The abortion-capital punishment debate

[CrAz3D]

"When you put a quarter into a coke machine & a coke comes out is the coke yours or the machines?"

I have NO idea where I heard/read that, but I thought it was funny & applies here

[dxoigmn]

Yes, having children is a choice.  And if you're not ready for it, you shouldn't be fucking the next guy who comes in the door.  Why should an unborn child who cannot even speak for himself or herself be punished because you wanted to get laid?

Unfortunately, people have sex without the intention of having a baby, even people in long-term relationships! Many people take precautions to reduce the risk of pregnancy, but sometimes pills fail and condoms break. But that is an entirely different argument. We are talking about a soon-to-be mother and her yet unbord child, not what act was use to achieve that and whether or not that is morally correct.

What happens if the mother is unable to support her child? Do we let it suffer by going through the foster care system? If the foster care system was this great system, then I would have problems with abortion. But it isn't. Until the system can be fixed, then abortion is probably in the best interest of the soon-to-be mother and the unborn child.

Plus, we're already overcrowded as is. Anything to limit population growth is probably a good thing.

[CrAz3D]

Yes, having children is a choice.  And if you're not ready for it, you shouldn't be fucking the next guy who comes in the door.  Why should an unborn child who cannot even speak for himself or herself be punished because you wanted to get laid?

Unfortunately, people have sex without the intention of having a baby, even people in long-term relationships! Many people take precautions to reduce the risk of pregnancy, but sometimes pills fail and condoms break. But that is an entirely different argument. We are talking about a soon-to-be mother and her yet unbord child, not what act was use to achieve that and whether or not that is morally correct.

What happens if the mother is unable to support her child? Do we let it suffer by going through the foster care system? If the foster care system was this great system, then I would have problems with abortion. But it isn't. Until the system can be fixed, then abortion is probably in the best interest of the soon-to-be mother and the unborn child.

Plus, we're already overcrowded as is. Anything to limit population growth is probably a good thing.

What about criminals?  You could make that SAME arguement for them
The system is flawed so just kill them.
It stops population growth too

[dxoigmn]

What about criminals?  You could make that SAME arguement for them
The system is flawed so just kill them.
It stops population growth too

There is a difference between a human and a fetus. And changing the subject is a bad debate technique.

[CrAz3D]

What about criminals?  You could make that SAME arguement for them
The system is flawed so just kill them.
It stops population growth too

There is a difference between a human and a fetus. And changing the subject is a bad debate technique.

Please look at the topic/subject of this thread & then maybe reword your previous post to say something along the lines of "hmm, good point CrAz3D, killing people that deserve to die is even better than killing a soon-to-be someone that has done nothing to deserve death".

[Adron]

Please look at the topic/subject of this thread & then maybe reword your previous post to say something along the lines of "hmm, good point CrAz3D, killing people that deserve to die is even better than killing a soon-to-be someone that has done nothing to deserve death".

Killing people that deserve to die is great. Now, who deserves to die? Not those on the death row.

[dxoigmn]

What about criminals?  You could make that SAME arguement for them
The system is flawed so just kill them.
It stops population growth too

There is a difference between a human and a fetus. And changing the subject is a bad debate technique.

Please look at the topic/subject of this thread & then maybe reword your previous post to say something along the lines of "hmm, good point CrAz3D, killing people that deserve to die is even better than killing a soon-to-be someone that has done nothing to deserve death".

I was focusing on abortion, but I'll respond given the topic.

No you can't use the same argument, because a fetus is not a human. Economically, it is too expensive to put every criminal to death given the current system.

What happens when a teenager is forced to have a child because of anti-abortion laws? Well she's more likely to end up on "welfare" which many of you do not support. Why not save some money and be proactive, instead of creating a potential problem which you will have to pay for out of your pocket?

[CrAz3D]

Please look at the topic/subject of this thread & then maybe reword your previous post to say something along the lines of "hmm, good point CrAz3D, killing people that deserve to die is even better than killing a soon-to-be someone that has done nothing to deserve death".

Killing people that deserve to die is great. Now, who deserves to die? Not those on the death row.

It is ok to end something that is completely innocent & good but not ok to end something that has done so much harm to the world?
I just don't see how that works, please, explain this simply to me.

[Adron]

It is ok to end something that is completely innocent & good but not ok to end something that has done so much harm to the world?
I just don't see how that works, please, explain this simply to me.

OK.

A fetus is right at the beginning. There is no monetary investment in it (schooling etc) and mostly not a big emotional investment (and the one there is, those with the emotional investment, the parents, are the ones making the call). Plus, the egg was quite likely never intended, by the man and woman involved, to become anything other than ejected as part of a menstruation. Effectively there is no loss compared to the state of egg never being fertilized.

Someone on death row may be completely worthless and impossible to rehabilitate. If that is the case, go ahead and kill. On the other hand, if this is someone who acted in anger, out of his/her normal self, or someone who has used the time in prison to change, then there is a profit to the world to be had from releasing this person. There are also likely more emotional bonds to this person from other people - parents, relatives, children, etc, and so the emotional hurt is going to be bigger.

[MyndFyre]

We are talking about a soon-to-be mother and her yet unbord child, not what act was use to achieve that and whether or not that is morally correct.

I never made a position about whether having sex is morally correct.

And changing the subject is a bad debate technique.

So I suggest that you don't assume that because I'm pro-life I'm trying to condemn sex or anyone that has it.  Sex is good times.  All I'm saying is that if you're going to have it, you 1.) had better know that there is always a risk of pregnancy (the damn condom box says it), and 2.) you'd better be prepared to live with the consequences.

There is a difference between a human and a fetus.

I still don't believe you've adequately responded to my argument about the fetus being a stage in the progression of human life.

Fine, then, Adron.  Let's have the mother stop eating and drinking (because that's not unnatural "intervention") if she wants the baby to be aborted.  Chances are IMO that she'll abort herself, too.

If that is okay, then what is wrong with the mother taking some pills to abort the fetus? It is hard to see the difference.

CrAz3d was correct: my point was being made satirically.  I don't think it's okay for the mother to stop eating or drinking, and what I'm saying is that in order to do so, it would put the mother's life at considerable risk as well.

[dxoigmn]

I never made a position about whether having sex is morally correct.

No, but you did say "you shouldn't be fucking the next guy who comes in the door." Is that not a moral judgment?

So I suggest that you don't assume that because I'm pro-life I'm trying to condemn sex or anyone that has it.  Sex is good times.  All I'm saying is that if you're going to have it, you 1.) had better know that there is always a risk of pregnancy (the damn condom box says it), and 2.) you'd better be prepared to live with the consequences.

I didn't assume. You made a judgment on people who fuck "the next guy who comes in the door." While I agree with your comment, it has no place in this discussion because women, one-night-stand or otherwise, accidentally become pregnant.

I still don't believe you've adequately responded to my argument about the fetus being a stage in the progression of human life.

Adron addressed this adequately.

CrAz3d was correct: my point was being made satirically.  I don't think it's okay for the mother to stop eating or drinking, and what I'm saying is that in order to do so, it would put the mother's life at considerable risk as well.

Having a baby could put the mother's life at considerable risk as well. Having an abortion could put the mother's life at risk too.

[CrAz3D]

Life is a risk.
</profound moment of the day>
Boy that sounded quite spiffy in my head, with the pause & accents I made, WHOOEY.

[MyndFyre]

No, but you did say "you shouldn't be fucking the next guy who comes in the door." Is that not a moral judgment?

No, it's not a moral judgment.  It's a matter of fact.  If you don't want to have a kid, if you absolutely do not want to have a kid, you shouldn't be having sex.  That the only guaranteed 100% way to avoid it.  That's not a moral judgment, it's not a matter of opinion, it's 100% unbiased fact.

Adron addressed this adequately.

Adron never responded to my counterargument about aborting the mother too.  Unless human life apparently is not valuable to you guys, in which case we simply have a difference of opinion.  Although I still stand by my position that everyone conceived deserves the opportunity to live.

[Grok]

More food for thought:

The 4th amendment guarantees citizens equal protection under the law.  However, abortion skews that in favor of the mother.  She has the right to abort her legal parenthood rights and responsibilities through abortion up until such time as legal in whichever state she resides.  The father however, only has the right to terminal legal parenthood rights and responsibilities up until the time of conception.  After that, even, the mother can decide FOR HIM whether he will be a father, and have those rights and responsibilities.  She can make this decision for many more months after he can.

Where is his legal right to abort parenthood up until the same point in pregnancy as the mother?

If she elects (right to choose) to not abort, she then dumps a responsibility on the father who has no right to choose at the same point in time.  Where is the 4th amendment?

Note:  Neither side of this argument has been chosen by me as my own opinion.  You may not assign either side to me until I state on which side I stand.  This is posted as a political/intellectual debate, not something to invoke mud-slinging by those who cannot otherwise resist.

[dxoigmn]

No, it's not a moral judgment.  It's a matter of fact.  If you don't want to have a kid, if you absolutely do not want to have a kid, you shouldn't be having sex.  That the only guaranteed 100% way to avoid it.  That's not a moral judgment, it's not a matter of opinion, it's 100% unbiased fact.

Yes but you only mention a subset of girls who fuck "the next guy who comes in the door." You didn't say "If you don't want to have children, don't have sex." There is a difference.

Adron never responded to my counterargument about aborting the mother too.  Unless human life apparently is not valuable to you guys, in which case we simply have a difference of opinion.  Although I still stand by my position that everyone conceived deserves the opportunity to live.

Human life is valuable, but fetus are not humans.

Just imagine the day such anti-abortion laws are enacted. Then we may just see some soon-to-be teenage mother attempt suicide because they have no other option. Then come tell me you value human life because you sponsored some anti-abortion law.

I want to see a response to my "welfare" correlation, seeing as many of you don't support those kind of programs.