Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?

abortion pro-life pro-choice womens rights debate

  • Please log in to reply
511 replies to this topic

Poll: Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?

This is a public poll. Other members will be able to see which options you chose

Are you Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#451 Kaddict

Kaddict
  • 1,654 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 April 2016 - 05:02 PM

My point is that it in no way is genital mutilation. Disagree with it all you want. don't circumcise your kids. I am 100% for parents making that decision. I just think comparing it to female GM--which is done for no health benefits, is scientifically proven to damage/harm and scientifically proven to provide no health benefits, which is done because of an absurd amount of social sexism--is not only inaccurate but inappropriate.

 

Anyway, I'll leave this debate back to abortion (and apparently euthanasia according to the OP?) rather than penis talk.


You're comparing apples to oranges. There is a clear difference between already having cancer and the potential to get cancer. 
 


That isn't true. Paternalism is still rife in medicine. Contraceptives, hysterectomies at early ages, pain management for chronic pain, use of medical marijuana, forced institutionalization for mental health, etc are all aspects of paternalism.

I actually find older doctors are far more receptive to allowing me, as a chronically ill patient, in my care. But that's purely anecdotal.

The pain stuff/marijuana etc is not paternalism, that is not wanting to get your license taken away from the DEA. Or the fear of your patient accidentally overdosing. And I think you are confused about what paternalism is. Doctors can refuse any form of procedure/service/medicine they are uncomfortable prescribing (as long as they give appropriate referrals to MDs who aren't uncomfortable with such practices). That is in no way paternalism. Paternalism (in the sense of an MD) is telling your patient what to do, assuming you know everything and their decisions about their life aren't important (in an overly simplified way).


Edited by Kaddict, 03 April 2016 - 05:04 PM.


#452 Coops

Coops
  • 🌧️🌩️🌧️




  • 3,602 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 April 2016 - 05:09 PM

My point is that it in no way is genital mutilation. Disagree with it all you want. don't circumcise your kids. I am 100% for parents making that decision. I just think comparing it to female GM--which is done for no health benefits, is scientifically proven to damage/harm and scientifically proven to provide no health benefits, which is done because of an absurd amount of social sexism--is not only inaccurate but inappropriate.

 

Anyway, I'll leave this debate back to abortion (and apparently euthanasia according to the OP?) rather than penis talk.


The pain stuff/marijuana etc is not paternalism, that is not wanting to get your license taken away from the DEA. And I think you are confused about what paternalism is. Doctors can refuse any form of procedure/service/medicine they are uncomfortable prescribing. That is in no way paternalism. Paternalism is telling your patient what to do, assuming you know everything and their decisions about their life aren't important (in an overly simplified way).

I don't agree with how you view circumcision. That's fine. I do agree with how you view FGM. I guess I view circumcision as a bodily autonomy/ethics thing.

 

I know what paternalism is. Telling me marijuana is not going to treat my pain (not true) is paternalism. Telling me I will become immediately become addicted to pain meds, despite it giving me a quality of life, is paternalism. Telling me my diagnoses are irrelevant and I just need to stop being sick - yeah, been told that too, is paternalism. 

Doctors have never told me "I don't feel comfortable providing this service, let me recommend you to someone who will". I'd understand if they were honest about their feelings. They aren't or I haven't been fortunate enough to meet one yet. They hide behind paternalism to skirt their duty as a doctor to treat me ethically and provide me with a quality of life. You can be paternalistic while not wanting to get your DEA license taken away.



#453 Kaddict

Kaddict
  • 1,654 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 April 2016 - 05:16 PM

I don't agree with how you view circumcision. That's fine. I do agree with how you view FGM. I guess I view circumcision as a bodily autonomy/ethics thing.

 

I know what paternalism is. Telling me marijuana is not going to treat my pain (not true) is paternalism. Telling me I will become immediately become addicted to pain meds, despite it giving me a quality of life, is paternalism. Telling me my diagnoses are irrelevant and I just need to stop being sick - yeah, been told that too, is paternalism. 

Doctors have never told me "I don't feel comfortable providing this service, let me recommend you to someone who will". I'd understand if they were honest about their feelings. They aren't or I haven't been fortunate enough to meet one yet. They hide behind paternalism to skirt their duty as a doctor to treat me ethically and provide me with a quality of life. You can be paternalistic while not wanting to get your DEA license taken away.

I agree with you on your paternalism stuff. I just didn't understand in what context you meant it with your first post, hence my follow up. I am sorry you have had doctors that have treated you like that. If med-THC is legal wherever you live, and they don't have a license to prescribe it (because I think it is still a schedule 1, and if I am not mistaken, most places you need a special license to dispense those) then he/she absolutely should have referred you do a dif pain specialist. I guess my anecdotal exposure to doctors in my community has just been much more positive than your anecdotal evidence. 



#454 Coops

Coops
  • 🌧️🌩️🌧️




  • 3,602 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 April 2016 - 05:30 PM

I agree with you on your paternalism stuff. I just didn't understand in what context you meant it with your first post, hence my follow up. I am sorry you have had doctors that have treated you like that. If med-THC is legal wherever you live, and they don't have a license to prescribe it (because I think it is still a schedule 1, and if I am not mistaken, most places you need a special license to dispense those) then he/she absolutely should have referred you do a dif pain specialist. I guess my anecdotal exposure to doctors in my community has just been much more positive than your anecdotal evidence.


Oh yeah. Sorry I wasn't clear lol. I'm all over the place tired. I just meant with respect to doctors who, and they probably don't realize, use paternalistic excuses to avoid treating my pain and many others in the community of chronic pain. It's due to so much misinformation and propaganda against drugs.

As for the circumsicion, I was reading a recent article and I guess in 1999 the American pediatrics whatever changed their stance against it. But the meta analysis on penile cancer, HiV etc and circ is more recent. So. I think I'm wrong with medical info on it. That being said, I am still against it for ethical reasons and it seems the benefits are for potential problems down the line, rather than immediate threats. And I think clarifying that is important. I think proper sex ed is probably cheaper and more effective, not to mention more ethical in my opinion, than just circumcision.

#455 Kaddict

Kaddict
  • 1,654 posts


Users Awards

Posted 03 April 2016 - 07:22 PM

You don't have to apologize for being unclear. Talking over the internet makes ever failure clear things a little bit tougher for so many reasons. Anyway, thanks for making this a surprisingly pleasant discussion. ha. 



#456 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16,889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 April 2016 - 01:54 AM

Yeah FGM is a lot, lot worse than MGM but it's still a pretty heinous thing to do without consent.

Yes, there's less chance of getting cancer, but there would be less chance of getting breast cancer if you pre-emptively cut every woman's breasts off. It's a pretty silly argument to make.

#457 Junjie

Junjie
  • Hi there!


  • 2,169 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 April 2016 - 04:00 PM

Pro-choice, definitely. It's not like it's a choice that can ever be taken lightly, in any case. If a lady has to make a choice for an abortion, allow her.

#458 DregsandDregs

DregsandDregs
  • 127 posts

Posted 04 April 2016 - 09:16 PM

Still going through the thread.

 

http://www.neocodex....98825-abortion/

 

If you don't want a child, you should probably: stay away from sex or use whatever protection necessary. It's not the babies fault you were negligent with your body. I also don't think that just because a 'fetus' is less than 28 weeks old that 'it' is not alive. 

If you're old enough to have sex, you're old enough to accept the responsibility of caring for a child and doing it the right way. 

 

It's not a fetus at day 28.  Damn, you're only maybe pregnant by day 28--implantation hasn't occurred yet.

 

Funny thing though about...oh I think it's day 30 or so.

 

Right, we have these things called Cell Surface Markers.  They're part of how our immune system works, our white bloodcells reach out and grope other cells to check to see if they're ours or not.  It's dependant on DNA.  This is basically how organ transplants fail.

 

Weird thing: Egg cells have different Cell Surface Markers than the rest of the woman.  That's why the Ovaries are so fucking weird--women would sterilize themselves if they weren't.

 

A blastocyst doesn't get cell markers until after it implants.  This keeps it from being murdered quite so fast by the body.

 

As long as there is a limit on the number of abortions someone is permitted, I'm fine with it.

(I don't like the idea of a woman having multiple [3+] abortions since they may increase the chance of maternal death, cause uteral scarring and cervical incompetence.)

 

Then again, most women don't have that many so it shouldn't be a problem.


I'm sure he's referencing women having abortions due to them not using protection/contraceptives.

 

That's a lie.

 

Also, let's run with your logic for a second.

 

I don't like the idea of a woman having multiple [3+] pregnancies, since they cause massive soft tissue damage, cause vaginal scaring, prolapse, and incontinence.

 

 I used to be very adamantly pro-choice. I recently (within this past week) saw a pictography of an abortion and now I'm waffley. I don't really understand why euthanasia is lumped in with abortion though. What does me believing certain adults should be allowed to die have to do with fetuses?

I'm very pro-contraceptive for the people who want it.

In spite of my kind of pro-choice stance, I would love to either adopt kids or be a foster parent. I can't do either due to my current life circumstances and I'm sure that applies to more people than just me.

 

Here's the thing, you probably saw one of those, D&C abortion?  The gross ones.

 

Guess what?  Those are only used if the life of the mother is in danger...or the baby is dead/dying.

 

Typical Abortion Picture:

Spoiler

 

By the way?  Dilation and Extraction abortions were the same thing...but also to give the mothers a chance to hold their goddamn babies, get closure, and say goodbye.  Now, now they have to be cut up.

 

Anyways.

 

Anyone who says they are against abortion except for rape and incest is proving the fact that they are against abortion to punish women.

 

Just because a woman was raped doesn't making that fetus less of a fetus.  If you think a fetus is a person, then you are literally advocating the murder of an innocent for the crime of another.

 

If you're against it for incest, the same thing applies.  Genetic problems?  Then you must support abortion for genetic defects.

 

EDIT: This thread is too long


Edited by DregsandDregs, 04 April 2016 - 09:22 PM.


#459 Romy

Romy
  • Ableist Neocodex Elite Four Member



  • 4,738 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 April 2016 - 10:55 PM

That's a lie.

 

Also, let's run with your logic for a second.

 

I don't like the idea of a woman having multiple [3+] pregnancies, since they cause massive soft tissue damage, cause vaginal scaring, prolapse, and incontinence.

 

You quoted a post that I made 3 years ago.

I'm not a cunt anymore.

 

A woman should be allowed to do whatever they want with their body no matter what. The government has no dominion over the bodies of their people.

If my partner wants to get an abortion, they should be allowed to regardless of what I believe. 

 

 

Also, calm your fucking tits.



#460 Coops

Coops
  • 🌧️🌩️🌧️




  • 3,602 posts


Users Awards

Posted 04 April 2016 - 10:56 PM

You quoted a post that I made 3 years ago.

I'm not a cunt anymore.

 

A woman should be allowed to do whatever they want with their body no matter what. The government has no dominion over the bodies of their people.

If my partner wants to get an abortion, they should be allowed to regardless of what I believe. 

 

 

Also, calm your fucking tits.

I laughed way harder than I should have at this.



#461 Jess

Jess
  • 🍴Aioli-American🍴



  • 9,198 posts


Users Awards

Posted 05 April 2016 - 03:07 AM

Still going through the thread.


It's not a fetus at day 28. Damn, you're only maybe pregnant by day 28--implantation hasn't occurred yet.

Funny thing though about...oh I think it's day 30 or so.

Right, we have these things called Cell Surface Markers. They're part of how our immune system works, our white bloodcells reach out and grope other cells to check to see if they're ours or not. It's dependant on DNA. This is basically how organ transplants fail.

Weird thing: Egg cells have different Cell Surface Markers than the rest of the woman. That's why the Ovaries are so fucking weird--women would sterilize themselves if they weren't.

A blastocyst doesn't get cell markers until after it implants. This keeps it from being murdered quite so fast by the body.


That's a lie.

Also, let's run with your logic for a second.

I don't like the idea of a woman having multiple [3+] pregnancies, since they cause massive soft tissue damage, cause vaginal scaring, prolapse, and incontinence.


Here's the thing, you probably saw one of those, D&C abortion? The gross ones.

Guess what? Those are only used if the life of the mother is in danger...or the baby is dead/dying.

Typical Abortion Picture:

Spoiler


By the way? Dilation and Extraction abortions were the same thing...but also to give the mothers a chance to hold their goddamn babies, get closure, and say goodbye. Now, now they have to be cut up.

Anyways.

Anyone who says they are against abortion except for rape and incest is proving the fact that they are against abortion to punish women.

Just because a woman was raped doesn't making that fetus less of a fetus. If you think a fetus is a person, then you are literally advocating the murder of an innocent for the crime of another.

If you're against it for incest, the same thing applies. Genetic problems? Then you must support abortion for genetic defects.

EDIT: This thread is too long


I don't know why you're going on about days when it clearly says weeks.
Also I have no idea which of these quotes were mine.
As far as implantation, that depends on where you're counting from and when you had sex. It's typically 3-8 days from ovulation, which rarely 28-30 days after you get "pregnant"

#462 Sleepcharm

Sleepcharm
  • 11 posts

Posted 05 April 2016 - 12:24 PM

I'm def pro-choice

 

The woman should have a say on if she has the baby or not, and allowing abortion will help prevent overpopulation of  humans.



#463 DregsandDregs

DregsandDregs
  • 127 posts

Posted 05 April 2016 - 04:41 PM

You quoted a post that I made 3 years ago.

I'm not a cunt anymore.

 

 

Rep Up!

 

God I'm not used to forums this slowfast.  This is weird



#464 UnicornSoul

UnicornSoul
  • I ♥ U Kyra Jade


  • 1,745 posts


Users Awards

Posted 16 May 2016 - 12:38 PM

First, I would like to add my two cents in for what they are worth on pro-choice. Pro-choice is the option people choose when they realize it is the woman's choice to make the decision and it is none of our business. I am pro-choice but I do not advocate for abortions. What I do is support the people who have made the very tough decision. I will go with them to be their strength in this hard decision to follow thru with. I will be judgement free.

 

When it comes to myself, I am pro-life, unless a health problem arises where keeping the child would significantly alter the child's life in a way that would make it difficult to live. I know how this world works and how mean people can be if they are not "normal" and I would not want my child to go through with that.



#465 Sirius

Sirius
  • Azkaban Survivor

  • 99 posts


Users Awards

Posted 25 May 2016 - 10:34 AM

Pro-choice, because it's none of my damned business what someone else does to their own body.



#466 hotcoldyay

hotcoldyay
  • 42 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 01:06 PM

Pro-choice.

 

People should have the right to declare what they would like done with their body.  Even if I wanted to save someone, if he/she wanted to do something that kills him/her, that's ultimately his/her choice. The only choices I am allowed to control are my own.

 

There are also cases in which abortion has helped save mothers who are in terrible medical situations. I remember a case about a very young girl who was raped and became pregnant, and because abortion was illegal and looked down upon, the child died trying to have a pregnancy her body could not support. Had abortion been legal, she could have been saved.

 

If I were pregnant, I could personally never abort as it'd be a lot on my conscience. But that's for me and me alone. I am not other people. 



#467 phoenix13

phoenix13
  • 46 posts

Posted 25 May 2016 - 02:47 PM

Honestly, I am pro life but I also stand for pro choice. I was raised as a catholic but I believe that a person's body is their own and I have no say on it. But there comes a time where I believe a life is worth more than anything.



#468 Daria

Daria

  • 419 posts


Users Awards

Posted 25 May 2016 - 03:13 PM

I've lightly skimmed through the start of this thread and I couldn't agree more with what @Adam said

If you are old enough/mature enough/responsible enough to have sex and not use any protection then you are definitelt capable of having kids. This is why I am pro life

There are also cases of rape and health dangers that may affect mother and/or baby. In that case the month should have the choice of whether or not she wants an abortion. This is why I am pro choice.

Abortion is definitely a grey area there are many things that can impact on a decision

#469 marcelolek

marcelolek
  • 3 posts

Posted 26 May 2016 - 12:44 PM

Pro-choice: Woman has the right to choose what to do with her own body , 

the state and religion has nothing to do with that choice!


Edited by marcelolek, 26 May 2016 - 12:44 PM.


#470 ortin

ortin
  • I'm so l33k

  • 5,908 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 May 2016 - 01:15 PM

I've lightly skimmed through the start of this thread and I couldn't agree more with what @Adam said

If you are old enough/mature enough/responsible enough to have sex and not use any protection then you are definitelt capable of having kids. This is why I am pro life

There are also cases of rape and health dangers that may affect mother and/or baby. In that case the month should have the choice of whether or not she wants an abortion. This is why I am pro choice.

Abortion is definitely a grey area there are many things that can impact on a decision

Let me throw you a hypothetical curveball.

What if a young couple, having never been educated on safe sex and yet feel mature enough to have sex, gets pregnant? After all they were only ignorant. More grey area to consider :p



#471 jasonlumar

jasonlumar
  • 50 posts

Posted 26 May 2016 - 01:39 PM

I'm strongly for pro-choice. It's the woman's body and if she feels she isn't ready to bring another human into this world then why stop her? Yeah, there's a lot of irresponsible people out there that don't use proper means to prevent this but if they have a way to fix a bad decision they've made, through abortion, then I say let them. 



#472 JustinHoodMusic

JustinHoodMusic
  • 31 posts

Posted 26 May 2016 - 02:35 PM

As a man, I don't think I have the right to be anything, but pro-choice. 



#473 luna194

luna194
  • 26 posts

Posted 30 May 2016 - 09:22 PM

Personally the thought of having an abortion is terrifying to me, but I'm pro-choice all the way. It's a hard decision, but I think people should be able to make it for themselves.



#474 Tidalzombies

Tidalzombies
  • 107 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 May 2016 - 09:53 AM

My current stance is this: I should have no say on what someone else can or can't do to their body. It doesn't affect me. As such, I am pro-choice. :)



#475 Kitty

Kitty
  • Kitten please 🐱

  • 271 posts


Users Awards

Posted 31 May 2016 - 10:20 AM

Pro-life

 

buuttttt if the life of the mother was in danger and they also had other children then pro choice? So I guess i'm in the middle :/




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users