Pro Life or Pro Choice?

Nobody has made this debate yet (unless I'm blind), and it's fairly talked about nowadays so I'd like to know what Meep thinks about it.

 

It doesn't matter how we feel, its between the women and possibly whoever there significant other is, but ultimately the women. oh, and what 4726minecraft said about goverment and stuff, because hes smart and stuff.

 

put it this way;

the government spending roughly $100-$1k on an abortion for a mother will save it $2376 in the future

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=how much does the government spend per citizen


[disclaimer] i'm pro-choice

 

Pro-life, although for pro-choice reasons lol.

 

pro-choice; no uterus no opinion

 

What does that even mean

 

I'm pro- why-cant-we-leave-people-alone-and-let-us-go-on-with-our--own-lives-and-stay-out-of-other's-business

 

Not possibly - We have an equal say over our children, I believe.

Again, dismissal of the men's rights in these matters.

One could argue that the government paying for an abortion vs government paying for people who cannot afford children, the latter could cost society more.

 

Pro-choice, but I'd much rather see the government put effort into preventing pregnancy in the first place.


I do believe once the fetus can be considered alive at a certain point in pregnancy (when it actually develops the proper brainwaves), but I completely understand why people would think it's immoral to cut the pregnancy short.

To add on, some women just don't possess the maternal instinct needed for being a mother. There are women who force themselves to go through with the pregnancy and feel nothing but regret and apathy for their baby. The baby then goes on to either be put up for adoption (no guarantee of being adopted) or lives a crappy life. Really, the choice is probably one of the hardest a woman would ever be faced with in her life.

 

Lol, guess where half the DNA for that child comes from? The man who might want his kid to survive.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 10, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 10, 2016 ---

I believe in choice, and I feel like destroying a human (a fetus is a human, and if you disagree, I'd be happy to tell you why I believe this) life without it's consent is wrong. I mean, 9 months of hardship (really less, as it takes some time for the effects of the baby to become apparent) at the minimum for an entire human lifetime... I think it's more fair to give the kid a chance, instead of saving the mother nine months.

 

It's physically impossible to get consent from a fetus. Plus, some expecting mothers are faced with the options of abortion or a potential miscarriage, which can kill both the mother and the fetus in the worst case.

Sometimes, I think it's worth it to abort the thing before it becomes a threat to the mother. In my eyes, an already existing human is more important and has more priority than the fetus of a human.

 

you contributed some juice - those with a uterus have to go through so very much more to produce something for you. it's not their responsibility to create a child for you. you didn't lose anything in the exchange.

wrong & I don't care for your reason, I've heard ten thousand beliefs like this but they all boil down to possibility of human > living current human.

"give a kid a chance" it's not a kid until briefly before it's born. the "9 months of hardship" isn't it, there's a life of emotional effects as well. those with a uterus don't owe you anything, they don't own that bundle of cells anything either. that bundle of cells doesn't have more rights than the person who is expected to house it for 9 months within them.

 

I (would have) lost the opportunity to have a child.

No. This is not what you're saying. You're saying that you'd cut someone's life short by 75 years in order to make yours easier for, like I said, 9 months at the least, and 18 years if you actually choose to raise the child.

Wrong, and I don't care about your reason. Human life > little hardship.

 

I show up into this, and everybody probably assumes I'm going to start ranting off Bible verses just because of my own beliefs. I cannot from personal experience (if I did . . . there's a problem). Personally, I feel that it really is dependent on the situation. Should it be illegal? Absolutely not; this, in some cases, does save lives of others.

Let me also point out something; the mother could simply avoid pregnancy altogether. As put forth by. @4726minecrafter

In reality, it is the mother's choices that prevent or generate pregnancy, so is it the (future) child's fault that the mother doesn't want/ shouldn't have children?

Therefore, I am in the middle on this issue.

 

What changes? The DNA? I don't think so, and as it's DNA that determines a species, I'd say anything with our DNA is Human.

There's also this wonderful thing called adoption.

Every living thing is a "bundle" of one or more cells.
Could you use this to justify leaving someone for dead?
You know, there are laws that make it so that if you have the capability to help someone, and they die as a direct cause of you not helping them, you're liable.

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 10, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 10, 2016 ---

And the father's*

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 10, 2016 ---

Yes, but this doesn't make up a majority of the cases.

 

That is only my reasoning to keep it legal, not that it is morally right every time.

 

Pro-choice.
If a woman is in danger, she should be able to abort the fetus.
Likewise, if the woman was a victim of rape, she should be able to as well.
She did not want the child in the first place, it was not her decision.
If she is in danger, if the child will end up killing her, then she should be able to abort it.

Planned parenthood actually does give out free condoms, so...

 

boo-fricking-hoo.

That's not always feasible, accidents happen. Or situations change. If there's a way out then let them use it.

yeah, go adopt your own kid rather than making someone have one for you.

this entire "pro-life vs pro-choice" is essentially "i value fetuses more than human beings" vs "those with uteruses should have bodily integrity".

 

No, it really isn't, and your biggest problem is that you think every issue is black and white, there are no shades of grey, and that you are always right. And then you say things like this:

What Pro life "boils down to", if that is even applicable in this case, is that every human has a right to live, and human life begins at the moment of conception, and what pro choice "boils down to" is that human woman should be able to decide whether or not they wish to carry a fetus to term. As such, it is a very complicated issue with no simple answer, and I'd appreciate it if you would actually think about it in it's 'true' sense, instead of saying "Well, I'm obviously right, so why should I listen to you?"

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 10, 2016, Original Post Date: Jun 10, 2016 ---

So you'd take it upon yourself to end what will likely be a a 75 year life?