Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    44
    Post Thanks / Like

    A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Whenever the topic of abortion comes up I always hear someone try and take a "moderate" or "balanced" view of the situation and say "Rape should only be allowed in cases of rape".

    Now, either you are dealing with a living being with a soul, and it would be immoral to kill it, in which case you are justifying murder...

    Or you are dealing with an unconcious lump of cells that won't be able to care if they are discarded. So why "only" in cases of rape if it would inconvienance the woman? Why force this onto the would-be mother?
    "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetant" -Isaac Asimov

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,405
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Nonsense, the idea of a moderate view can mean many different positions. It simply implies you are somewhere between the absolutes of pro and anti abortion positions.

    I advocate prohibiting abortions at the stage of development where a fetus can theoretically survive outside of the womb based on the principle that a person who cannot exist without another person's body is not yet an independent person in the eyes of the law because there is no way for the state to protect it apart from enslaving its mother.

    I find that to be a very moderate position in so much as neither side of the debate seems willing to accept it. But I also feel it is completely rational.

  3. #3
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    X
    Posts
    1,042
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I advocate prohibiting abortions at the stage of development where a fetus can theoretically survive outside of the womb based on the principle that a person who cannot exist without another person's body is not yet an independent person in the eyes of the law because there is no way for the state to protect it apart from enslaving its mother.
    With the advancement of technology, would you have a cut off point in regards to "able to survive outside the womb"?

    Or would this be "without extreme medical assistance" type of situation?

    Say, for example, we would be able to artificially incubate a 12 week old fetus; would your abortion cut off then be 12 weeks? What if it was 11, 10, 9, etc? (While this may not be possible now lets think of this as a hypothetical)

    Or would your cutoff be able to survive without medical assistance?

    Just curious.

  4. #4
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,636
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by kuijias View Post
    Now, either you are dealing with a living being with a soul, and it would be immoral to kill it, in which case you are justifying murder...

    Or you are dealing with an unconcious lump of cells that won't be able to care if they are discarded. So why "only" in cases of rape if it would inconvienance the woman? Why force this onto the would-be mother?
    What about the viewpoint that as the fetus develops it should garner more protection.

    After all, our current laws are more restrictive on late-term abortion than early abortion and there's no doubt that there is a difference between the two so why not treat them differently?

  5. #5
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,405
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by thegreenape View Post
    With the advancement of technology, would you have a cut off point in regards to "able to survive outside the womb"?

    Just curious.
    Yes, it would depend on available technology. So if we can raise babies from a jar etc... well then instead of abortion they could give up the child to said jar.

    I also have some sympathy with the idea of quickening, basically when the nervous system comes on line and starts operating autonomously.

    At the moment the finish line for viability is a bit later than quickening but I could see that reversing.

    I've some question about what reasonable chance of survival is. Anything better than 20% perhaps? Not sure. I recall looking up the earliest known survivor and that is a pretty decent cut off point as well.

  6. #6
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,716
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Nonsense, the idea of a moderate view can mean many different positions. It simply implies you are somewhere between the absolutes of pro and anti abortion positions.

    I advocate prohibiting abortions at the stage of development where a fetus can theoretically survive outside of the womb based on the principle that a person who cannot exist without another person's body is not yet an independent person in the eyes of the law because there is no way for the state to protect it apart from enslaving its mother.

    I find that to be a very moderate position in so much as neither side of the debate seems willing to accept it. But I also feel it is completely rational.
    I see that position as completely arbitrary and I can't see any rational support for it. In fact, one could mount an argument that it's those who can't survive independently that need more protection than those who can.
    "I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world" - Richard Dawkins

    "If you could rationalize with Religious people there would be no more Religious people" -Gregory House

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,405
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by kuijias View Post
    Whenever the topic of abortion comes up I always hear someone try and take a "moderate" or "balanced" view of the situation and say "Rape should only be allowed in cases of rape".

    Now, either you are dealing with a living being with a soul, and it would be immoral to kill it, in which case you are justifying murder...

    Or you are dealing with an unconcious lump of cells that won't be able to care if they are discarded. So why "only" in cases of rape if it would inconvienance the woman? Why force this onto the would-be mother?
    Your position implies you know the basis for the person's views. You are offering their position, but are not supporting their reasoning. It is entirely possible someone does not view abortion as murder. Rather, they view it is an unnecessary form of surgery which they find unethical. This hypothetical reasoning discredits your argument by counterexample.

    The fact is that abortion can be a complex issue and different people may have different reasons for being for or against it. Likewise, someone who is pro abortion choice may believe abortion is, indeed, murder. Yet, they may also believe in eugenics making such losses in life acceptable. This view is one that was held by many of the early advocates for abortion such as Margaret Sanger.

    As such, the only reasonable conclusion here is that you find certain stances to abortion irrational because you
    a. don't know the rationale behind them
    b. don't understand the rationale behind them.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  8. #8
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    1,961
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by kuijias View Post
    Whenever the topic of abortion comes up I always hear someone try and take a "moderate" or "balanced" view of the situation and say "Rape should only be allowed in cases of rape".

    Now, either you are dealing with a living being with a soul, and it would be immoral to kill it, in which case you are justifying murder...

    Or you are dealing with an unconcious lump of cells that won't be able to care if they are discarded. So why "only" in cases of rape if it would inconvienance the woman? Why force this onto the would-be mother?
    You are assuming that an act is either immoral or moral, which, I suppose, makes some sense from the standpoint of virtue ethics.

    From a consequentialist standpoint, however, a normally immoral act can be justified under certain conditions. Murder, for instance is wrong, but if I kill someone in the process of protecting myself, it is justifiable. Likewise, a person could argue that murdering a fetus, while normally immoral, is justifiable if a greater good comes out of it.

    It is therefore completely rational to take the middle ground in the abortion debate.

  9. #9
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by czahar View Post
    You are assuming that an act is either immoral or moral, which, I suppose, makes some sense from the standpoint of virtue ethics.

    From a consequentialist standpoint, however, a normally immoral act can be justified under certain conditions. Murder, for instance is wrong, but if I kill someone in the process of protecting myself, it is justifiable. Likewise, a person could argue that murdering a fetus, while normally immoral, is justifiable if a greater good comes out of it.
    A virtue ethicist who thought that doing whatever brings the greatest good is itself good would take a similar position, I think.

    It is therefore completely rational to take the middle ground in the abortion debate.
    Well, that depends on the actual reasoning behind the position.

    What would you consider a "middle ground" on abortion? Which of the following positions, if any, occupy this "middle ground":

    1. Abortion is wrong, except if the mother was raped.
    2. Abortion is always wrong.
    3. Abortion is the woman's right.
    4. If aborting the pregnancy would bring more good into the world, then the abortion is morally justified. If aborting the pregnancy would bring more harm/pain into the world, then the abortion is not morally justified. Aborting Hitler, yes; aborting Norman Borlaug, no.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  10. #10
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    1,961
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    Well, that depends on the actual reasoning behind the position.

    What would you consider a "middle ground" on abortion? Which of the following positions, if any, occupy this "middle ground":
    The way I am understanding it to be defined in this debate is supporting abortion in some instances and being against it in others.

  11. #11
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Underneath the mountains
    Posts
    313
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by kuijias View Post
    Or you are dealing with an unconcious lump of cells that won't be able to care if they are discarded. So why "only" in cases of rape if it would inconvienance the woman? Why force this onto the would-be mother?
    Kuijias, this assumes that those in the moderate view sees it in such an either/or form.

    As a person who holds a moderate view I certainly don't. Here's my reasoning:

    I do view life, on a religious basis, as sacred. Any form of killing of life should be done with care. Because of my faith and personal view, I view human life as especially sacred. But as is often shown in abortion debates, There's no set standard as to when a fetus is considered to be entirely a human being (human in DNA does not equal person). Almost everybody can agree that when it can live outside of the womb it should probably be considered a human. Late-term abortions are more than sketchy and I don't take a very moderate view on them. The baby should already be dead in the womb or there's some extreme medical condition where the mother is about to die and the baby isn't viable outside of the womb.
    But before then I don't see the fetus as necessarily a living soul or necessarily an unconcious lump of cells (except, of course when it is an unconcious lump of cells). It's life and it's potential human life. It should be taken very seriously and with the deepest respect given to that potential. Religiously it means that I don't have sex outside of marriage (that's right people I'm 21 and still a virgin...and probably will be till my mid-20's the rate i'm going), that whenever I do I treat sex as a gift from God to share with my husband, and that I treat whatever pregnancies I have with deep regard. This doesn't mean though, that abortion is completely ever off the table. Just like killing a very viable, living adult human isn't. It just shouldn't be done often, but a very rare circumstance.
    For me the question isn't whether the pregnancy is a real baby or a lump of cells. It's a question of how one is regarding the potential of life. Rape, incest, the life of the mother, or severe birth defects that won't allow the baby to live past birth are acceptable reasons to have an abortion. But even then, it is to be done with extreme care in the decision process. It's not a one size fits all type of a choice.

    So there you have it, a moderate view on abortion can be completely rational. The problem with the beginning post is that you assume that the moderate views perspective on life must be similar to that of usual perspectives given of the pro-lif/choice camps. It's not. Within my perspective, the moderate view honestly seems more rational than taking the extreme of either camp.


    With luv,
    BD
    We do not see things as they are, we see things as we are.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    24
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    [QUOTE=kuijias;422403]"Rape should only be allowed in cases of rape".
    [QUOTE]

    What? Is that a typo? Are you saying that if somebody rapes you, you are allowed to rape them back?

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    44
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    [QUOTE=Ty Boyd;422980][QUOTE=kuijias;422403]"Rape should only be allowed in cases of rape".

    What? Is that a typo? Are you saying that if somebody rapes you, you are allowed to rape them back?
    Whoops, yea, I meant people say "abortion should only be okay in cases of rape."
    "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetant" -Isaac Asimov

  14. #14
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,636
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    I think it's perfectly rational to have an "in-between" between pre-conception and birth.

    When a baby is born, there is pretty much unanimous agreement that that being deserves the right to life. So let's call that 100%.

    And before conception, there is also unanimous agreement that the egg and sperm do not deserve the right to life. So let's call that 0%

    And then between the 0% and 100% is a nine-month period where the fetus grows. And of course between 0 and 100 are the numbers 1 through 99. So what's wrong with picking one of those in-between numbers and likewise increasing the number as the growth continues?

  15. #15
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,405
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by mican333 View Post
    And then between the 0% and 100% is a nine-month period where the fetus grows. And of course between 0 and 100 are the numbers 1 through 99. So what's wrong with picking one of those in-between numbers and likewise increasing the number as the growth continues?
    The notion is that you are making an arbitrary distinction rather than basing your decision on a reasoned principle.

    The rape clause of abortion I think mostly stems from the notion that abortion is an issue of responsibility. If you get pregnant it is your fault and you must abide by the consequences. If you are raped it is not your fault and it nulls you of moral responsibility to carry the child.

  16. #16
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East Lansing, MI
    Posts
    10,636
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    The notion is that you are making an arbitrary distinction rather than basing your decision on a reasoned principle.
    But it is reasoned. If A is 0% illegal and B is 100% illegal and there is a linear path between A and B, then you can basically graph how "illegal" something is as it goes from A to B.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    The rape clause of abortion I think mostly stems from the notion that abortion is an issue of responsibility. If you get pregnant it is your fault and you must abide by the consequences. If you are raped it is not your fault and it nulls you of moral responsibility to carry the child.
    Well, I would add the "rape" factor to the formula above. You could say "rape" adds a -20% and therefore what would be 99% wrong is not 79%.


    I know the straight line graph thing is a little too simplistic but the fact is people view abortion as in-between "perfectly alright" and "flat-out murder" and given that it really is in-between, an in-between viewpoint is rational.

  17. #17
    Sonuvabetch
    Guest

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    Ok I didn't read everyone else's opinions, but here's mine.
    Abortion is just plain wrong and immoral. Even though the person is not completely made, doesn't make them not a person! I'm sure that they would of wanted a chance at life, I mean who wouldn't?

    Off topic, but why do people commit suicide? When the "process" was done it was probabaly a 1:1,000,000 chance that YOU were chosen to be made and brought to Earth. And so why do you kill yourself? You're alive, be greatful for that! It could of been the other sperm, but it was you, so just live life!

    Ok back to topic, ok so you wanna do abortion, why? You're creating a human being and you just want to throw them away?? That's really messed up I think. But if you really can't have a kid, such as a High School student (there are plenty of those in my school) then just put the baby up for adoption or something. I think at a hospital you can put your baby up for adoption. So just let the kid live, even if it's not with you.

  18. #18
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    93
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: A moderate view on abortion is completely irrational.

    You're creating a human being and you just want to throw them away?? That's really messed up I think.
    I believe abortion should be allowed for a couple of reasons:

    a. creates a planned family, where every child is born into a family that loves them and planned for them.
    b. keeps the population under control, more people means more pollution, less resources, less land available.
    c. Reduces the number of mentally and physically handi-cap that can be detected inside the womb. I have nothing against these people (they have no control over their situation), but the truth is they generally require assistance all their lives adding financial strain on the family and society as a whole. (I personally would rather be aborted than live a life like this).


    But if you really can't have a kid, such as a High School student (there are plenty of those in my school) then just put the baby up for adoption or something.
    Sure they could be put up for adoption, live a life knowing they were adopted and never know their mother and father (this is a big deal for those that dont know them). Another reason, abortion is the best for these high school students is:
    a. so they can still be a part of the working class with a good education (children make this task much harder)
    b. so their parents wont find out and possibly disown them. (I know of people that have been kicked out of the house because they got pregnant).

    but why do people commit suicide? When the "process" was done it was probabaly a 1:1,000,000 chance that YOU were chosen to be made and brought to Earth. And so why do you kill yourself?
    This is very narrow minded thinking. People live all sorts of different lives, some do have a very hard life where they feel death is the only means of escape. Others suffer from extreme depression and feel compelled to "off themselves". Then there are those who are terminal, suffering from horrible pain until they die. Suicide is the humane choice for them.

    I had a conservative friend tell me that a good substitute for euthanasia is suicide. They are the same thing.

    The point is, everyone has a different life to live, telling everyone to fit inside your little box no matter what their situation is selfish.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Pro-choice is not inherently anti-Christian
    By mican333 in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: January 30th, 2009, 08:30 AM
  2. Abortion (more to the point)
    By Iluvatar in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: January 22nd, 2006, 01:49 PM
  3. Gays and Pro-Lifers Unite on Abortion
    By ophelia in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: March 17th, 2005, 05:44 AM
  4. Abortion
    By Jordan in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: May 30th, 2004, 05:07 PM
  5. Abortion rights wrong -- secular reasons
    By Spartacus in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: March 28th, 2004, 11:20 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •