There is No Defending Late-term Abortion

Apr 2013
35,427
24,039
Left coast
#41
The c

The counter arguments would be (again, I’m pro choice here)
1. For years society said what happened between a husband and a wife was only the business of th family. So what’s different with a husband saying “mind your business”
2. It’s not illegal to spank a child. It’s illegal to beat a child to a bloody pulp. Is it illegal to spark a child so hard it leaves a bruise? Is it illegal for a parent to make a child’s pick which switch they’d get beat with? Where is the line? (I have to say this argument in particular grossed me out so much, but I’m playing devils advocate here)
3. If I pay for dozens of abortions it certainly impacts the lives of the dozens of babies that won’t be born. If the women also tell their family about it, it could impact potentially hundreds of lives who know about it or were potentially hoping for a baby to be born.

I feel I have to say it for the forth time because I don’t want SJW jumping down my throat, but I lean pro choice. BUT taking the position to “mind your business” is same kind of arguments that allowed men to beat their wives and father beating their children.
That may have been true in the past. But like civil rights and the right of gays to equal marriage rights, our society is slowly smartening up to where the whole beating a wife is now definitely the public's business, as is beating a kid. BTW, in some jurisdictions, spanking or hitting a child is illegal now.

And the fetus is in the woman's body so her decision is the final arbitrator, assuming competence.
 
Nov 2012
39,563
11,526
Lebanon, TN
#42
one positive thing about the March for Life.. it was a massive youth movement... I have said many times in a decade or 2 maybe 3, Abortion will be viewed in the same light as slavery is viewed today.
 
Likes: webguy4
Jul 2018
985
250
Earth
#43
one positive thing about the March for Life.. it was a massive youth movement... I have said many times in a decade or 2 maybe 3, Abortion will be viewed in the same light as slavery is viewed today.
Some people are against abortion because they think that women will be "saved" by having rug-rats.

1 Timothy 2:15 (CEV) = But women will be saved by having children, if they stay faithful, loving, holy, and modest.
 
Likes: leekohler2
Dec 2018
292
158
Unionville Indiana
#45
I have said many times in a decade or 2 maybe 3, Abortion will be viewed in the same light as slavery is viewed today.
Thanks for bringing up slavery. I checked into the particular relevance between abortion and slavery in North America. Here's what's found of interest in peer reviewed journals:

Some women resisted reproduction in order to resist slavery. They found medicine or herbs to terminate pregnancies or practiced abstinence. For example, chewing on cotton root was one of the more popular methods to perform abortion and end a pregnancy. This method was often used as the plant was readily available, especially for the women who worked in cotton fields. Gossypol was one of the many substances found in all parts of the cotton plant, and it was described by scientists as 'poisonous pigment'. It appears to inhibit the development of sperm or restrict the mobility of the sperm. Also, it is thought to interfere with the menstrual cycle by restricting the release of certain hormones. Women's knowledge of different forms of contraception helped them control some factors in their life. ...

... Women resisted reproduction to avoid bringing children into slavery, and to deprive their owners of future property and profit. "In addition to the labor they provided, slaves were a profitable investment: Their prices rose steadily throughout the antebellum era, as did the return that slave owners could expect when slaves reproduced."-- (Perrin, Liese M. "Resisting Reproduction: Reconsidering Slave Contraception in the Old South," Journal of American Studies 35, no. 2 (August 2001): 255 + America: History & Life.).

And,

By consciously avoiding pregnancy or through gynecological resistance, black women reclaimed their own bodies, frustrated the planters' pro-natalist policies, and in turn defied white male constructions of their sexuality. Whether swallowing abortifacients such as calomel and turpentine or chewing on natural contraceptives like cotton roots or okra, slave women wove contraception and miscarriages through the dark fabric of slave oppositional culture. -- Follett, Richard. "'Lives of living death': The reproductive lives of slave women in the cane world of Louisiana," Slavery & Abolition 26, no. 2 (August 2005): 289-304. America: History & Life.)

None of this is really surprising. Why would conscientious and compassionate black women, on the plantation, want to bring a child into a horrific world of continual hard labor, punishment, torture, and squalor to fill the coffers of "Old Master"?
 
Last edited:
Dec 2018
875
541
Wisconsin
#46
That may have been true in the past. But like civil rights and the right of gays to equal marriage rights, our society is slowly smartening up to where the whole beating a wife is now definitely the public's business, as is beating a kid.
That is exactly my point. Arguing "mind your own business" in favor of abortion rights is as poor an argument as it was for spousal and child abuse. It doesn't mean the issues themselves are of the same level. But the argument to support them is as equally poor.
 
Apr 2013
35,427
24,039
Left coast
#47
That is exactly my point. Arguing "mind your own business" in favor of abortion rights is as poor an argument as it was for spousal and child abuse. It doesn't mean the issues themselves are of the same level. But the argument to support them is as equally poor.
They are the same. But here is their similarity. The wife has control over whether her body gets beaten. The child is considered incapable of informed consent so society makes the decision. The pregnant woman has control over whether she goes through a pregnancy.

And other than the child for whom arguably society is acting as surrogate for them, it is all their business. Not the business of those imposing themselves on them. And thus it is the business of society to prevent such acts being inflicted on them, using forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term as an act.
 
Nov 2018
1,909
798
Montana
#48
You and I appear to be to be on the same side of the aisle on this topic, but I don't think "mind their f*cking business" is exactly a compelling argument. What if I beat my wife? Mind your f*cking business. What if I beat my children? Mind your f*cking business? What if impregnate dozens of women and pay all of them to have abortions? Mind your f*cking business.
Abortion is really ENTIRELY a female problem and should really only be dealt with by women. That men intrude on the topic is really a reflection of historic considerations of women as chattel.
 
Nov 2018
1,909
798
Montana
#49
one positive thing about the March for Life.. it was a massive youth movement... I have said many times in a decade or 2 maybe 3, Abortion will be viewed in the same light as slavery is viewed today.
Only if someone does not understand slavery or abortion. Of course, understanding abortion would only require a very basic education and a trivial amount of committment to objective thinking and only a trace of concern for women and their autonomy. Apparently that is why it is a topic so difficult for conservatives...
 
Dec 2018
875
541
Wisconsin
#50
Abortion is really ENTIRELY a female problem and should really only be dealt with by women. That men intrude on the topic is really a reflection of historic considerations of women as chattel.
I disagree. I, as someone who is pro-choice, believe men has a say in the matter (maybe not as much a say as women).

Let's look at an example. Let's say my wife and I are trying to have a kid. After 3 years of trying, we finally get pregnant. Then three months into the pregnancy, she comes home and tells me she had an abortion without telling me. Now she certainly had the right to do so. But should I have had a say in the matter?
 

Similar Discussions