I said I don't care what point between 12-24 weeks we pick.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

Nobody is "for" abortion, except maybe the eugenics freaks. The question is skewed. The pro-choice argument tends to be one about the principle of choice rather than actual stance, kind of like when we defend Nazis' right to assembly... except we also take into consideration a worst-case scenario in which an abortion may actually be necessary to save the mother, just in case such a situation occurs at some point.
The real problem with abortion is that people do it during times of extreme stress and passion, without being educated by the facts and calm enough to evaluate the situation. The problem I have with the "pro-life" stance is that it is content in actually treating all the women who do it as war criminals rather than as victims themselves.
Before we can criminalize abortion, it seems to me we must be able to make sure that only criminals will do it. This means better comprehensive sex education minus the kid gloves and plus the emphasis on consequences, as well as the alternatives to abortion and the real ugliness of abortion.
As society stands now, people who have kids they can't afford are viewed in a way similar to how we see murderers. If this is where we stand as a society, then how is it a jump to go to abortion.

But that is the way of our "socially conscious" society. Keep 'em ignorant then &*%$ 'em up when they screw up. Make a mistake the terrible part and each choice there after a punishment with neither allowing redemption... Seems to sum up the way we treat issues like this.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Well...choice for everyone except the child. Tough luck eh?

If you shoot someone during an argument, it is still a crime, even though you were under great stress. Stress is not a defense IMO.

People are not robots.

If you consider the fetus to be a person, and you deliberately kill a person, that = murder. The logic is not hard to follow.

If I go to a hospital, and deliberately shoot a woman who is in a coma, I have still committed murder.

Murder should remain illegal, even if some people do not see it as wrong.

That is the argument I am using with aboriton. The fact that they may not see it as seriously as others do is not a defense.

That is part of the punishment. You can escape all of that by simply not killing the fetus in the first place. Right?

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

[quote="Sadistic-Savior";p="254890"]The mistake I was referring to is getting pregnant, not having the abortion.
As it stands now:
1) There is nothing a woman can do in that situation that will remove the stigma
2) There is no consensus that a fetus is human and that abortion is murder
3) Sex education is deficient, thanks to the "pro-life" social cons who think ignorance is the best conditioner, ignore reality by pretending natural urges for survival will be suppressed while kids are discouraged from using safe sex or even masterbating because its so &%#$@$ evil.
4) Already being ignorant and not having a consensus and not being in any way competent to make an educated decision, the women is under high pressure, a sense of urgency, and heavy unremovable stigma, as well as in many cases having born-again Christian parents that are wanting to practically disown her for her initial ^&*%-up.
While this wouldn't be an excuse for murder, society would be grossly incompetent to allow such a situation to come to be. We would have murders on a regular basis, regardless of law, if this conditioning was normal on everything.

Here's what I don't like about a majority of the pro-life crowd, and it might be a bit redundant from the above:
1) They believe hiding fact and sheltering kids is a great alternative to education.
2) Their rhetoric is that having a child is a punishment for sex, blurring the distinction between it and termination.
3) They believe that having a kid one can't afford is itself an evil act and further blur the distinction between the "punishment" of having a kid and aborting it.

In other words, while pushing for government to step in, they help to create the conditions that make abortion seem like a good idea.
Ignorance kills.

At least most of the pro-choicers believe in comprehensive sex ed to make up for the parents that REFUSE to teach. While these parents &%*$ about schools getting into the parent's job, why don't they do their &*%$ job? It's just like when people who never give a dime to charity or lift a finger to help someone %&*$ about the cost of social programs.
And part of what pro-choicers generally (aside from eugenics folk) push is teaching the consequences of sex and the ugliness of abortion.
Another thing we need to teach, because they aren't getting the message, is that having a kid isn't the end of the world. I wasn't planned. Who was in our generation? &*%$!
You'd think the parents would want to teach that to their kids if nothing else.

But however anecdotal, this is my experience with young women who have thought about abortions or been irresponsibly promiscuous (ie, unsafe sex because the guy didn't feel like wearing a condom)... And I was one of those "nice guys" that had to hear about all this from my female friends in high school (all the inspiration I needed for abstinence).
1) Sexually abused, usually by a relative, at a young age... and unable for some reason to explain it to parents
2) Parents who are born-again Christians with zero tolerance for "sin" and who give their kids a sense that everything must be hidden from them at all costs
3) Learning from peers what their parents kept them ignorant of
4) After all that, they are "born again" and become reflections of their parents

It might be anecdotal, but god(*)(*)(*)(*), it seems to happen a lot in my hometown. Thankfully (loosely used) all but one of them either just had a pregnancy scare or had a miscarriage (that I assume was not self-induced).

As much as you like your "people are not robots" talk to simplify the argument I have that people can only make decisions on what they know (funny, you're okay with the president's administration using that line), surely even you must understand the roles PARENTS play in shaping kids.

I want these parents to take the role they complain about the schools taking from them. They can do it better.
But the fact is they don't. That's why schools do... or would if not for all the pressure not to.

A woman who gets an abortion kills once and feels remorse.
Ignorance is a mass murderer that always keeps a self-righteous sense of duty in its kills.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Unless she was raped, the mistake is her own. She doesnt have the right to kill her child because she made the mistake of getting pregnant.

There is a reason for that. A child molester has a tough time removing the stigma of his mistake as well.

I have already said, many times, that this is the main argument. If you consider the fetus to be a person, then killing it is murder.

If you do not consider the fetus to be a person, then it is property. That means it can be experimented on or harvested for parts, at the mother's discretion.

Education is irrelevant. Speeding is still illegal, even if you do not know that fact while you are speeding. Killing someone is still illegal, even if you are ignorant of the fact that US law prohibit's murder.

None of which is the child's fault.

I wonder, would you accept such a defense for any other crime? Or just abortion?

I seriously doubt that most people would seek abortions if the penalty was equivilent to murder.

Only one way to find out for sure, right?

They believe that sex education is something that should happy in adulthood or just prior to adulthood. I can agree with that.

Waiting until you are an adult to have sex is not unreasonable. It wont kill you.

Either way, that is not the child's fault. It doesnt deserve to die because the mother was uneducated or naive.

Punishment is irrelevant. The purpose of outlawing abortion is to protect the life of the child, not to punish the mother.

I have never seen any pro-life people even imply otherwise.

They are correct; having a kid you cant afford is an evil act. But killing it is more evil.

There are alternatives. There is no shortage of adoptive homes for newborns in the US. They are in high demand. Some people wait years for the chance to adopt a newborn.

Why is teaching abstinence a bad thing?

Regardless on what you think their job is, even if we assume they are not doing it, that is not the child's fault. Abortion should be illegal for this reason, no matter what the state of the remaining variables.

You would never argue that murder should be legal because the state is incompetent at prosecuting murderers...right?

Really? Since when?

I certainly never saw anything like that when I was pro-choice. Can you show me some examples?

Sad but irrelevant. Her crappy situation is not reason enough to kill a child. None of that is the child's fault.

Ignorance is not a defense for rape or murder...why should it be a defense in this case?

If they are minors, the same rules would apply to minors who rape and murder. So a 14 year old who kills her child would be shown leniency the same way a 14 year old murderer or rapist would be shown leniency.

Remorse is irrelevant. Whether they feel a lot of remorse or none at all, it is just as wrong.

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

The point I'm arguing is that this is a battle that must be fought with sense, not coercion. You were turned from pro-choice? How did that happen?
Since there is nowhere near a consensus and abortions occur as a result of ignorance... put it together.
Nothing's wrong with teaching abstinence. The problem comes from not teaching why or what else can happen.... before someone else can.
The problem comes in not creating an atmosphere where kids feel comfortable going to their parents for advice and help.
And adulthood is too late. Kids do not live in a vaccuum and do not remain as ignorant as their parents would like. Parents cannot completely control the influx of information. Trying is a failed policy.
Coercion doesn't work. Infanticide and abandonement are illegal. They happen universally where birth control and abortions and education are not found.
All the laws do is give us a mindset that all is well and taken care of.

The stigmas attached to unready parents are, unlike those attached to molesters, factors that will help to shape the kid's life in negative ways. That's part of the rational equation. And, no, it is not evil to have a kid out of wedlock because there is no malice. It is stupid... and it is a mistake that has enough consequences of its own to not require further social stigma. The stigma only helps to $%&* up society. Teaching ahead of time helps to keep it from happening in the first place.

How is it that you and I can turn against abortion through rational thought, but all others must be subject to coercion because we don't feel like educating.
Better to repeat the ignorance of older generations unto infinite...

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

I was presented with the same argument I am making now; that the fetus either has to be defined as a person or an object. That it cannot be both.

The level of education is irrelevant when the question is whether or not killing a fetus is wrong and should be illegal.

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

I voted for a women's right to choose.

There were all sorts of nasty things happening before abortion was legalised - here, we called them "back street abortions" some were as crude as unqualified people using knitting needles and coat hangers on scared young women to end the pregnancy.

So having an abortion available on the National Health Service was a progressive move.

So I take it that your opinion is that the fetus is an object, not a person. Right?

__________________
My Political Blog (Updated Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

Which part of my post gave you that opinion?