Pro-Choice and Anti-Capital Punishment?

flambed

Because laws are made for each person to follow, I try to think about the needs of every citizen, not just the mainstream. Therefore, as long as there is rape, I support legal access to abortion.

When I was a teen I had a baby and gave it up for adoption. We're now in contact, and he had an awesome life. That said, 3 months into a new marriage I had an abortion. I am glad that happened: my ex husband is now being investigated for kiddy porn and even if he is convicted, denying a parent access to a child is pretty near impossible, even in cases of domestic abuse. The judge in my part of the world is super fathers' rights oriented, and has kept women living in isolation near their abusers to enforce fathers' visitation access.

There are all kinds of circumstances, concerns, and suspicions that may well not be captured in a simplistic poll, particularly one conducted by an agency with a stake in the issue.

I wasn't advocating killing the elderly - I was pointing out how ridiculous the argument is that inconvenience/fiancial concerns have any validity in whether a human life should be terminated.

In response to Desmond:
I do feel that if said pregnant woman is underage that their parents should be involved. It is a very hard choice to make period. And until they are of legal age, their parents or guardian are responsible for their well being. It is a hard choice to make at any age. I even pushed my teenage friend to tell her parents and the way the law was written at that time she didn't have to.

I have been through the decision making process with five friends. It is not a decision made in haste. And again don't be so quick to label it "birth control" because it isn't.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion as I am mine

these reasons look valid to me, thanks for the break-out

The rape issue does not cover irresponsible parents who simply were partying too much, then finally 'got around' to an abortion.

But the rape issue, and others like it, are used to justify the continuing careless, reprehensible, and presently legal acts in many countries.

I think that we as a society should take a stand, admit there is a line that is *frequently* crossed and intervene.


Or should abortions be allowed for any reason, no matter how trivial?

Society's casual disregard for human life opens the door to many, many dark possibilities, and not just for children.

Ha ha. You so funny.

These are mutually exclusive statements.

An "eye for an eye" is revenge, and taking revenge is the opposite of compassion.

The rape issue does cover the woman who was sleeping only to wake up and find her husband on top of her. Marriage is not an implied "yes" whether people want to believe that or not.

I do agree that abortion simply used as birth control is wrong - but I have yet to meet anyone who was overly thrilled at the prospect of abortion.

It may be revenge to some, justice to others.
Is compassion an all or none statement?
Can I not have compassion for the innocent and none for the wicked?
That is exactly my point, nothing is black or white.
We, as a society need to use more common sense.
If you condone abortion because a child would be an inconvenience are you no longer compassionate or does this only apply to me because my views do not fit someone else's agenda?

I don't believe in these things because of convenience, I believe in them because of what I feel is right and wrong.
I believe it is wrong to destroy a life unless you are saving it from suffering or to save the life of the mother or because the mother was raped.
I do not, however, believe it to be wrong to remove an evil being form this earth to make sure that they do not kill again.

It would be more convenient to just let a killer live in jail so that nobody has to have that death on their conscience, but life is not about convenience.
As long as someone evil is still alive they have the chance to kill again. So I have compassion for the innocent, I choose to keep them safe and sacrifice a murderer.

Call it what you will.

I too have been involved in 'picking up the pieces' more than once. One time, I could almost understand and sympathise. But not every time.

I've seen such decisions made in haste and fear, and I've seen abortion used as birth control.

You may be wondering how could I possibly know about a woman's inner thought process. Well, one friend told me afterward, in a stream of tears. It was not her first abortion, either.

That was twenty years ago, and it still haunts her.

Thus my convictions on the matter. Yes, abortion is legally used as birth control, and I would not be so quick to look the other way and pretend it does not occur.

i would argue the opposite. it would be more convenient to kill someone on death row, rather than to let them have appeals and keep them in jail. people would worry about this evil person still living with the possiblity of harming others.

as long as cars are still running on roads, they have the chance to kill again. as long as cigarettes are being made, they have the chance to kill again. etc, etc, etc. are you opposed to these things as well?

it doesn't bother me that you are anti-choice & pro-capital punishment. everyone is entitled to their beliefs and opinions. i just don't understand the logic you are using behind your arguments.

Anya,

What I am saying is, in terms of our conscience or morality; it is more convenient not to sentence a murderer to death. I am not talking just anyone charged with murder, I mean someone that is guilty beyond any doubt. Most people don't want to be responsible for saying "yes, he/she should die for that crime", so it is more convenient to put them away and pretend they are gone.

There are many dangerous things in the world, some of which are a necessity for our way of life to carry on, but murderers are not one of them. So I don't understand that correlation.
Who does it benefit to keep them around, besides the lawyers making money off of their appeals?

I'd rather not pay for their abortions either. People should be responsible enough not to get pregnant in the first place unless they were a vicitm of rape, but alas we don't live in a world full of responsible people. The abortion is much cheaper in the long run.

Sorry Cristiano, but I have absolutely zero sentimental attachment to any fetus not the product of my own loins. I completely agree with Selador. Arguing about lost potentialities is irrational. What if one of the children you didn't have by one of the women you might have impregnated but didn't might have grown up to cure cancer?! There's nothing rational down that road. A fetus has no awareness. No memories. No experiences. No emotional bonds. And when you drop the moralizing sentimentality, no intrinsic value on its own. If you find that cold that's okay. Like I said, it is. We're headed down the road towards severe overpopulation so what then? How will people reconcile their agonizing over the unborn when we'll desperately need to regulate reproduction? Your position is unsustainable in the long run, and the day will be here a lot sooner than anyone wants to believe.

As for the elderly, I'm all for assisted suicide. I fully intend to check out before I'm nothing but a burden to others.

Chip the above was well put and bravely spoken. I might quibble with your assertion that foetus has no intrinsic value, for in general I think there is a point at which the line between existence and life is crossed. You peg the point at which i cease being a buddhist and start being a lawyer.

If only I could get rich on death penalty appeals.

Abstinence is beside the point, and doesn't address my statement. Why should women be legally compelled to do something, while men are not?

Because men run the show?

It's not a good idea, for a number of reasons. One: cannibalism is a good way to catch diseases. Two: people get very squeamish about this stuff, and it's probably not worth the hassle and societal fallout.

And yes, I'd be squeamish about eating a fetus - I'd need a really good reason to do it. I don't eat much meat anyway, and we are all brought up to think that cannibalism is wrong.

But what's actually wrong with it? Give me a reason other than squeamishness and disease. Assume the fetus died of natural causes.

Damien, I just wanted to say after reading your remarks on this thread that I find your ideas frightening.

I guess maybe it's just your personal opinion and not an actual argument?
I mean, there are so many philosophical contradictions behind your remarks that nothing you say has made any sense to me.

Like always I am coming late to this thread and everything I may say may have already been said since I am too lazy to read all of the posts.

Lethal injection, electric chairs, gas chambers etc etc are murder pure and simple no matter who does them whether it be the governement or an individual and only a person with no morals would condone such activities.

Abortions have nothing to do with capital punishment and should not be compared. A woman has a right to govern her own body no matter what men say. Every cell in a person's body is alive so is it murder to remove a cancerous tumor? In the anti-abortionist's minds it must be.

Nobody, and I repeat NOBODY, is going to tell me what to do with my own body.

I am pregnant now, and it IS a child. It is not genetic material. It is not a fetus, zygote, or embryo. It is my child growing inside of me.

I have had an abortion in the past, when I was 18.I was not ready for a child.
To say that people are being responsible when they have an abortion is crap. I was scared and didn't WANT the responsibility of a child, yet I chose to have sex. The abortion was the only way out of that responsibility at that time. I know quite a few friends that had abortions when they were younger also. Their reasoning was pretty much the same. Not wanting to be responsible for a child. Some didn't want to mess thier "looks" up with stretch marks. Sad, but true for some women.

Now I am married and my outlook has changed. But some things are still the same, I never viewed it as anything other than a child, even when I aborted. Abortions because a child would inconvience you shouldn't be allowed. Try abstaining. Everyone knows birth control can and does fail, so why risk it? Because abortion is a right? *snort*

I completely agree. I do wonder how many men would have a different opinion if the issue was in relation to thier body and not a woman's.

Your post made me think of something. How many men, if they had a big growth eating away at their their favorite appendage, would choose not to have it removed based on moral reasons? My guess would be zero.

Ditto. I also notice that none of the pro-lifers have answered my question about how many unwanted children they've adopted or plan to adopt.

Was that supposed to be a sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek comment? I hope so, otherwise you're saying that it was OK for you to have had that choice when you needed it, but now it's not because you feel you don't need it?