I am an abortion consequentialist, and if you're smart, you are too

Frankly, I don't give a flip flying mother(*)(*)(*)(*) about people in general, especially not people dumb enough to go (*)(*)(*)(*) and have kids that they have not the means nor the will to support. They can all burn in (*)(*)(*)(*)ing hell. Of course, I've (*)(*)(*)(*)ed a girl that wasn't on birth control and without protection, but she said she'd "get rid of it" if she got pregnant so woo hoo.

But you have to consider the consequences of a possible, often-proposed ridiculous solution to this distaste, which would be to punish said people by making them have that baby (pro-life). People who need abortions are more likely than not, not geniuses so to speak, not very well educated and highly impulsive. They shouldn't be spreading their genes and being allowed to raise kids in their image.

Allowing abortions, or as I'd like to do, make it illegal to have kids when you're below 18 (hey, if you're not allowed to drink alcohol till 21 you shouldn't be allowed to take on the MONUMENTAL task of raising a child before 18 ), does two major things:

1. decreases poverty (because most people that this would apply to don't have much money nor the brains to make much money, based on both statistics and real life experience), and

2. decrease crime (same reasons as 1.)

So, to finish this extremely politically incorrect diatribe, do you (*)(*)(*)(*)ers at least accept abortion not for it's morality, but for it's logical consequences?

 

At this point in time, I no longer oppose abortion rights (I used to) but I would have skinned the cat a bit differently. I don't actually like justifying abortion by reference to how many unwanted babies would become poor or resort to a life of crime. That comes too close to justifying forced abortions. I'm certainly not for that.

 

I can't imagine how in the world you'd police this and whats the penalty for violators?

The goal, however poorly stated, is splendid, but you've understated how easy it'd be to accomplish.

 

As bad as it sounds, I support forced abortions on dumb ass people that shouldn't be spreading their genes..but I wouldn't seriously publicly support that because it'd just turn people against me.. *sigh*

 

Previous post

 

I defend abortion as a right but I also defend pregnancy and giving birth as a right. It's simply not morally permissible to violate a woman's right either way.

 

What about a child? Our society (obviously) already dictates over children and doesn't allow them liberty (we obviously allow them life, but not liberty).

 

The pro-abortion posters in this thread are callous and cold.

Have all of you forgotten abortion is murder and deprives a human being in transit from reaching this world?

 

Only if you consider a fetus a human.

 

the pro-life view is to have the gov decide for potential mothers
the pro-choice view is to allow the potential mother to decide if she is ready to have children or not

I am pro-choice, I do agree though that birth control and even abortion reduces crime by reducing the number of unwanted children being born into this world

though I would never want the government to make this choice for someone

 

exactly...

 

perhapos those are your definitions

why not view it from the perspective of the life you wish to snuff?

pro-choice using your terminology simply means ending a life without any consequence and tossing away that life as if it were garbage.

pro-life is exactly as it sounds, viewing the life of the most vulnerable as being just as important as your precious life.

 

This thinking that a fetus may not be a human is insane. It clearly is a "human" fetus indubitably destined to be like us.

It seems that the dormant and unresponsive state of a fetus leads us to think it isn't human yet, but that is an egregious misconception. Would any of you consider a sleeping human being LESS human? Would it then be more acceptable to kill a sleeping man than a man who is awake? We are not defined by "state" or "stage". Our essence starts upon the fertilization of a human egg cell because by then, barring acts of God, the human population is irrefutably destined to "increment by one". Stopping such a process prevents this "increment by one".

Abortion is a premeditated act to decrease the human population by one. In other words, it's MURDER. Try to think clearly, folks.

 

what do you suggest be done about the products of conception that are miscarried?

Should they be named? Should they have a proper burial? Should the family be notified? Should there be mouring and a headstone erectec? Should family members wear black for a year?

I am serious. Where does this all start and stop and who decides?

Let us have freedom of reproductive rights and freedom of religion.

Yes, the old slippery slope argument.

Where does the deifying of a zygote and fetus start and stop????

 

A fetus is simply a stage in human development much like a cocoon is part of the life cycle of a butterfly and like the caterpillar isn't a butterfly a fetus isn't a human. It's not insane at all, we don't evaluate things based on what they will be, we do it based on what they are.

First, using bold type doesn't make your opinion any more correct. Second, it most certainly is not murder; murder is the unlawful killing of another person. Destroying a fetus isn't unlawful and therefore isn't murder, by definition.

 

I agree with your first point. The fetus is a human (its not a dog..), but thats not the question relevant to abortion debate. The correct question is, is it a person? (a human with rights, worthy of protection by law). I dont think merely being biologically human is what makes us persons, what makes us valuable. Only humans with a mind (functioning brain) should be protected as persons.

 

Near the end Romans began to abandon new borns on the hill sides.
Christans began to resque the infants.
SLowly Rome died and the Church grew.

 

I tend to support this, too. Altough not because of genes, but for the sake of the children. Too many poor and abusive people procreate like rabbits in this world. I believe that in an ideal world, only mentally and materially ready people would be allowed to reproduce.

 

WOW

what more is there to say than WOW

 

Wow that was terrible....lol.

Human beings don't go through metamorphosis....lol.

You do understand this right?

A fetus is a human being.

Unless you can explain to me how a 24 week old "fetus" can be delivered by c-section, and cared for in ICU. Is that a non-human being in the ICU?

 

Oh, we are recreating the 1920s all over again sec.

It's eugenics in full frontal mode.

 

Never claimed we did, just made the factual statement that we're not that same at each stage of our life cycle and just because something will become something else doesn't mean that it's the latter.

And whether folks like to hear it or not, the least amongst us are also the most prolific procreators, there is a direct link between the amount of education you have, your IQ and the number of children you will bear. Our least simply reproduce faster than our best can keep up.

 

What? Anikdote, a human being is never anything less then a human being. We don't go through metamorphosis like a caterpillar turning into a butterfly. That was a terrible attempt to justify killin babies.....lol. I know we have lots of ignorance in this country, so some might not pick up on your terrible analogy, but please don't insult those of us who have gray matter b/w our ears with ridiculous comparisons of human beings to caterpillars.

 

Biologically, sure it's of the human species, but other than that bears virtually no resemblance to a fully developed human. That we should regard them as equals ignores a huge number of characteristics that define humanity.

No, it was an attempt to distinguish a fetus from a baby, which is perfectly valid.

 

Human being is a human being is a human being. I see this will degenerate into a semantics debate soon.

I think there is no "being" unless a mind is present. Humans before 5th month and after brain death are not beings. They are human biological material. Anyway, we may call them human beings if you want, still my opinion is the same.