth. Like you with that Trump phone call.
 
birdup.snaildown said:
The estimated rate of total performed abortions is massively higher in countries with access to legal abortions. The argument that the legalization of abortion has not increased the number of abortions (but, simply made them safer) has been thoroughly debunked.

If you think about it on a personal level, would you be just as likely to have an abortion if you had to seek out an illegal backyard method?

Historically abortion was performed after birth. We don't call it abortion. We call it infanticide, but it is essentially the same thing isn't it? The historical rate of infanticide was around 50%. It varies depending on culture. The rate of abortion among African American communities in NYC is around 50%. I don't think this is a co-incidence. They are the same. Technology now allows us to abort children before they are born.



I don't think @JessFR is trying to criminalize anything. I'm certainly not. We're just having a discussion.



But you keep saying "you".
Click to expand...
Ok so it's been said now a couple times that "no one wants to criminalize" it, we're just having a discussion, etc. Then what exactly is the point of this discussion other than to be like "abortion = bad"?

It's still legal, so that's just how it is. Your feelings of loss about your potential child are justifiable, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you made a mistake, and it doesn't make abortions unilaterally bad.

Life doesn't begin at conception I'm sorry guys. Notice we celebrate"birth"days and not fucking "conception"days lmao
 
Well, the day of conception is sometimes not exactly clear. Birth is always clear.

Besides that doesn't solve anything.

Is abortion permissible right up until birth? What makes it permissible before birth vs after?

Does a mother have a right to kill their baby when it's a couple weeks old?

What about a couple weeks prior to birth, if that's OK, then why? Why is one murder but the other not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top