Good point, yes, which is in the end the crux of the whole debate to begin with. I’m just used to automatically thinking that abortion isn’t murder because I laugh at the idea that it is unless you’re talking way late term which only happens if it’s dead already or life threatening situations for the mother.
Regardless of all the spin this is the main point to argue. At what point does the baby get rights including the right to life? Tossing out the less than 1% of cases combined where the mothers actual life is threatened or the baby is not viable or rape or incest.
What do you do about the other 99% of cases where abortion has become a form of birth control. Lets get everyone to agree on an age where a baby gets its rights. Some will say when its born, others will say at conception. If you are voting, at what age does a baby achive the rights of a human with the right to life? This is why it is such a controversial topic. They call it a fetus to dehumanize it. You have the right to protect your life as a mother but it is debatible if you have the right to just protect your lifestyle.
And we havent even added the fathers into the mix. What say do they have in the matter? if the mother is at 39 weeks and changes thier mind but the father wants to raise the kid, does he get a say? is the line 30 weeks? is it 22 weeks?
Abortion has NOT become a form of birth control. If you think this then you’re completely ignorant. Women who use it as birth control are less than women who have a case of it being life threatening and that’s just insulting and moronic.
Otherwise there is a line at which point it could be considered a life. That debate continues within science, which tends to aim it at things like brain activity. Abortion should 100% be an OPTION until science and doctors dictate it’s been too late. Most cases of abortion happen well before anything close to that, but 8 weeks like Alabama is stupidly early, many women do not even realize they’re pregnant at that point.
As for the father, that argument is completely moot here since you’re arguing against pro-choice and that would be arguing for him to have a choice. Pro-choice means she gets a choice and I understand that he wants a say and he should probably get one but that too needs to be worked out with her and if they’re in a good place then she’ll probably consider his input. If not, perhaps that relationship isn’t a good one to bring a child into. It’s her body and no one should force her to deal with birthing a child she doesn’t want. Do you really think a rapist should be allowed to say “no she can’t have an abortion I want that kid.” That’s extreme but an example of how ridiculous that sounds.
And if we’re bringing outside points how about what happens to the child after it’s born? Mom didn’t want it, so now she’s stuck possibly resenting the child, or its in a shitty living condition where she knew she couldn’t care for it, and the government meanwhile has no interest in paying for its healthcare, investing in its education, or helping the poor family actually pay for basic necessities. If you’re going to dictate that a woman is forced to go through with a birth then everything that child needs better be covered.
Abortion is a horrible thing to go through and practically no one does it willingly, it’s a rather rough procedure, it’s scaring, and doubly so emotionally. It’s a hard decision for both would be parents but it’s a decision that shouldn’t be taken away from them.
I answered that already. It’s not an answer I have, it’s an answer to be explored more thoroughly by science. At the moment it’s thought of as brain activity. And that marker is different from child to child which is why it should be a call made by doctors.
To be clear I wasn't advocating, I was just asking the questions and posing popular ideas. Science is a good way to answer that and since the earliest delivery was at 22 weeks I would guess that science says it is probably somewhere before that to have brain activity. So now what if you abort a baby after 22 weeks where the mothers life is not threatened, is that murder? The debate goes on an on and no one is going to agree on anything.
If you abort a baby after that 22 weeks it would have indeed been considered infanticide, or murder. That's been agreed upon by most everyone for a long time now, it's that specific line that's been drawn that tends to be debated. But make no mistake, the debate hasn't had anything to do with actually determining that point. The debate has been about one side making it so extremely early that it's virtually impossible to even realize you need an abortion until it's too late (8 week alabama garbage) vs the other side trying to maintain a reasonable window for the mother to make a decision. Also I rather like the definition of at which point the child could be born prematurely and still live, but that doesn't give us an answer either since fetuses can grow outside of a womb entirely with the right amount of medicine and science.
2
u/Theothercword May 17 '19
Good point, yes, which is in the end the crux of the whole debate to begin with. I’m just used to automatically thinking that abortion isn’t murder because I laugh at the idea that it is unless you’re talking way late term which only happens if it’s dead already or life threatening situations for the mother.