Abortion | Page 12 | INFJ Forum

Abortion

Just in legal terms, I think abortion should be treated as either manslaughter or murder.

If abortion is to be permitted, I think it should be framed in terms of sanctioned, or decriminalised manslaughter, or murder.


This would seem to require less philosophical and moral acrobatics than trying to reduce the definition of human life to some very qualified conditions; or trying to compare the value of one life against the quality of life of another.
 
I don't actually really remember much of the pain. I know it sucked, but it doesn't remotely bother me now. I had a c-section so I didn't experience any "genital mutilation".

I do have more stretch marks and I am sure my boobs will never be the same again, but oh well. :p

As far as I know, the brain releases some pretty strong sedative chemicals after childbirth, but I can't get past the body horror of vaginal tearing, cutting, and possible anal leakage, aka. the episiotomy. and, uh, all other bodily, and emotional horrors. :m100:
 
Some ideas I'm pondering right now...

1. An elective abortion is the choice to expel a fetus, living or dead, from the mother's womb.

2. A spontaneous abortion is when the fetus is expelled from the mother's womb without her intent, also known as a miscarriage, which can occur later in pregnancy than an elective abortion would be allowed.

How many parents actually have a right to the remains after fetal demise? Are you required to have a burial or cremation? If so, at what point of gestation does the law require it? Does anyone have the knowledge of these laws, if they exist?
 
Even a shit life where you're going to end up suiciding anyways?

Life is what you make it. By same standard that same life could become the president of the United States.
 
Against. I support science and science states that life begins at conception. I can quote my medical text books if you would like. If human life begins at conception then there is no moral way to choose to end that life.



Wrote by Christine Miller

‎*What is the definition of murder?*

--Murder, as defined in common law countries, is the unlawful killing of another *human* being with intent

*What is the definition of human?*
...--Having or showing those positive aspects of nature and character regarded as distinguishing humans from other animals

(and a fetus does show "character as regarded as distinguishing humans from other animals")

*What is the definition of a fetus?*
--The unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural resemblance to the adult animal.

(this basically sums it up that a fetus is considered a* human*)

Now, if you want to abort a fetus please go read the definition of *murder* again.

*What is the definition of Abortion?"

--Also called voluntary abortion. the removal of an embryo or *fetus* from the uterus in order to end a *pregnancy*

(please remember that we already concluded that a fetus is a human)

*What is the definition of pregnancy?*

--the state, condition, or quality of being *pregnant*.

*What is the definition of pregnant?*

--having a *child* or other* offspring* developing in the body; with child or young, as a woman or female mammal.

*Define offsping/child

--the immediate descendants of a person
--a human offspring (son or daughter) of any age

Abortion IS murder-- you are *killing* a *human* being with intent by voluntarily ending a* pregnancy* which is being in the state that you are carrying an immediate descendant.

*What is killing?

--the act of terminating a* life*

*What is life?*

--Living organisms undergo metabolism, maintain homeostasis, possess a capacity to grow, respond to stimuli, reproduce and, through natural selection, adapt to their environment in successive generations. More complex living organisms can communicate through various means. A diverse array of living organisms (life forms) can be found in the biosphere on Earth, and the properties common to these organisms
 
If human life begins at conception then there is no moral way to choose to end that life.
So you are not simply getting an abortion you are killing a human and you are already a mother and failing horribly.

Thankfully, morals are relative.
 
Self sustaining... obviously a baby is not self sustaining... even AFTER birth it requires it's mother or the care of someone else to live, so to argue that it is okay to *kill* because a *fetus* is not self sustaining makes no sense, is it okay to kill and infant, a toddler? they are not self sustaining either. A baby and fetus both can't live without a *mother*


I would argue that your definition of self-sustaining is not taking into account the fact that a full term newborn can generally breathe on its own due to fully developed lungs and also has a properly working excretory system. The mother's body provides these necessary functions in utero.
 
I would argue that your definition of self-sustaining is not taking into account the fact that a full term newborn can generally breathe on its own due to fully developed lungs and also has a properly working excretory system. The mother's body provides these necessary functions in utero.

All of the nutrition is also delivered via the mother's bloodstream, the fetus cannot digest food on its own.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Wyote
Abortion isn't right though I would understand why some women would get it in certain cases.
 
Life is what you make it. By same standard that same life could become the president of the United States.

Bollocks. If you're argument rests on "he could be the future president" the you're off your rocker. Life is full of nothing but suffering and then you die alone. It's a bit grim but I swear it, this is the truth.
 
Bollocks. If you're argument rests on "he could be the future president" the you're off your rocker. Life is full of nothing but suffering and then you die alone. It's a bit grim but I swear it, this is the truth.

Bullshit, life isn't miserable and full of suffering for everyone, what a pessimistic view.
 
I've always wondered how no one questions the act of conceiving a new life and bringing a new being into the world without knowing if the being wants to be created and born in the first place, yet most people rage about ending the life of a fetus on the basis, that you don't know if it wants to live, and what potential it has. Double standard, amirite?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wyote
I've always wondered how no one questions the act of conceiving a new life and bringing a new being into the world without knowing if the being wants to be created and born in the first place, yet most people rage about ending the life of a fetus on the basis, that you don't know if it wants to live, and what potential it has. Double standard, amirite?

Stop! Your cold logic is affronting my very existence!
I refuse to listen to you!
 
I've always wondered how no one questions the act of conceiving a new life and bringing a new being into the world without knowing if the being wants to be created and born in the first place, yet most people rage about ending the life of a fetus on the basis, that you don't know if it wants to live, and what potential it has. Double standard, amirite?

Eh, it's probably for reasons similar to pushing for suicide to be made illegal.

Actually no, more likely due to oversight in the rationalization of why killing is inherently wrong.
 
Well, when they grow up ask them if they wanted to be created. Until then forcing them into non existence by ending their heart beat is wrong. Heartbeat starts at 21 days. Thats a human heart beat, a genetically separate living being. Dont take my word for it, look at science.
 
Well, when they grow up ask them if they wanted to be created. Until then forcing them into non existence by ending their heart beat is wrong. Heartbeat starts at 21 days. Thats a human heart beat, a genetically separate living being. Dont take my word for it, look at science.

You do know that there are an infinite amount of holes in any argument on this earth according to my Ne? this is no exception.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Majesty
You do know that there are an infinite amount of holes in any argument on this earth according to my Ne? this is no exception.

I'm sorry I am not familiar with the term Ne. There are holes in every argument anyone has ever made at any point in time. I'm not claiming to know everything, just giving my opinion.