Quote:
Originally Posted by Vampyr
The largest fallacy I see in your argument, and the argument of every other pro-life person, is that you belittle the concept of pregnancy, you downgrade it and make it look like it's no big deal. Like anyone could do it with little effort, and that it won't cost them anything. Men make this assumption all the time. I can't think of a way to explain to you how serious, painful, and BIG OF A DEAL that pregnancy is. It's not something that just "happens", and it isn't cheap, and trying to raise a child is certainly not cheap. You just need to understand this. Talk to some women in your life that have given birth. Talk to some girls who haven't given birth yet, and see how they feel about the concept. More than likely terrified. That is why I feel that men have no right to make this choice, none.
|
I don't think anyone disagrees that pregnancy is a burden, but, I don't think anyone disagrees that making the decision to take or give life is a burden as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vampyr
Honestly, it depends. If you were immediately aware of being pregnant very shortly after it happened, then yes, I feel like you should have to decide within your first trimester; unless you were raped. Most women are afraid to tell anyone they were raped, because they think no one will believe them, and having to admit you're also pregnant just makes things even more terrifying. Once again, you're being anti-woman and assuming decisions like these are easy. You're not having any empathy -at all-. You're just spitting out words and acting righteous, but you never actually put yourself into the shoes of a woman facing this choice.
|
First off, if you read my earlier post you would have learned that I do believe we should extend abortions to the 2nd or 3rd trimester where the health of the mother is compromised. Whether or not rape qualifies as a good circumstance is debatable. And I do believe I extend my empathy towards women, as I already stated, I do not take a firmer stance on being anti-abortion because I am not a woman. I do not believe that you have any basis for labeling me anti-women, other than you want to create a diversion in this argument. This argument is about abortion, not woman's rights. We are discussing whether abortion is moral; is killing a living thing acceptable. And, we are arguing how it should be legislated. By calling me or Bond anti-women you are not making a concrete argument in favor or against abortion. Just like the Holocaust thing, this is not going to work on me or convince me about where you stand on abortion. Maybe you should be more empathetic for the embryo who has the potential to life and is going to be murdered?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vampyr
And sometimes the medical complications that could cause harm to the woman aren't known until further into the pregnancy. The above quote just further propagates the anti-woman philosophy that I'm talking about. Once again, you're not having any empathy. What right do you have to tell a woman she has to choose an unborn baby over her own life? What right do you have to tell someone she has to die? You have no right to take away a beautiful life from something that hasn't even started its yet.
|
I never said that right off the bat a woman has to choose her life over the unborn baby. I just said it would be morally reprehensible by many moral standards, legitimate philosophy, to take the life of the baby. Again, if you read my earlier post you would see that I feel that we should extend the option to have an abortion to a woman in the unique situation where her life is compromised. However, again, you are not really presenting a strong argument, you are turning this into a "you are anti-women because you are making a philosophical argument." Right now this is not effective and I still feel you are reacting, not arguing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vampyr
Did anyone even read what I originally wrote about adoption? And stop acting like spitting a baby out of your body is something easy to do. I'm sick of hearing men say, "Eh, just have it and let someone adopt it." And no, I can't personally answer that question for everyone, but I think it's up to the parents. Personally I think it is cruel to do that to a person; to give them a half life.
|
Oh boy....this paragraph deserves the most deconstruction of all your points. I agree, having a child is stressful. I've agreed on that over your last 3 points, because apparently I'm anti-women and not empathetic towards their situation. Again, this plays a very small roll in the moral good or bad of aborting an embryo/fetus/baby.
Furthermore, I have seen many people with down syndrome. Who are you to say they have a "half life." That comment is horrible. Why can't a person with down syndrome enjoy the simple pleasures in life, eating, breathing, LIVING. You are putting some huge presumptions on your plate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vampyr
Really? A guy's sperm doesn't have the potential for life? A woman's egg doesn't have the potential for life? Even simple carbon has the potential for life. That's why potential life isn't life, just like potential energy isn't real energy. It just could be someday. Maybe.
|
I agree..sperm has life potential. But, a sperm unified with an egg which is DNA fertilization is life. At least in the sense that you perceive life. You started as an embryo. From that point forward your life potential took on new meaning.