+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: South Pacific International Airport (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-99.html)
+----- Forum: Lampshade Bar and Grill (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-190.html)
+------ Forum: South Pacific University (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-30.html)
+------ Thread: Abortion (/thread-2932.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Abortion - Roavin - 05-12-2016
I think I'm going to make myself unpopular now.
In the first trimester, the central nervous system as such doesn't exist yet (isolated pieces do). Synapses don't form until about 20 weeks in. The capacity to feel anything, even pain, is just physically not there yet. The working nervous system at that point is significantly less complex than that of a common house fly, which humans kill with impunity. Calling first trimester abortion murder just doesn't make sense, because really, what are you killing?
Some say that life begins at conception. What they don't account for is that a majority of fertilized eggs never even make it to the second trimester. The fertilized egg may not attach itself correctly - this is absolutely undetectable by a woman, because it all just looks like her regular period. Now even if the egg does attach correctly, roughly 20% of those don't hold on through the first trimester either, and in 70% of the circumstances, the woman never notices except maybe an irregularity in her period that could just as well have been caused by regular ups and downs in the average life of an adult. If life truly begins at conception, then shouldn't there be funerals and obituaries all the time about these unknown lives that are constantly being lost?
Some say that abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape or incest. That logic makes no sense. If abortion is a bad thing (murder!), then it's bad to do a bad thing to an embryo or a fetus, but if that potential baby's very existence is owed to another bad thing, through no fault of its own, it's okay to do a bad thing to it? The circumstances of conception really should be irrelevant. A rape baby, a drunk-one-night-stand baby, and a consensual marriage baby in the same circumstances all have the same chances of being president, a criminal, a pastor, an unemployed drunk, or anything else later in life.
Finally, instead of having the debate about abortion, why not have the debate about education instead? Adolescents need to learn about this, because they will be fucking if you like it or not. Exemption on religious grounds isn't an excuse not to educate them, because that exemption is invariably based on the parent's views and not the child's views. Also, educate boys and girls together, not in separate classes as so many places do. It's the joint responsibility of all parties involved in a sexual encounter to make sure that things such as infections and pregnancy are talked about and dealt with.
Educate, educate, educate, and don't make it a taboo topic! Talking about sex doesn't encourage it, and statistics prove it: Countries that educate earlier and invigoratingly have less teenage pregnancies and unwanted pregnancies in general. And if you think abortion is icky (which I can understand), then what better way to work against it than to reduce its necessity?
RE: Abortion - Seraph - 05-12-2016
(05-12-2016, 11:15 AM)Roavin Wrote: I think I'm going to make myself unpopular now.
Not at all, at least not with me. Thank you for the input. You've gone into detail about things I have pondered myself and which contribute to the attitude I presented above. It is very difficult to know when to draw the line and decide that a small bunch of cells deserves to be given more rights than any other bunch of cells.
As for education, I couldn't agree more!
RE: Abortion - Kris Kringle - 05-12-2016
As I told a pro-life friend of mine a few weeks ago, it's not that I want abortion to be commonplace. As Roavin said, the idea is that it will not be necessary. But if the woman does happen to need one, I don't think it's the place of the government to tell her what to do with her own body, or to tell her that what she has decided to do, an incredibly difficult and personal decision, can be so carelessly summed up as "murder".
RE: Abortion - Punchwood - 05-12-2016
(05-12-2016, 12:43 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: As I told a pro-life friend of mine a few weeks ago, it's not that I want abortion to be commonplace. As Roavin said, the idea is that it will not be necessary. But if the woman does happen to need one, I don't think it's the place of the government to tell her what to do with her own body, or to tell her that what she has decided to do, an incredibly difficult and personal decision, can be so carelessly summed up as "murder".
Well it is in a way. Abortion is the deliberate termination of a human embryo, and murder is to deliberately kill another human being. I can support abortion within the first 24 weeks where it is really just cells but after that the child can feel pain, and it is a child if you look at aborted foetus you can's say that it's just a bag of cells it is very clearly a human being. So I would also say don't just carelessly say a woman should have a right to kill a bay just because it is inside of her.
RE: Abortion - Kris Kringle - 05-12-2016
I think there's a difference between having an abortion and purposefully murderijg someone, all technical definitions aside.
Abortion - ProfessorHenn - 05-12-2016
I mean, who's body is that baby inside? Who's in control of that body normally? The woman. What right do we, as people NOT in control of their body, have to dictate what a woman wants to do with her body?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RE: Abortion - Jay Coop - 05-12-2016
In my English class, we recently read an article about abortion. Shortly after Donald Trump retracted a statement where he advocated punishing the woman for abortion, the writer, Katha Pollitt, explained how he was in the wrong for retracting it. Read for yourself.