Go Back   Cosplay.com > Off-Topic Chat > General Off-Topic Forum

Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 377 votes, 5.00 average.
Unread 04-21-2012, 06:41 PM   #3976
SafetyMoose
Loading Custom Title...
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 76
On the whole abortion topic. As a guy I don't feel comfortable commenting on if it should be allowed or not. Obviously pregnancy is not something that effect me to the extend that it would effect a women. I do feel that since governments are made up of men, and normally older men, that they are a poor choice of people to make those sort of decisions. The issue comes when people debate the moral consequences of aborting a child. I am all for allowing women to choose what they do to their bodies, however, in many places, if you murder a pregnant women, you are charged with double homicide. Where do we draw the line between Abortion being legal and enforcing a law that brings justice to the loss of life of an unborn child from a Murderer?
SafetyMoose is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Unread 04-21-2012, 06:47 PM   #3977
Shana05
Annie Leonhardt Lover
 
Shana05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,000
I can't speak for all fetal homicide laws but the "Lacey Peterson" law here in the U.S. is messed up. The way it's written, it's a double homicide no matter what stage of pregnancy the victim was in. If she was only two weeks pregnant, she has a very small chance of knowing she was pregnant yet. So how is her killer supposed to know she was pregnant? How can the killer have the intent to kill something they didn't know existed?
__________________
Tumblr - Facebook Fan Page - Etsy Shop

Working on: Lolita!Annie Leonhardt (Attack on Titan) - Red Riding Hood!Alois Trancy (Black Butler) -Chinese!Sakura Kinomoto (Card Captor Sakura)
Shana05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-21-2012, 06:57 PM   #3978
SafetyMoose
Loading Custom Title...
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shana05 View Post
I can't speak for all fetal homicide laws but the "Lacey Peterson" law here in the U.S. is messed up. The way it's written, it's a double homicide no matter what stage of pregnancy the victim was in. If she was only two weeks pregnant, she has a very small chance of knowing she was pregnant yet. So how is her killer supposed to know she was pregnant? How can the killer have the intent to kill something they didn't know existed?
That is a good point, how do we differentiate murder from manslaughter in that situation? Its not something that I feel can ever be clearly defined because so many different groups have opinions on the matter. You could argue that there was no intention to kill the child in court because its existence was unknown but then again, if we allow people to get away with that does it suddenly justify abortion? There are so many ways this all loops back on itself its understandable why I belive we will never morally reach a conclusion on this topic.
SafetyMoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-21-2012, 11:38 PM   #3979
Adorima
Registered User
 
Adorima's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miyabi- View Post
Whenever this pro-life shit is brought up I always think of that quote from Ronald Reagan: "Funny how people that are for abortion are alive today."

Know what I find funny? How the people that often make the most judgements about or for other people aren't God.



This. All of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shana05 View Post
Actually abortions are very safe and carry much fewer risks than pregnancy. The fact you're using a pro-life website to back up your claim hurts you. The pro-life movement is well known to distort facts and all out lie. Also I believe a woman has a right to have an abortion for any reason. Making exceptions for certain situations doesn't work. In countries where women are supposed to be allowed to have abortions for rape and health reason often don't get permission.

Also you're not mentioning how I brought up the prayer seemed to be for the safety of abortion providers. That hits a personal note with me as I actually knew Dr. George Tiller. A man who had his clinic bombed and two murder attempts the second being successful.

Also "Post-Abortion Syndrome" doesn't exist. It's not an accepted syndrome by any medical association. Just because there's some organization dedicated to it, doesn't make it real. There are plenty of organizations dedicated to "curing" homosexuality despite being highly condemned by the American Psychological Association. Again, you're hitting a nerve with me as my mom had two abortions. She wasn't promiscuous, both of those pregnancies were with my father. She doesn't regret these abortions at all, she knows she made the right decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lithium Flower View Post
I live in the United States.


This is your opinion on the matter. This is your own feelings on how it would affect YOU. You do not have a right to impose that on another woman, Your feelings, your choices, your life. Not your feelings, your choices, others lives. I will tell you right now that it would be in both of our best interests that this conversation does not continue as I find it's already gone past my tolerance level.
You are all pro-choice; the choice to have autonomy over one's body. Then give the baby that choice as well.
__________________
Life: "Yay!...Meh...Yay!"

+*+*+

NDK 2012/13:
Yori Wakaba - Vampire Knight 25%
Wang Yao (China) - Axis Powers Hetalia
Adorima is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 01:30 AM   #3980
SafetyMoose
Loading Custom Title...
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adorima View Post
You are all pro-choice; the choice to have autonomy over one's body. Then give the baby that choice as well.
Falling back on an impossibility to support an argument is not very credible to say the least.
SafetyMoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 01:50 AM   #3981
Adorima
Registered User
 
Adorima's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by SafetyMoose View Post
Falling back on an impossibility to support an argument is not very credible to say the least.
Meaning? That it's not proven to be a baby? Or becuase it can't speak up for itself it's impossible to know? Whether or not the child is a child and whether or not the it is worthy of the same rights we enjoy is the crux of the matter. The rest of this debate doesn't matter if that doesn't matter.
__________________
Life: "Yay!...Meh...Yay!"

+*+*+

NDK 2012/13:
Yori Wakaba - Vampire Knight 25%
Wang Yao (China) - Axis Powers Hetalia

Last edited by Adorima : 04-22-2012 at 01:53 AM.
Adorima is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 02:08 AM   #3982
SafetyMoose
Loading Custom Title...
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adorima View Post
Meaning? That it's not proven to be a baby? Or becuase it can't speak up for itself it's impossible to know? Whether or not the child is a child and whether or not the it is worthy of the same rights we enjoy is the crux of the matter. The rest of this debate doesn't matter if that doesn't matter.
You can't fall back on saying that the child should have an opinion when it is not able to communicate. If anything, under the law a child is essentially the property of the parent.
SafetyMoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 08:57 AM   #3983
SeraphicSkitty
Registered User
 
SeraphicSkitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adorima View Post

In response to the prayer campaign of that planned parenthood, I was wondering if you guys knew that abortions by nature aren't safe and that 93% are done for social reasons; (unwanted, inconvenient), not medical necessity.
6% of abortions are done out of necessity or for health-related reasons. Also interesting to note that 1% of abortions are from babies concieved in rape and incest. Also, the first of it's kind done on women who concieved children in rape, Dr. Sandra Mahkorn's 1981 study, found 75 to 85 percent of rape victims chose life. I found this info at the Elliot Institute. Even though this is a prolife website, all the facts are from the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization which keeps meticulous stats on contraception and abortion world-wide.
You might want to check your facts, because the actual statistics from the Guttmacher Institute are wildly different than the ones you posted:

"The risk of abortion complications is minimal: Fewer than 0.3% of abortion patients experience a complication that requires hospitalization"
"In repeated studies since the early 1980s, leading experts have concluded that abortion does not pose a hazard to womenís mental health."

And who cares if abortion is done for "social" reasons? If a woman has an abortion, it's because she knows that it is necessary for herself and her existing children. No one should be forced to continue a pregnancy that they don't want or can't care for. From the Guttmacher Institute, here are the social reasons women cite for obtaining an abortion:

"The reasons women give for having an abortion underscore their understanding of the responsibilities of parenthood and family life. Three-fourths of women cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals; three-fourths say they cannot afford a child; three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner"

In the future, you should try researching multiple sources of information, preferably ones based on actual science and not religion. Here are the rest of the facts, so that you can read over them:
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
SeraphicSkitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 10:07 AM   #3984
Bisected8
panificium delicatum sum
 
Bisected8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 9,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by SafetyMoose View Post
A rehabilitative system would be just as expensive, if not more expensive then incarcerating the offenders. Although it may be the morally correct route to go, the tax payers should not have the burden of higher tax rates because you are imposing a system that may not even help criminals, and may just end up being a waste of money. I for one would not like my tax money spent on eventually allowing a potentially violent criminal back out in to the street just because he seems to have changed... Any sociopath can make it look like they have changed for the better in order to get what they want, in this case freedom.
...yes, because everyone who commits a crime is a sociopath who'll just feign being reformed...

My point was that either way when someone commits a crime, they're locked up.

If you decide "once a criminal always a criminal" then all you're going to do is lock them in a building with other criminals and garentee they'll be nothing but a better criminal; when they get out, they'll have poorer job prospects (because as far as employers are concerned, they're a criminal), less respect for the law (because it's decided that they're always going to be a criminal anyway) and no reason not to act like a criminal (because everyone else has decided they're a criminal and they'll treat them like one).

However, if the prison (which you're going to spend money keeping them locked up in anyway) aims to reform them, then when they're released (which will also happen anyway, unless you're proposing to make every crime carry an actual life sentence) then there's a much higher chance that they won't reoffend. Thus they'll spend their life as a tax paying citizen rather than having to have public funds spent to keep them locked up after commiting another crime.
__________________
Me on deviantArt.
Me on TV Tropes.
Me on twitter.

To do; Dark Link (70%) Link (20%)

Can't write, can't draw. Can code, a little.

Last edited by Bisected8 : 04-22-2012 at 10:17 AM.
Bisected8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 12:38 PM   #3985
SafetyMoose
Loading Custom Title...
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bisected8 View Post
...yes, because everyone who commits a crime is a sociopath who'll just feign being reformed...

My point was that either way when someone commits a crime, they're locked up.

If you decide "once a criminal always a criminal" then all you're going to do is lock them in a building with other criminals and garentee they'll be nothing but a better criminal; when they get out, they'll have poorer job prospects (because as far as employers are concerned, they're a criminal), less respect for the law (because it's decided that they're always going to be a criminal anyway) and no reason not to act like a criminal (because everyone else has decided they're a criminal and they'll treat them like one).

However, if the prison (which you're going to spend money keeping them locked up in anyway) aims to reform them, then when they're released (which will also happen anyway, unless you're proposing to make every crime carry an actual life sentence) then there's a much higher chance that they won't reoffend. Thus they'll spend their life as a tax paying citizen rather than having to have public funds spent to keep them locked up after commiting another crime.
Its that simple on paper, but trust me, I work with criminals and have spent a bunch of time working in Cells and I can tell you that even with the rehab programs we currently have (yes, they are lacking but they do exists) we still see the same faces coming in and out of booking. I agree with you, it would be a much better system if we at least tried, but the funding for police is not there in that respect, and trying to convince the majority of the population to care enough to pay for it through taxes is going to be very difficult. Another issue you bring up is that they can't get jobs after release. Well, even if they did get rehabilitated, the crime is still on their record and depending on those crimes, that person could have those records for a very long time. An employer is still going to ask for a record check, is going to see that they have done time and is not going to take the risk wit that person. In an ideal world, sure rehabilitation could solve all our problems, but in reality the risk of them re offending is just too high to justify giving them new opportunity. This may seem negative but I have spent time in that environment and this is based off my experiences.
SafetyMoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 03:16 PM   #3986
Shana05
Annie Leonhardt Lover
 
Shana05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adorima View Post
You are all pro-choice; the choice to have autonomy over one's body. Then give the baby that choice as well.
I do want babies to have choice over their bodies. That's why I'm against infant circumcision as babies can't make a decision about that. I believe one should leave them intact until they're old enough to make the decision for themselves.

To be clear this is a baby:


This is not:


The above is a picture of an abortion at 8 weeks, around the time most abortions are performed. This is from a medical journal so it's legit unlike the photos you get from pro-life groups which are often actually stillbirths, miscarriages or the incredibly rare late-term abortion which is only legal in cases of health and even then it can be hard to obtain one. An embryo/fetus is unable to make a choice as it doesn't have the mental capacity, so why should I give it one?

In a somewhat related note, I want to share this Tumblr post from a woman who investigated child abuse and neglect.
__________________
Tumblr - Facebook Fan Page - Etsy Shop

Working on: Lolita!Annie Leonhardt (Attack on Titan) - Red Riding Hood!Alois Trancy (Black Butler) -Chinese!Sakura Kinomoto (Card Captor Sakura)

Last edited by Shana05 : 04-22-2012 at 03:19 PM.
Shana05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 03:30 PM   #3987
SafetyMoose
Loading Custom Title...
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shana05 View Post
I do want babies to have choice over their bodies. That's why I'm against infant circumcision as babies can't make a decision about that. I believe one should leave them intact until they're old enough to make the decision for themselves.

An embryo/fetus is unable to make a choice as it doesn't have the mental capacity, so why should I give it one?
Circumcision has also been an interesting debate as of late due to the argument that it can prevent certain health risks, although the other side does say that the risk of related health issues is very low. As a parent however, is it not your responsibility to make such decisions on behalf of the child in the interest of its own health? Parents are responsible for a large majority of a childs development and I dont think that its really necessary to start thinking that young children should have the right to make decisions on concepts that relate to their own health when they do not even understand the issue in the first place.
SafetyMoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 08:14 PM   #3988
Marshall Lee
Vampire King
 
Marshall Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 37
Personally I'd just like to know why people can't mind their own damn business?
It's no one elses business if someone decides to get an abortion or not. As stated above I'm pretty sure the person getting one understands their circumstances a hell of a lot better than someone doing the judging.

Last edited by Marshall Lee : 04-22-2012 at 08:16 PM.
Marshall Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 09:32 PM   #3989
SeraphicSkitty
Registered User
 
SeraphicSkitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by SafetyMoose View Post
Circumcision has also been an interesting debate as of late due to the argument that it can prevent certain health risks, although the other side does say that the risk of related health issues is very low. As a parent however, is it not your responsibility to make such decisions on behalf of the child in the interest of its own health? Parents are responsible for a large majority of a childs development and I dont think that its really necessary to start thinking that young children should have the right to make decisions on concepts that relate to their own health when they do not even understand the issue in the first place.
You make a really good point with the health perspective. If kids had to consent to medical procedures, most would never get vaccinated.
Circumcision is such a murky issue, given all the conflicting research on it. The only constants are that it protects against HIV and that is some men it results in reduced sensation. If I were to have a son, I really don't know what I would choose for him.
SeraphicSkitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-22-2012, 10:36 PM   #3990
Lithium Flower
Handphones
 
Lithium Flower's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 15,236
There is no medical reason for a child to ever be circumcised, they do not have a higher danger of contracting STDS of any kind and the penis is not 'dirtier'. That is all just old rumors and lies. Truly there is absolutely no reason for it at all, it's an archaic medical practice that's on par with blood letting and using cocaine as product marketed to calm infants. It really has no place in our society and it still shocks me to this day that it's considered an acceptable practice. It's something I'd expect from the same radicals who cut the clitoris off young girls.

If you really have the stomach for it, here you go.
__________________
Iíll tell you what people look like, really: they look like flames. Or like the stars, on a clear night in the wilderness.
LiveStream
Emmers Drawberry: Professional Superhero
◆○◆○◆○◆○◆○
Tumblr silliness.

◆○◆○◆○◆○◆○
Deviantart of more super silliness

Lithium Flower is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:31 AM.


Copyright 2002-2013 Cosplay.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
All comments and posts in our forums are the opinion of the respective poster.