Doesn't society and the individuals involved, have the obligation to protect that Human Life?

And use another against their wishes, That's slavery.

---

BTW: Understanding that betreger's description is irrelevant to a moral, ethical and intelligent discussion of this issue.

Clyde, forcing someone to do something against their will is an ethical question.
But for arguments sake once society does that how should society compensate that woman for the unwanted expenses, medical, lost income and interrupted career which may have life long consequences? Then there is the question of who is to pay for the rearing of the unwanted child.

---

REALITY MAN said:

'Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot.....Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot Dot....

...last dot he can connect.

REAL MAN says: Dot was Born Today. Dot, Against ALL ODDs or With ALL ADVANTAGEs, Became DOT, First FEMALE PREZ EVER and BEST PREZ EVER, And SAVED dA WORLD. ...from....FAKE DOT CONNECTORs

DOT Connected.

Abort NO Yap

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

No, the question is: Does society have a right to tell a woman what to do with her body? If the answer is yes, then society has a right to tell a man what to do with his body. Slavery! But slavery was moral back 2000 years ago when the fairy was invented.

No. the question is: When does Human Life begin?

Wrong. Until it is established that society can tell a woman what to do with her body, when life begins is moot.

---

Until it is established that society can tell a woman what to do with her body, when life begins is moot.

Gary, Clyde apparently believes making a woman a slave is ethical during certain parts of their lives.

---

Yes Gary and Bet Rigger. I do thank both of you for exposing the reality of your beliefs.

Clyde, I can not speak for Gary but I find involuntary servitude, slavery to be immoral. so the question becomes is your immorality better or worse than mine? If you pass judgement I ask who made you God?
IMO the way out of that conundrum is to let the woman make the decision and allow her to deal with the consequences.

---

I'm a little at a loss as to why you expect anyone here to know exactly when life begins, Clyde. It's been a question debated for centuries. Aristotle was of the view that male life started 40 days after conception and female, 90 days. Viability of a foetus (when it can survive outside of the womb) is now possible at shorter gestation periods, but only thanks to technological developments.

Both my babies were born prematurely, my daughter particularly so. Without an incubator and specialist equipment, it is unlikely she would have survived. If she had not, or there was no life support around at the time to give her a chance of life, and I was religious, then I might well say that abortion up to 28 weeks fitted in with "God's plan". Doesn't mean I would be right, but I could convince myself I was. Where I struggle a little with pro-life arguments that propound life beginning at conception is the lack of follow-through to the right to a even a basic quality of life from the moment of birth onwards. It more often than not seems to be a "there you go, job done, wash our hands of what comes next" .

None of us can predict what comes next - but a pregnant woman has to spend more time than any pro-life supporter does, thinking about the future of a child she is carrying and herself. That leaves me agreeing with both Betreger and Gary's points.

Anniet, as a woman you are not typically allowed a seat at the table concerning women's health issues, much less birth control and abortion questions. Most of these decisions are made by middle age or older white men.

---

Anniet, as a woman you are not typically allowed a seat at the table concerning women's health issues, much less birth control and abortion questions. Most of these decisions are made by middle age or older white men.

:)

I do hope you'll all forgive me for butting in ;)

edit: I'm going to try to get some sleep now... so I'll leave you all to it. Night night everyone, it's been an interesting discussion :)

I do hope you'll all forgive me for butting in ;

)
IMO there is nothing to forgive but the little guy in the sky people won't, your gender precludes that.

---

Clyde, you are obviously incapable of setting a logical foundation for your beliefs, hence you can't come up with a logical argument for them that flows from point to point. Sounds like you still believe in a fairy in the sky.

Of course you could simply be intentionally disingenuous and know you are promoting circular logic. Say starting that abortion be banned, using that to arrive that enforced pregnancy must be permitted, so now you have the right to ban abortion because you can force pregnancy.

Try it the correct way, does society have the right to force a woman to bear a child? If you say no, abortion is legal.

---

Trump signing Anti-Abortion laws with his men with high ethical and moral standards.

I am a Pro Women's Right's Advocate. Including Government Funding for women who wish, or for medical or emotional reasons, need to terminate their pregnancy.

If that is the case, then you have no right to discuss this subject as you're not female.

anniet...

Thank you for your intelligent, insightful, and non personal attack post.

You're most welcome :)

"There are morally and ethically competing interests regarding this topic.
Women's Rights vs. Human Life.
Either position carries with it ethical and moral problems.".

anniet...

I am a Pro Women's Right's Advocate. Including Government Funding for women who wish, or for medical or emotional reasons, need to terminate their pregnancy.

But... I do acknowledge there are important ethical and moral issues from many on the 'other side'.

Of course there are, and as a human women ;) I would not dream of dictating to another woman, who is pro-life, that they must or should ever terminate a pregnancy. That to me, would be morally and ethically so wrong. The very idea leaves me appalled :(

Yet - if they were engaged in activities that would cause their unborn baby serious harm, or were trapped in an abusive relationship that could put the baby at risk after they are born - my respect for their views would cause me to struggle in a moral sense. I hope to never be in that situation, but if I were, I would like to think that I could and would give them the help and support they needed to break away from that without any need to compromise their view as to when their baby's life began, and for as long as they needed the help to do so. That is what I see missing from the other side of the argument. Perhaps I'm wrong, and that support is there from pro-lifers, I don't know.

But until there is consensus within the medical profession and other fields of science, we can only go with what they recommend. For me personally, were I to consider having an abortion, my concern would be that the baby-that-might-have-been :( that I felt unable to have, would suffer no pain, or conscious knowledge that it was "alive" at all. The only way we might ever know for sure at what point during cell division and/or cell differentiation that is - would be through permitting the kind of "experiments" just too awful to contemplate.

There will, I'm sure, never be agreement on the moral and ethical issues that termination elicits - but to opt for just one way, or the other - and dictate that as a one-size fits all, to me feels wrong.

anniet...

Pain and conscious knowledge, is also my concern. When does consciousness begin? We don't yet know.

Also agree that "one-size fits all, that is advocated by many on both sides, "feels wrong".

If I get some time I'll have a root around for some views on that question, Clyde :)

We're a confusing bunch of cells in so many ways. If it wasn't for those who raise us from infancy recalling anecdotes about our early years, or taking photographs for us to ask questions about once we develop some language skills to do so - as much as four years or more of our lives can be completely missing from our conscious memory. Yet we had consciousness throughout, and learned so much about what makes us comfortable, happy, contented and what doesn't.

I am in so many ways, much more long-winded when expressing my views. Much more so than others here, and I do have to admit to occasionally struggling a bit to identify the points you make amidst so many of your questions, Clyde, but I have enjoyed our chat so far, thank you :)

Clyde, this is not an attack.

---

When MEN are NOT LEGALLY Responsible for YOUR KID, YOUR BODY, due to YOUR PREGNANCY, then WE WILL have NO SAY in YOUR ABORTIONS.

Until Then, YOUNG, MID, and OLD Men, White or Otherwise, will HAVE OUR SAY about ABORTIONS.

Full Term Yappin'

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

Of course there are, and as a human women ;) I would not dream of dictating to another woman, who is pro-life, that they must or should ever terminate a pregnancy. That to me, would be morally and ethically so wrong. The very idea leaves me appalled :(

What I don't understand is why can't all the Pro-Lifers choose not to have abotions and all the Women's Rights Advocates choose whatever they deem for their own bodies? In fact, why can't everyone just choose what's best for their body?

Additionally, I don't understand why Jane Doe from Tinytown, USA getting an abortion is of any concern of every Pro-Lifer. They sure don't care about that child after it's born, and they sure don't want to have any social safety-net programs to help that unwanted child into adulthood. And I sure don't see all these Pro-Lifers adopting every unwanted child to make sure they all grow up to be responsible and contributing members of society.

I would absolutely love it if there were no such thing as an unwanted pregnancy, and that every child was conceived under the best of circumstances. Unfortunately (or fortunately for us ;) ), we're one of the few species (only?) that has sex for pleasure and not just procreation. As soon as humans find out how much fun sex is, they want more of it, and 'accidents' are bound to happen. I don't see a need to ruin a woman's life by mandating she can't have an abortion because she was irresonsible, or the guy was irresponsible, or the condom accidentally broke, by telling her she can't do what she chooses is best for her life. And obviously the rape scenario is right out. Women should have every right to terminate in that situation. Abstinence programs fly in the face of our very nature, i.e. to repeat any experience that feels good. Anyone that thinks abstinence can work has completely lost touch with reality.

Sorry to butt in. I generally don't se any reason to discuss much of anything in the Politics forums when everything comes down to partisanship and plugging one's fingers in one's ears and ignoring any attempt at civil conversation. All the same, I'm glad a woman, an intelligent one at that, spoke up and joined the conversation.

I think abstinence, while unrealistic in most cases, is probably the best answer, going forward.

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

I think abstinence, while unrealistic in most cases, is probably the best answer, going forward.

Abstinence just doesn't work. Just look at the rates in Texas where abstinence is vigorously supported by the Governor.

---