3 ms·

Abortion: pay a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, one medical procedure, done Giving birth to that child: stay pregnant for a few more months, go through

by rwalle 4y ago

Abortion: pay a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, one medical procedure, done Giving birth to that child: stay pregnant for a few more months, go through labor, and ACTUALLY raise that child by buying the food, paying for and sending them to school, paying for a lot of other stuff, and spending time with them for TWO DECADES which you may not be mentally or financially prepared for Why is this even a question? You think a mother gives birth to a child and it's done business, like abortion?

FollowingTheDao 4y ago
So your determination of the value of a life is only monetary? And if so, who determines when the cut off is? If the fetus is still attached to the mother after it leaves the birth canal, I still consider it her body, so is i still her choice?
- candiodari 4y ago
  The problem is that, as per usual, both extreme positions don't work. You cannot reasonably totally disallow abortions, and of course there needs to be some limit. So we agree where the cutoff is. As in, we discuss in congress and find some point we can agree on. Perhaps using European democracies as a guide, where things range from up to 12 weeks after conception to 6 months after conception. We could perhaps work "from first principles". Obviously abortion needs to happen after a woman knows she's pregnant. So, you should allow at least 1-2 female periods' worth (1 period = 4 weeks) + some time to schedule the procedure, which comes to that same minimum of about 12 weeks. An exception is medically necessary abortion, which is even legal (and a fact of life) after the baby leaves the birth canal (a baby without lungs will stay alive as long as the umbilical cord is intact, for example. When you cut it, and you have to cut it, baby dies. Not much can be done. And this is not the worst example by far. Though it's natural, so you might say "Approved by God", by republican logic). I must say this is one thing I don't understand about the religious position. Several abortion procedures are built into our genes (one relating to the immune system, one relating to the heart, one relating to the brain, and I doubt we've discovered all of them). Either those systems work to a minimum standard, or your own cells (or the mother's cells) will abort you. So there are very practical reasons that "God" does abortions. The theory is that these systems exist, because it vastly lowers the time it takes to produce another child, increasing the rate at which your DNA spreads. This also exists in animals (most famously male lions' post-natal abortions when they take over a troup).
  - moistly 4y ago
    > of course there needs to be some limit Canada has proven that is not true. In Canada, it is entirely between the woman and her doctor, right up until birth. If she could find a doctor to do it (spoiler alert: she won’t) she could abort minutes before contractions begin. And this is the way it should be. Doctors and the hospitals behind them don’t perform late term abortions unless they are medically necessary. In Canada there are no laws, no legal limits, and there is no problem. Funny how that works, eh? It’s almost as if we can trust doctors and women.
- BoGs83 4y ago
  I think you are removing the act of raising a child which its success in today's world is purely monetary. If you cannot afford to feed yourself how are you going to afford the doctors, diapers, extra room, school, clothes, etc. etc. Strangers are not going to help raise the child, like back in tribe ages where there so many children that everyone in the tribe had a part. The social benefits from government when you have a child are abysmal even in the "good" states in America. When discussing value of life people usually pick their preferred side. Do homeless people have a value on life? America treats homeless as garbage. What about disabled people?
  - FollowingTheDao 4y ago
    > f you cannot afford to feed yourself how are you going to afford the doctors, diapers, extra room, school, clothes, etc. etc. People do this all over the world. > Strangers are not going to help raise the child, like back in tribe ages where there so many children that everyone in the tribe had a part. and > The social benefits from government when you have a child are abysmal even in the "good" states in America. So why are we not addressing these things? But actually, that is what adoption is all about. True? Stranger raisin your baby? > When discussing value of life people usually pick their preferred side. I don't. I do not discuss their value monetarily at all. That is incomprehensible. By the way, I am homeless, and yes, I see both Democrats and Republicans treat me like garbage. They both do not care about life at any point.
    - moistly 4y ago
      Adoption is a colossal failure in America. Tens of thousands of children “age out” and will never, ever be adopted; tens of thousands are adopted for use as house slaves or sex slaves for the abusive “parents”; the entire system is filled with neglect and abuse.
      - FollowingTheDao 4y ago
        > Adoption is a colossal failure in America. Again, look at this. No one wants to elect people to fix these problems, we just keep on voting in these corporate capitalism politicians and then they tell you to just have an abortion because you cannot afford the high cost of everything and the low wages. I am not anti-abortion, I just want a society where they are not needed becasue money.
- hellisothers 4y ago
  The crux here is we don’t all agree that a life is at stake which makes it impossible to align on anything. If I look at it through a lens of a life at stake then some of these positions begin to make sense, but I don’t, so they seem nonsensical at best and I’m sure my position seems uncaring if not evil from the other way.

by rwalle 4y ago

FollowingTheDao 4y ago

So your determination of the value of a life is only monetary? And if so, who determines when the cut off is? If the fetus is still attached to the mother after it leaves the birth canal, I still consider it her body, so is i still her choice?

candiodari 4y ago
The problem is that, as per usual, both extreme positions don't work. You cannot reasonably totally disallow abortions, and of course there needs to be some limit. So we agree where the cutoff is. As in, we discuss in congress and find some point we can agree on. Perhaps using European democracies as a guide, where things range from up to 12 weeks after conception to 6 months after conception. We could perhaps work "from first principles". Obviously abortion needs to happen after a woman knows she's pregnant. So, you should allow at least 1-2 female periods' worth (1 period = 4 weeks) + some time to schedule the procedure, which comes to that same minimum of about 12 weeks. An exception is medically necessary abortion, which is even legal (and a fact of life) after the baby leaves the birth canal (a baby without lungs will stay alive as long as the umbilical cord is intact, for example. When you cut it, and you have to cut it, baby dies. Not much can be done. And this is not the worst example by far. Though it's natural, so you might say "Approved by God", by republican logic). I must say this is one thing I don't understand about the religious position. Several abortion procedures are built into our genes (one relating to the immune system, one relating to the heart, one relating to the brain, and I doubt we've discovered all of them). Either those systems work to a minimum standard, or your own cells (or the mother's cells) will abort you. So there are very practical reasons that "God" does abortions. The theory is that these systems exist, because it vastly lowers the time it takes to produce another child, increasing the rate at which your DNA spreads. This also exists in animals (most famously male lions' post-natal abortions when they take over a troup).
- moistly 4y ago
  > of course there needs to be some limit Canada has proven that is not true. In Canada, it is entirely between the woman and her doctor, right up until birth. If she could find a doctor to do it (spoiler alert: she won’t) she could abort minutes before contractions begin. And this is the way it should be. Doctors and the hospitals behind them don’t perform late term abortions unless they are medically necessary. In Canada there are no laws, no legal limits, and there is no problem. Funny how that works, eh? It’s almost as if we can trust doctors and women.
BoGs83 4y ago
I think you are removing the act of raising a child which its success in today's world is purely monetary. If you cannot afford to feed yourself how are you going to afford the doctors, diapers, extra room, school, clothes, etc. etc. Strangers are not going to help raise the child, like back in tribe ages where there so many children that everyone in the tribe had a part. The social benefits from government when you have a child are abysmal even in the "good" states in America. When discussing value of life people usually pick their preferred side. Do homeless people have a value on life? America treats homeless as garbage. What about disabled people?
- FollowingTheDao 4y ago
  > f you cannot afford to feed yourself how are you going to afford the doctors, diapers, extra room, school, clothes, etc. etc. People do this all over the world. > Strangers are not going to help raise the child, like back in tribe ages where there so many children that everyone in the tribe had a part. and > The social benefits from government when you have a child are abysmal even in the "good" states in America. So why are we not addressing these things? But actually, that is what adoption is all about. True? Stranger raisin your baby? > When discussing value of life people usually pick their preferred side. I don't. I do not discuss their value monetarily at all. That is incomprehensible. By the way, I am homeless, and yes, I see both Democrats and Republicans treat me like garbage. They both do not care about life at any point.
  - moistly 4y ago
    Adoption is a colossal failure in America. Tens of thousands of children “age out” and will never, ever be adopted; tens of thousands are adopted for use as house slaves or sex slaves for the abusive “parents”; the entire system is filled with neglect and abuse.
    - FollowingTheDao 4y ago
      > Adoption is a colossal failure in America. Again, look at this. No one wants to elect people to fix these problems, we just keep on voting in these corporate capitalism politicians and then they tell you to just have an abortion because you cannot afford the high cost of everything and the low wages. I am not anti-abortion, I just want a society where they are not needed becasue money.
hellisothers 4y ago
The crux here is we don’t all agree that a life is at stake which makes it impossible to align on anything. If I look at it through a lens of a life at stake then some of these positions begin to make sense, but I don’t, so they seem nonsensical at best and I’m sure my position seems uncaring if not evil from the other way.