For those of you who support abortion...

[lucky4034]

You can try to make practical arguments on how Utopian society becomes when women can have abortions on a whim. You can try to claim how unfair it is for a woman to have to carry a baby to term. You can point to rape and incest as your foot in the door. You can talk about "her body, her choice" and "freedom to choose" and so forth, but those are all simply intended as distractions from the basic issue, because the distractions are easy. The real issue isn't.

I don't make arguments on how society becomes Utopia because women can have abortions. There is nothing Utopian about society...

The cost/benefit I weigh is how decisions can affect me. I'm stuck in this society and will do my best to work towards the highest benefit I can get. As I pointed out in a few posts earlier... I am selfish in a biological sense. My goal is to pass along my genes (responsibly so I don't become a drain on society) and to live as long as I can as happy as I can without being a burden upon those around me.

Abortion is beneficial to the species at this point... to argue otherwise is either bias or close minded. Introducing an additional 42 million lives a year to an already over stressed population would be tough to manage. Surely you can understand that perspective.

I'm not pro-life for the same reason I don't support sending humanitarian aid to Africa. There are 200 million people STARVING in Africa... our solution is to send them food. Just enough food in fact that they can procreate and produce more mouths to feed. The reason they are starving is because they don't have enough food to feed all of the mouths they already have and yet our solution is to send them food to create more mouths. Not only does that put a strain on us... but it actually perpetuates the strain on Africans. (you propose a similar solution for abortion)

When we send them food, it takes away from the food we have here in the USA. Its not cheap to support all of these extra mouths... and thanks to our governmental system, the burden to continue support falls directly in my lap as a taxpayer.

Do I believe in Eugenics? NO... I don't think the solution is to go to Africa and kill all of the people starving. But that doesn't mean I have to support creating more people to feed. The logical solution is to allow nature to takes its course and allow 200 million people to starve to death. Then all of a sudden, Africa becomes a much better place to be born for all and as a result, America becomes a better place to live. There is no denying this fact....

You see... I consider myself fortunate to live the life I live today. I do not take it for granted. I recognize how LUCKY I am to have been born in the USA at the end of the 20th Century. I'm fortunate to not have been born a starving kid in Africa and I do my best to relay that message to my daughter.

I view the USA like a lifeboat stranded at sea... We can make the decision to try and pack everyone on the life boat and then complain when it sinks.... or we can put the survival of everyone already inside the lifeboat as our priority, and if there happens to be extra seats available, we can throw out a line. If there ise room for others... then so be it. But right now... if you haven't noticed... the boat is starting to sink!!!

 

[cordex]

Do I believe in Eugenics? NO... I don't think the solution is to go to Africa and kill all of the people starving.

Why not? Wouldn't it be even more effective from a utilitarian perspective? As a proponent of the path of greatest utility, shouldn't you advocate killing the hungry (or infirm, or mentally disabled, or otherwise undesirable/inconvenient/unpleasant drains on society) to ensure they don't breed and make more undesirables - while simultaneously ridding yourself of known undesirables? Win/win, right? You solve not only the future increase, but you can actually serve to decrease the hungry mouths today! Or if you don't have the stomach for murder of adults, how about enforced sterilization?

Of course I don't think you (or most others here) really believe that. You hopefully have some sort of moral or ethical problem with such a horrific idea.

That, my friend, is the point. Your utilitarian arguments are utterly meaningless as long as the root moral issue remains unaddressed. As standalone arguments for abortion, they're nothing more than a distraction that can't hold up to even the most basic scrutiny without a resolution of the question of when a baby becomes a person.

 

[indiucky]

Abortion is beneficial to the species at this point... to argue otherwise is either bias or close minded.

Man...I hope I get to that point of certitude where anyone that disagrees or debates me is either biased or close minded...

Perhaps one of those worthless drains on society..(You obviously know they will be) may end up being a decent human being, that "gasp", discovers a cure for cancer, an inexpensive renewable energy source, or (this is for you Hornandy) a Libertarian candidate that can actually win? What if???

The point being is many poor kids, born into poor families, end up being beneficial to mankind (or to use your term "Species"...How very Richard Dawkins of you!...I mean that is so.....Sciencey sounding!!!!)I wish I was that cool...Maybe someday...

Do not discount the unwashed poor...As Colonel Harlan Sanders once said in front of a buddy of mine, "If it wasn't for us fellas with an 8th grade education you college boys wouldn't have a place to work.."

 

[lucky4034]

Man...I hope I get to that point of certitude where anyone that disagrees or debates me is either biased or close minded...

Perhaps one of those worthless drains on society..(You obviously know they will be) may end up being a decent human being, that "gasp", discovers a cure for cancer, an inexpensive renewable energy source, or (this is for you Hornandy) a Libertarian candidate that can actually win? What if???

The point being is many poor kids, born into poor families, end up being beneficial to mankind (or to use your term "Species"...How very Richard Dawkins of you!...I mean that is so.....Sciencey sounding!!!!)I wish I was that cool...Maybe someday...

Do not discount the unwashed poor...As Colonel Harlan Sanders once said in front of a buddy of mine, "If it wasn't for us fellas with an 8th grade education you college boys wouldn't have a place to work.."

To argue that overpopulation is beneficial to any species is stupid....

 

[giovani]

I don't make arguments on how society becomes Utopia because women can have abortions. There is nothing Utopian about society...

The cost/benefit I weigh is how decisions can affect me. I'm stuck in this society and will do my best to work towards the highest benefit I can get. As I pointed out in a few posts earlier... I am selfish in a biological sense. My goal is to pass along my genes (responsibly so I don't become a drain on society) and to live as long as I can as happy as I can without being a burden upon those around me.

Abortion is beneficial to the species at this point... to argue otherwise is either bias or close minded. Introducing an additional 42 million lives a year to an already over stressed population would be tough to manage. Surely you can understand that perspective.

I'm not pro-life for the same reason I don't support sending humanitarian aid to Africa. There are 200 million people STARVING in Africa... our solution is to send them food. Just enough food in fact that they can procreate and produce more mouths to feed. The reason they are starving is because they don't have enough food to feed all of the mouths they already have and yet our solution is to send them food to create more mouths. Not only does that put a strain on us... but it actually perpetuates the strain on Africans. (you propose a similar solution for abortion)

When we send them food, it takes away from the food we have here in the USA. Its not cheap to support all of these extra mouths... and thanks to our governmental system, the burden to continue support falls directly in my lap as a taxpayer.

Do I believe in Eugenics? NO... I don't think the solution is to go to Africa and kill all of the people starving. But that doesn't mean I have to support creating more people to feed. The logical solution is to allow nature to takes its course and allow 200 million people to starve to death. Then all of a sudden, Africa becomes a much better place to be born for all and as a result, America becomes a better place to live. There is no denying this fact....

You see... I consider myself fortunate to live the life I live today. I do not take it for granted. I recognize how LUCKY I am to have been born in the USA at the end of the 20th Century. I'm fortunate to not have been born a starving kid in Africa and I do my best to relay that message to my daughter.

I view the USA like a lifeboat stranded at sea... We can make the decision to try and pack everyone on the life boat and then complain when it sinks.... or we can put the survival of everyone already inside the lifeboat as our priority, and if there happens to be extra seats available, we can throw out a line. If there ise room for others... then so be it. But right now... if you haven't noticed... the boat is starting to sink!!!

Don't take this the wrong way because I agree with you on most of these points but........ Reason and emotion go together like whiskey and icecream.

And for most , abortion is an emotions issue.

 

[lucky4034]

Why not? Wouldn't it be even more effective from a utilitarian perspective? As a proponent of the path of greatest utility, shouldn't you advocate killing the hungry (or infirm, or mentally disabled, or otherwise undesirable/inconvenient/unpleasant drains on society) to ensure they don't breed and make more undesirables - while simultaneously ridding yourself of known undesirables? Win/win, right? You solve not only the future increase, but you can actually serve to decrease the hungry mouths today! Or if you don't have the stomach for murder of adults, how about enforced sterilization?

Of course I don't think you (or most others here) really believe that. You hopefully have some sort of moral or ethical problem with such a horrific idea.

That, my friend, is the point. Your utilitarian arguments are utterly meaningless as long as the root moral issue remains unaddressed. As standalone arguments for abortion, they're nothing more than a distraction that can't hold up to even the most basic scrutiny without a resolution of the question of when a baby becomes a person.

Why is it always an all or nothing proposition with you folks?

I already clearly spelled out why I personally don't care to see abortion made illegal.

I also addressed why I don't think Eugenics is a just solution. As beneficial as Eugenics would be to the species... I don't get down with interfering with any organisms struggle... but I don't think I am responsible for rescuing everyone either which is what completely abolishing abortion ultimately proposes.

If someone can give me a strong argument that 42million extra dependents a year wouldn't be a strain on the population, then I'll reconsider my position on that.

As far as "the point" at which a mother loses rights to a fetus? I agree with what a few others have said. There needs to be some reasonable point of no return. I'll leave that for the experts to decide... it obviously isn't the moment of conception and it obviously isn't the moment of birth.... But recognize that is a different argument than the argument that abortion should be abolished.

For all of those who are pushing for the total abolishing of abortion, I've already asked who in the hell they expect to fit the bill and only 1 person gave a response.

ONE PERSON said he would step up and take responsibility for the extra 1.3 million Americans and 42 million humans a year that would result. ONE PERSON... its going to take much more participation than that and I for one am not interested.

I'm waiting for others to step up and pledge another 20% of their income for the cause. Someone is going to have to fit the bill and one person can't do it alone. (not even Bill Gates... especially considering he is a eugenicist)

 

[indiucky]

To argue that overpopulation is beneficial to any species is stupid....

So what is the magic number bro?? I am obviously stupid so please enlighten this dumb, bible totin' redneck about them thar species numbers so I know when we dun git over populamated. Tell me whut does St Dawkins and St Gore say????

 

[Bunnykid68]

This planet is far from over populated. Big cities might be overpopulated but not the rest of the world

 

[shootamc58]

Arguing abortion is like arguing about guns. Whichever side you are on, it's highly unlikely you will switch to the other side. Just like guns, If they make abortion illegal, people will find ways to have them just like guns. While I may or may not agree with it, I'd hate to see what some people would do if they weren't legal. I'm not smart enough to come up with a solution to something so complex, but I'm smart enough to know that I won't change someone's opinion on a subject that is such a "hot topic", just like guns. The law says it legal, so until it isn't, I just can't see driving my self crazy over arguing about it. Ultimately, I think it is a woman's choice for the most part. It's her body and in reality most of the situations where abortion is considered, the father won't take responsibility. Before you flame me, I know, what if the father wants it? Imo, that is the exception not a rule. Far less fathers step up and take care of a child that a mother doesn't want than do. As much as it sucks, nothing is perfect, especially when it comes to something like this. So many fathers don't do their duty and pay child support as it is. I for one do not have the desire or means to give more of my income to support unwanted children or take on an adoption role. I believe that if the people wanting to outlaw abortion took all the unwanted children then this subject would work itself out. We all know that isn't going to happen. This is such a hot topic that doesn't seem to have an answer that satisfies everyone. I think no matter what the legality of this was, someone is going to be upset and people are still going to have abortions. Within our laws, its legal. Good bad or otherwise that's the way it is for now.

 

[lucky4034]

This planet is far from over populated. Big cities might be overpopulated but not the rest of the world

Thats funny... there are 800 million undernourished people in the world. Thats about 1/8th of our current world population.

Despite abortion, the world population has doubled in the last 40 years and the growth rate is exponential.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Thats funny... there are 800 million undernourished people in the world. Thats about 1/8th of our current world population.

Despite abortion, the world population has doubled in the last 40 years and the growth rate is exponential.

Plenty of food in this world, so much in fact that we make fuel out of it

 

[Mosinowner]

As a Catholic abortion to me is the same as murder...... Hell I am even against the use of contraceptives. As soon as that child is conceived (This is from a catholic point of view) it has a soul and is a human being. If abortion is ok then why is killing a pregnant women a double murder?

 

[lucky4034]

So what is the magic number bro?? I am obviously stupid so please enlighten this dumb, bible totin' redneck about them thar species numbers so I know when we dun git over populamated. Tell me whut does St Dawkins and St Gore say????

Don't waste time arguing with me... here... pledge some money to your cause.

Donate - Operation Rescue

Abortion Blackout | End abortion by 2020

Stop Abortion! | causes.com

Feed The Hungry - USA

Help -End Hunger- and -End Poverty- with a free click!

Help Feed the Hungry - ChildFund.org


I'm fair... I'll take your argument a lot more serious when you put your money where your mouth is. Until then... don't bother trying to tell me that paying for all the worlds children should be my responsibility.

I hear you talking.... now lets get that wallet out and get to work!

 

[lucky4034]

Plenty of food in this world, so much in fact that we make fuel out of it

I hear ya... how do you propose we get all of that food to Africa and Asia where people are hungry?

... oh wait.. I got it.


Feed The Hungry - USA

Help -End Hunger- and -End Poverty- with a free click!

Help Feed the Hungry - ChildFund.org

Let me know how that works out for ya....................................

 

[88GT]

Thats funny... there are 800 million undernourished people in the world. Thats about 1/8th of our current world population.

Don't be obtuse. Resource allocation efficiency has nothing to do with the quantity of resources available.

Despite abortion, the world population has doubled in the last 40 years and the growth rate is exponential.

You make it sound like birth rate is the single contributing factor to population.

 

[lucky4034]

Don't be obtuse. Resource allocation efficiency has nothing to do with the quantity of resources available.



You make it sound like birth rate is the single contributing factor to population.

You're late to the party... I've answered/addressed both of those statements.

 

[TheReaper]

Thats funny... there are 800 million undernourished people in the world. Thats about 1/8th of our current world population.

Despite abortion, the world population has doubled in the last 40 years and the growth rate is exponential.

So if you think that people should start aborting kids because of the population, at what age on the other end of the spectrum should we terminate a life because of the population, 80, 70.....what?

 

[88GT]

Do me a favor and start at the beginning of the discussion and work your way forward. If you don't find my answers to those questions in the last 20 posts I've put in this thread, I will gladly search them for you....

The first statement you made, you can find my response in the last page or two....

You're the one that said the earth was overpopulated based on the millions of hungry people. Either you believe that premise-conclusion line of thinking or you don't. But you said it, so why would I think you didn't believe it?

Nice edit. I've read every post. And can see the arguments for both sides, even though I disagree with some of them on a moral basis. Nothing I have to say is new or improved. But you crossed a line of credibility with that garbage. If you want to advocate for the killing of the unborn, there's no need to employ logical fallacies.

 

[$mooth]

As a Catholic abortion to me is the same as murder...... Hell I am even against the use of contraceptives. As soon as that child is conceived (This is from a catholic point of view) it has a soul and is a human being. If abortion is ok then why is killing a pregnant women a double murder?

This point was raised in the break room version of this thread.
I don't know all states, but I thought most of them would only charge the murderer with one count, unless they could prove that the infant had air in their lungs (took a breath) so they could claim the child was "born", then died.

Again, I'm not sure, so I'm open to more proof either way.

 

[lucky4034]

You're the one that said the earth was overpopulated based on the millions of hungry people. Either you believe that premise-conclusion line of thinking or you don't. But you said it, so why would I think you didn't believe it?

Nice edit. I've read every post. And can see the arguments for both sides, even though I disagree with some of them on a moral basis. Nothing I have to say is new or improved. But you crossed a line of credibility with that garbage. If you want to advocate for the killing of the unborn, there's no need to employ logical fallacies.

Yeah... i edited because I felt like I was coming across like an jerk and I've already been jerk enough in this thread.

If you read through all of my posts and put them together, my basis for Eugenics is that there are too many hungry mouths to feed as it is. Too many people rely on my tax money for help. Whether its foreign aid to Africa/Asia/Europe/South America... or its to the wonderful world of welfare here at home. Everyone here wants to push for this and push for that... but NO ONE wants to pay for it.

I surely don't want to pay for it... a lot of the questioning I got here was about Eugenics and that was the root of my posts about my not wanting to be responsible for saving all the world from hunger.

Over population whether its here or in Africa or on a remote island on the South Pacific does not necessarily need to be a worldwide phenomena. Africa is overpopulated for its resources and as a result, hundreds of million of people are starving... Surely you can understand that?

The solution is to turn to uncle sam and ask for foreign aid. To say that overpopulation doesn't exist in the world because we have food in America that they could eat in Africa is not how I'm looking at the scenario. You brought up the point yourself (as well as bunnykid) that there are places with an abundance of food that could feed the hungry in other regions of the world. The only problem with that is that its expensive... and SOMEONE gets to pay for it. (you and I through taxes stolen by the government to fund foreign aid)

Again... I was asked about my feelings on Eugenics and foreign aid and world hunger is what this conversation has evolved to.

If you look back a few pages I clearly separate this argument from my stance on fetus rights... but the moral of the story is the same. I don't support anything that forces me to be responsible for other peoples bad fortune or irresponsibility.

..........................................................


For everyone else who wants to feed the people in Africa or abolish abortion... I promise to lend you moral support as long as you promise to fit the bill.