So is there a woman trying to dictate her morals onto you ? Tell her to stop because that is really a STUPID thing to do ...
Legally speaking, once out of the body. At that point bodily autonomy of the mother is no longer in play. Effectively it will probably be around month 8, maybe 7. While a woman has a right to an abortion, that doesn't mean she has a right to force anyone to provide her one.
If you wish to use this as your basis, then you are only talking about late term abortions, and not abortions in general. The vast majority of abortions occur when the offspring is in zygote (rare save for Plan B, and IUDs, since zygotes are typically unknown to the woman, blastocyst or embryo stages, long before any potential as you put it.
Indeed, babies' lives DO matter. And any society that supports that notion would also bolster any programs that provide financial support to those mothers who cannot care for those babies themselves. Right? That same society should do everything it can to make sure that babies and children are fed well so that they grow up to be healthy and strong. Right?
Abortion, as we commonly use the word, is never a consequence. A consequence can never be a choice. A consequence results from a choice. And while yes, certain choices, such as whether or not to have an abortion, can only be available after a given consequence, it is not a consequence itself.
Do you have any kind of data that shows a frequent occurence of women getting pregnant just to have an abortion? I won't claim it never happened, but is the occurence statistically significant? Those occurences are typically due to changing or new information that wasn't present when the initial decision to not abort was made.
Why would a woman get pregnant on purpose just to abort later? The only logical scenario I can come close with, is a woman who has a high risk of a birth defect, who keeps trying in hopes of beating the odds, and aborts once it is shown the ZEF is seriously malformed, or dying/dead in womb.
It does occasionally happen. There are reasons. We've discussed this in other threads. Go look up the Two Minus One Abortion thread, as just one example. Many women take fertility pills, and then end up with more babies than they bargained for. After all, it's just another "choice".
Conflation fallacy. A woman is not seeking to get pregnant for the sake of getting an abortion in such a scenario. If you are referring to a claimed fetish or disorder that I seem to recall from as while back, again I ask, what is the incident rate that warrents a blanket ban on abortion?
How could I give you statistics when no statistics are being kept? Would you support a law that requires collecting of data? Besides, any kind or data would simply be based on a survey of the woman, and what she says might not be her actual reason. Your request seems kind of disingenuous, or not really well thought out. Do you think pro-lifers are going to stand outside of every abortion clinic and ask every woman going in to fill out a voluntary survey? Maybe with a $10 gift card to Macy's, once she fills it out??
Virtually no woman gets pregnant with the direct intent of getting an abortion. But sometimes women change their mind about wanting a baby.
FoxHastings said: ↑ I NEVER said women shouldn't have to deal with the consequences, they do,...they either gestate or abort.. I said " deal with the consequences"" by choosing either abortion or gestation...… I really have no idea what purpose your post served...
My point is that you are making a claim to something with no data to show sufficient occurence to warrant a blanket ban on abortion. You might as well claim women are getting abortions because it gives them orgasms. With this argument you pretty much can claim all studies are invalid because people are lying on them. It's well thought out. In order for your argument to be a basis for why we don't allow abortion, then you need to show significant occurence. Why would they need to? That data is already being taken inside the clinic.
Your wording wasn't clear on that especially within the context of the quoted post. Had you originally included the "by choosing" it might have been clearer. That said, it is not an uncommon argument to claim abortion as a consequence. Maybe I'm doing a bit of a transference here, but that is also a common argument on the other site I am on.
If I say something could be a problem, and there are some good reasonable reasons to believe that could be the case, but I can't prove for sure it will be a problem, is the burden on you or me to show that you shouldn't do that thing?
