Debate Now Are you pro-life, or pro-choice?

[TemplarKormac]

The title may seem a bit cliche, but still, a legitimate question nonetheless. And just for those who will read only the first sentence of this post:

The only time I will advocate for an abortion is when the mother's life is in immediate danger, or if she is raped, and/or a victim of incest. That's it. At no other time should a child be aborted prior to 21 weeks gestation.

Now, random men and women in the video below were asked whether they were pro choice or pro life. As you can see, many of them said they were pro choice. After being shown a video of what happens during an actual abortion procedure however, they soon changed their minds, or were at least planning to reconsider their stances on the subject.



Being "pro-choice" isn't just some arbitrary title one can simply slap across their chest so they aren't seen as misogynists, it's a sign of someone ill educated about the process detailing how an actual unborn child is torn apart piece by piece inside the womb. As seen in the proceeding video:



The question(s):

1) Are you pro-choice, or pro-life? Why?
2) If after watching the second video you changed from pro-choice to pro-life, what changed your mind?
3) If you are pro-choice even after watching the video, why?

The rules:

No name calling and/or religious slurs.
No talking points. I want sound arguments to be made on both ends.
No citing the Bible. On any side.

GO!

 

[TheOldSchool]

The only time I will advocate for an abortion is when the mother's life is in immediate danger, or if she is raped, and/or a victim of incest.

Why? Do you think God wants them to be aborted? Even though he created them?

 

[alpine]

1) Are you pro-choice, or pro-life? Why?


Neither, because I dont get "pregnant"....

 

[TemplarKormac]

The only time I will advocate for an abortion is when the mother's life is in immediate danger, or if she is raped, and/or a victim of incest.

Why? Do you think God wants them to be aborted? Even though he created them?

I don't know. Perhaps you should press your hands together and ask him yourself.

But I'll kindly cite the rules again:

"No citing the Bible. On any side."

Your post will be ignored. Feel free to try again.

 

[TheOldSchool]

The only time I will advocate for an abortion is when the mother's life is in immediate danger, or if she is raped, and/or a victim of incest.

Why? Do you think God wants them to be aborted? Even though he created them?

I'll kindly cite the rules again:

"No citing the Bible. On any side."

Your post will be ignored. Feel free to try again.

So in this thread, people aren't allowed to say they have religious objections to abortion? It's going to be a short thread.

 

[Coyote]

1) Are you pro-choice, or pro-life? Why?
I'm pro-choice, that does not mean I would choose abortion for myself, but I have no right to make that choice for any other woman.

2) If after watching the second video you changed from pro-choice to pro-life, what changed your mind?
I didn't change.

3) If you are pro-choice even after watching the video, why?
Because, for me - the video is manipulating emotions. I understand the biology and the science. But I am an absolute advocate for the right of each woman to determine it for herself.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So in this thread, people aren't allowed to say they have religious objections to abortion?

Nope. I'm uninterested in it. I hear and make enough religious arguments against abortion to last me a lifetime. I want people to dig deep into their conscience to make their case. In this instance, the Bible is nothing more than the easy way out.

It's going to be a short thread.

Feel free to leave if you wish.

 

[TheOldSchool]

So in this thread, people aren't allowed to say they have religious objections to abortion?

Nope. I'm uninterested in it. I hear and make enough religious arguments against abortion to last me a lifetime. I want people to dig into their conscience to make their case. In this instance, the Bible is nothing more than the easy way out.

It's going to be a short thread.

Feel free to leave if you wish.

Would you do us the courtesy of answering your 3 questions?

 

[TemplarKormac]

So in this thread, people aren't allowed to say they have religious objections to abortion?

Nope. I'm uninterested in it. I hear and make enough religious arguments against abortion to last me a lifetime. I want people to dig into their conscience to make their case. In this instance, the Bible is nothing more than the easy way out.

It's going to be a short thread.

Feel free to leave if you wish.

Would you do us the courtesy of answering your 3 questions?

I plan to, when you stop trying to draw the thread off topic.

 

[TheOldSchool]

So in this thread, people aren't allowed to say they have religious objections to abortion?

Nope. I'm uninterested in it. I hear and make enough religious arguments against abortion to last me a lifetime. I want people to dig into their conscience to make their case. In this instance, the Bible is nothing more than the easy way out.

It's going to be a short thread.

Feel free to leave if you wish.

Would you do us the courtesy of answering your 3 questions?

I plan to, when you stop trying to draw the thread off topic.

I suspect your objections are religious in nature. That's why I asked those questions. For clarification. And if you could clarify about the 21 weeks too. It seems like an arbitrary number.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The question(s):

1) Are you pro-choice, or pro-life? Why?
2) If after watching the second video you changed from pro-choice to pro-life, what changed your mind?
3) If you are pro-choice even after watching the video, why?

1) I am unabashedly pro-life. Because there is just something barbaric about the way unborn children are simply torn apart inside the womb. I cannot fathom the concept of an abortion like this being done purely for the sake of the woman's convenience. I believe without reservation that a woman should be made to carry the child to term, and to take care of the child, regardless of her financial circumstances or other plans for life. I think this will serve as a sufficient deterrent, and perhaps serve as a way to make the woman think hard before she decides to have unprotected sex. If a woman really wants to plan her future, it all starts in the bedroom. The best way to prevent a pregnancy is not to get pregnant in the first place.

I see choice in the form of a woman asking herself this question:

"Do I really want to get pregnant right now?"

2) My opinion is unchanged, simply due to the fact I was already pro-life.

3) This question doesn't apply to me, either.

 

[Grandma]

The only people qualified to answer the question are
1.women
2. who are or have been pregnant
3. have/had financial responsibility
4. and have/had majority responsibility in raising/parenting the child

As one who meets all 4 criteria, I'm very much pro-choice.

 

[Grandma]

1) I cannot fathom the concept of an abortion like this being done purely for the sake of the woman's convenience. I believe without reservation that a woman should be made to carry the child to term, and to take care of the child, regardless of her financial circumstances or other plans for life. I think this will serve as a sufficient deterrent, and perhaps serve as a way to make the woman think hard before she decides to have unprotected sex.

You think women have abortions as a convenience? Do you have any idea what an abortion does to a woman?

Of course you don't.

You think a woman should be forced to give birth to and raise a child. Funny you didn't mention any man taking any responsibility at all.

And again, protection is left entirely to the woman. There have been cases where pharmas messed up on quality control in birth control pills.

But in that you're a virgin that can't take care of himself, let alone a baby, you're scarcely qualified to force your ignorant opinion onto anyone who actually has a stake in the matter.

 

[TheOldSchool]

1) I cannot fathom the concept of an abortion like this being done purely for the sake of the woman's convenience. I believe without reservation that a woman should be made to carry the child to term, and to take care of the child, regardless of her financial circumstances or other plans for life. I think this will serve as a sufficient deterrent, and perhaps serve as a way to make the woman think hard before she decides to have unprotected sex.

You think women have abortions as a convenience? Do you have any idea what an abortion does to a woman?

Of course you don't.

You think a woman should be forced to give birth to and raise a child. Funny you didn't mention any man taking any responsibility at all.

And again, protection is left entirely to the woman. There have been cases where pharmas messed up on quality control in birth control pills.

But in that you're a virgin that can't take care of himself, let alone a baby, you're scarcely qualified to force your ignorant opinion onto anyone who actually has a stake in the matter.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Are you pro-life, or pro-choice?

I don't like those terms. I see them as cowardly,deceptive euphemisms.

In particular, I find that most of those who identify as “pro-choice” are opposed to people being allowed to make many essential choice. The only choice they re concerned about is the choice to kill an innocent human being in cold blood.

And that gets to my position on abortion. I am utterly and completely opposed to it. As an objective fact, it is the killing of an innocent human being, nearly always in the absence of circumstances that would be deemed sufficient in any other context to justify the intentional killing of a human being. Ethically, it is no different than any other instance of first-degree murder.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I suspect your objections are religious in nature.

I will not be baited into breaking the rules I set forth for this thread. While I do have religious objections, I'm speaking from the other side, from a purely objective standpoint. That will be the end of it. Clear?

And if you could clarify about the 21 weeks too. It seems like an arbitrary number.

Not an arbitrary number at all. At or around the 21st week of gestation, the bodily features of the pre-born child are clearly distinguishable, or what anyone would recognize as a baby, regardless of their stances on the abortion issue itself. At the 22nd week you can clearly make out the features of the baby's face. It is a natural compulsion for us to refer to what we see in the image below as a baby, not a fetus, or an amalgamation of cells forming inside of the womb. When we see a face, what we see is undeniably a face. And from there we must assume it belongs to a person. I believe that doesn't change for an unborn child, either. From the 22nd week onward, it becomes unmistakable what is forming in the womb.

21st Week of gestation

Label Key:

• 1. right hand covering right eye
• 2. right forearm
• 3. forehead
• 4. left cheek
• 5. open mouth
• 6. left forearm

22nd Week of gestation:

Label Key:

• 1. closed right eye
• 2. mouth
• 3. forehead
• 4. nose
• 5. left hand
• 6. chest

You can see the rest of the gestation cycle here.

Covered Eyes, Open Mouth

 

[TemplarKormac]

Do you have any idea what an abortion does to a woman?

If you're implying abortion has negative consequences, then that simply plays into my point. Why would you (assuming you are a perfectly healthy woman, who chose to have unprotected sex) have one knowing what the end result will be? Hmm?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"The title may seem a bit cliche, but still, a legitimate question nonetheless."

Actually not.

It fails as a false dilemma fallacy.

One can oppose abortion and seek its end while acknowledging, respecting, and defending a woman’s right to privacy.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You think a woman should be forced to give birth to and raise a child. Funny you didn't mention any man taking any responsibility at all.

From what I hear elsewhere, the man should be precluded from any and all decisions made about the fate of the child. Why now is the man so important? Why does he suddenly have to bear responsibility? I thought this was the woman's choice, not his?

If a man rapes the woman, he should be punished. If the woman decides then to carry through with the pregnancy, the rapist should be fined, in addition to his imprisonment, the cost of what it would take for a single mother to raise a child by herself.

But if a woman chooses to have unprotected sex, she should be made to go through with the resulting pregnancy. I have no qualms about saying so. Actions have consequences, man or woman.

 

[TemplarKormac]

But in that you're a virgin that can't take care of himself, let alone a baby, you're scarcely qualified to force your ignorant opinion onto anyone who actually has a stake in the matter.

Grandma

No. My mother took birth control pills, even before she knew that she had already become pregnant with me. Luckily she lost the pills in the process. So you see, I have plenty of stake in the matter. And I consider my opinion more than qualified. If my mother had carried through with her "choice" I wouldn't be sitting here listening to your scurrilous insults about my virginity. I'm lucky to even be here. Do you understand? And you, least of all, do not get to dictate who is and is not qualified to have an opinion or stake in the matter. Got that?

My grandmother worked in the Sociology Department at UGA for 34 years. In that time she met numerous college age women who had just undergone an abortion procedure. They saw her as someone they could confide in. My grandmother told me a few of the stories they told her about how scarred and traumatized they were afterwards (without naming names), and those stories, along with my stroke of luck in the womb, is why I'm pro life.

Those women were scarred, most likely for the rest of their lives, both physically and mentally. Why would a woman make a choice that would end in this manner?