Why Are People Pro-Choice?

[AlaunaBlackwood]

What do they believe and why?

[pixie374]

I have asked you this before, karl. How is it a "hijack"? Is it only acceptable for women to be unwilling parents? I'm sure men know what sex is, and the risks, how are they being fooled?

[KARL]

Woofgang, A man born through direct hijack, he and his brother both having children (one each) conceived the same way. They are far from alone, as evidenced by several women (acquaintances and relatives) acknowledging they know of numerous cases - none of this is simply me having freakishly stumbled upon a unique cluster. Discussion of this subject invariably touches some very raw nerves, for one thing many lives have been blighted.

[pixie374]

I still don't see how it is "hijack" karl? I also know of children born because the mother wanted them and the fathers didn't prevent it. But they were certainly aware and willing. What are you suggesting is happening? They are being forced?

[vetuste_ennemi]

I'm not a Christian, Pixie, and so don't believe that a human soul is implanted in a newly fertilised egg. And I'm not an embryologist, so I don't know at what stage the single cell becomes a sentient being with limbs and nerves.

What I do know is that late term abortion is infanticide.

[pixie374]

I believe... nobody has yet worked out when consciousness starts. We only know when a foetus is a "separate person" and not an embryo.

[KARL]

If a woman knows the man is an unwilling father, yet she contrives to become pregnant then one term that can be used is hijack, there are other possible terms. I am uninterested in discussion here of the suffering of women at the hands of men in ways that have nothing to do with unintended conception or the consequences of their being unwilling to exercise one or more of their options. As things stand, today no woman needs to become pregnant against her will and carry the child to term - she has several points of choice along the way. Men do not have anything like the same control over their fertility - that is surely not at dispute.

[jim360]

Late-term abortions are extremely rare -- in England and Wales, it's a rate of 1/1000 abortions on or after 24 weeks -- and only carried out (or at least should only be carried out) if there's judged to be an extreme risk to the life of the mother and/or fetus if the pregnancy were to continue.

[pixie374]

It isn't hijack, karl- unless the father is either unaware he is having sex, or has no understanding of what can happen. Men can always say no...!

[Spicerack]

VE "does she have the right to kill a one day old infant outside the womb?".

Full term abortions are the latest demand from pro-choice groups in the US. Crazy? Some of the Dem Presidential hopefuls go along with it.

[pixie374]

Killing an infant is not an "abortion". That is stopping a pregnancy.

[Zacs-Master]

I do hope aluana has been enlightened by the answers to her thread.

[jim360]

As far as US is concerned, late-term abortions, as with abortion in general, are on a long-term decline. If we take "late-term" to mean 28 weeks or later, then the current best guess for rate is in the region of 0.025% of all abortions. So "full-term abortions" just don't even register. It's an imagined crisis, manufactured for the sole reason of restricting abortion in general.

That's not to say that I condone "elective" late-term abortions, because of course I don't -- but the implication that women are choosing late-term abortion on a regular basis with no regard or consideration is wrong and incredibly offensive.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/late_term_abortion_usa.html

[Mozz71]

There's no real reason for late term abortions. Most women are fully aware they are pregnant, there's little excuse to dally for so long before making a decision. Once she goes past a specific time, if she does not want the child, then adoption is the way forward.

As for Karl's thoughts of "hijacking", I'm sorry, that's the chance you take if you don't wear protection.

[Spicerack]

-// but the implication that women are choosing late-term abortion on a regular basis with no regard or consideration is wrong and incredibly offensive.//

Incredibly offensive? Just as well nobody said it. (except you, of course)
The number of late/full term abortions may be low, Jim.(1 is too many, imo) Mightn't this be because they are still generally illegal. They'll probably rise if made legal. In a few years NY may tell us.

[pixie374]

What are the reasons for those though, spice? No woman ever "wants" an abortion, let alone a late one. Is that due to severe disabilities, life-threatening situations? How many late ones are genuinely about "convenience"?

[vetuste_ennemi]

//If we take "late-term" to mean 28 weeks or later, then the current best guess for rate is in the region of 0.025% of all abortions. So "full-term abortions" just don't even register. It's an imagined crisis, manufactured for the sole reason of restricting abortion in general.//

I'm delighted that the legally permitted murder rate is so low currently.

But Jim's post ignores (or rather deliberately confuses) the moral issue. All RCs, for instance, are opposed to all abortion because of their theological definition of "a person". Some atheists like me are opposed to some abortions for moral reasons I hope I've explained.

[pixie374]

I think the simple answer is, if you don't agree with them, don't have one.

[jim360]

If someone had said it then it wouldn't be an implication, would it?

But as a matter of fact it's pretty clear that, in the US, where the debate rages still, that's what "pro-life" activists either think happens or want people to think happens, in order to advance an agenda of passing ever more restrictive laws against abortion in all cases.

As to ve's post: point taken, although even in a moral discussion statistics are still important to place that discussion in context. That late-term abortions are extremely rare is important to note even if you do ultimately hold that any rate greater than zero is too much.

[Spicerack]

While we're on the subject, jim. What did you think about the latest Blasey Ford revelations. I seem to remember you were a great supporter of her.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Everybody is for "choice". Except that that most of us do not think it's the right if a person to choose to steal, or to rape, or to murder.


What I'm trying to get agreement to is that the "thing" in the pregnant woman's womb becomes at some point a human being, and that the mother's role is then to nurture and protect that child, not to flush it down the toilet.