Pro-Choice and Anti-Capital Punishment?

Damn, I always get those confused.

I know Im entering this thread late, and am probably restating something someone else responded to later in the thread, but this just irked me. Being a minority puts me in the disadvantaged portion of society when it comes to being accused of a crime. My opinion on the death penalty stems from my hatred of majority (governmental) control and my (sometimes unwanted) empathatic reflex. If in some godforsaken situation, someone accuses me of murder, I would want to allow my attorneys the longest possible amount of time to gather evidence for my release. Recent improvements in DNA anaylisis has swayed the cases of many persons in prison - given the rapid pace of technological advancement who knows what forensic tools may be available in the future. I dont want to die because another person says that I should.

I am not pro-abortion, I am however, pro-choice. I *really* hate third-trimester abortions though
==Chris

You can't end a family tree that is not yet in existence. lol. and according to the new agers
we all have chosen our paths in life for our learning lessons.

Can't miss what you never had. shrugs.

This is very brave of you to say openly, and sadly it runs exactly parallel to what I have seen.

I hope you find peace with regard to all you have been through.


It would be easy to remain silent on such an issue. I would irritate no one; my status as a male would not make me a target for hate.

Yet I have had people I care about in tears, one too many times over this issue. Wishing with all their heart that they had listened to me and others, but instead had chosen their irresponsible lifestyle over their child. And then upon maturing, faced the never-ending sadness.

I dare to say it - there are times when society has wisdom greater than a confused, scared, partying, 19 year old 'adult' suddenly in the position of mother-to-be or father-to-be.

Such are my experiences. Perhaps everyone else has known rape victims and tragic life-or-death situations.



With regard to adopting the unwanted - this argument would equally apply if aborting teenagers was proposed. It is not valid.

With regard to being a buddhist -vs- a lawyer... I am glad to say that I have no such internal conflict.

Wikipedia is not a reputable source of information. Quoting from one of their articles (espicially one without footnotes or references) is bad practice.
==Chris

It's not that complicated. It comes from a different focus. You focus on what may or may not be a human life. My focus is on where we limit government power. I am for a limited government. That means the government is not allowed to interfere in a private citizen's (even if it's a woman's) medical decisions. In the same spirit, the government's power to execute it's own citizens should also be limited. I, personally, would prefer that abortions don't occur, but I definitely don't want the government involved. I don't trust the government to make personal medical decisions for individuals, nor do I trust it to have the right to end the lives of it's citizens. Look at the current administration's track record. You want FEMA or the people who brought you the WMD fiasco making these decisions. I hope not.

Neither abortion nor capital punishment are murder. Murder is the illegal killing of a human. Both abortion and capital punishment are legal, and therefore not murder. If you want to ask if one or the other is wrong, or immoral, that is another can of worms....

When painting it as a government intervening in private lives argument, the same thing could be extended to not letting us kill each other. Granted, we can do so - but there are consequences to doing so. Calling it a medical decision is more than oversimplifying it. Having a kidney transplant is a medical decision. Ending the life of a child is not simply a medical decision that no one else should have any part in.

People put forth all these horrorific cases to justify abortion - the woman being raped, endangerment of the mother, horrible birth defects. That's all well and good, and those are valid reasons - but what on earth does any of that have to do with "oops, I'm not ready to have a baby yet I want to wait a few more years"? Abortions should be a rare, absolutely last choice, but they aren't. They are used far too often purely to avoid the inconvenience of pregnancy, and that is a pathetic excuse to have one.

Being 'young' and being 'liberal' are not one and the same. I was raised in a very liberal house (agnostic mom/athiest dad and both old hippies) yet I know the responsibilities of having sex and the possible outcome. Abortion should not be taken lightly by any means and I personally feel it should be used as a last resort, but they *should* have the choice.

I feel that the more conservative mindset that doesn't want teens to learn about sex and want to remove contraception from being easily attainable have probably contributed to this problem more than people are willing to admit. Kids need education early on to emphasize the downsides of sex of all kinds.

Making abortion illegal will NOT stop them from taking place. It will drive it underground giving the criminals yet another revenue source and who will be left to clean up the mess?

Unfortunately not everyone is like you or me who understand the responsibilities of sex and the outcome. Not everyone is graced with parents who actually teach their children the right thing. Not every child grows up to understand that sex comes with its own responsibilities. There are lot of folks out there, younger than you or me who only see as sex as a something that feels good and hip or trendy.

However, legalizing abortion sends a message that it's 'okay' to kill an unborn fetus who didn't even ask it to be born, that it's "okay" to skip out on responsibility because I can't control myself. It's the same with capital punishment, it desensitizes people to killing and making it acceptable.

It doesn't erase the fact that it's still killing, and deliberate killing is wrong. What makes it legal doesn't mean it's right.

Sorry, not following your logic there. Have you adopted any unwanted teenagers? You want to make sure that every unwanted child is born into the world, but you're not willing to accept responsibility for them. As long as it's someone else's problem it's easy to moralize.

The child is her own life. The child alone owns her life. Or are you suggesting parents own their childrens lives with the power to kill the child?

A prevalent theme in this discussion is the attempt to associate shame with abortion as a rhetorical technique. As I've stated before, labeling something as a "sin" or imbuing it with shame is a method of behavioral control (and a way of avoiding rational debate).

Performed by a responsible physician, abortions in the first trimester for any reason, including convenience, are perfectly acceptable. It is a choice parents (not the state or any other third party) make for themselves.

~Ulrika~

The child can't survive even after birth without parental care. Imagine a newborn feeding herself.

A newborn is also quite a bit more than a glorified tumor. The seed is not the same as the tree.

The sapling is a tree in the earliest stages of life.

A child at any stage of life is not a tumor.

Yes, but once it is out of the womb, it is not *part* of the mother - it is no longer a parasitic being (parents of teenagers might disagree, however).

A child is going to need a host, a parent or guardian. You might say that is a parasite, I disagree.

Well you sound like a pro-lifer to me, at least most of the things you say fit right into their ideology.

I dont want to denigrate your experience or your feelings, but I have a hard time believing you or this story. It sounds like one of those made up stories right out of a pro-lifer pamphlet to me.

As far as I am aware, many surveys over the years since abortion became legal have proven over and over again that while *some* women use abortion as a method of birth control the vast majority of them do not. This is one of those fallacious "facts" that is used by pro-life groups to suport their message of abstinence and religion. If those having abortions are characterised as irresponsible and selfish, it plays a lot better to that side.

By the same token, abstinence also does not work as a form of birth control and while you are promoting it here in true "pro-lifer" fashion, by far the majority of women do not see that as a viable option. You are doing a great disservice by promoting it as such and are likely to cause *more* abortions by doing so.

Try telling a 15 year old girl (hell, try telling a 12 year old!), not to have sex as a form of birth control, see how far it gets you.

In regards whether you are carrying a "child" or a "fetus" my comments were referring to the facts of science and language only. You may feel it's a child, (I am fairly certain I would feel the same myself if I was pregnant), but that's your feelings only. Factually, its a fetus, then when it's born, it's a child. That's what I meant, and only that.

Poor messaging and understanding of the severity of abortion doesn't mean we should turn abortion into a crime. It will not stop anyone from having an abortion and turns it into an even more taboo topic.

If you want to lesson the chances that your child doesn't end up in a situation where they are faced with an unwanted pregnancy, talk to them about responsibility, sex, contraception, and the serious nature of abortions. Providing them with contraception in the event that they need it would also be wise - it doesn't mean you promote the idea of them having sex, it means you want to make sure they are prepared if they face the situation.

That's fine that you disagree, but technically, while it is still attached to the host via the cord - it is a parasite. Sure, they grow up to be cute and cuddly, but we were all little parasites at one time.

You're right, but only because the cause is obvious (even if the father is not)-

tumor 2 : an abnormal benign or malignant mass of tissue that is not inflammatory, arises without obvious cause from cells of preexistent tissue, and possesses no physiologic function