-to not pay their taxes or to take sex seriously. And most people think they can solve this by taking responsibility for the actions of others. Obama thinks he can solve this by allowing abortion and gay marriage, when it only increases the problem. When will people ever get this?
I mean no offense to anyone and please correct me if I am offensive to anyone.
But I think pro-abortionists, pro gay-marriage people and a majority of democrats aren't seeing the big picture. They wonder why our economy is bad but they're not opening up their eyes. What they don't see is that these things are making people lazier, and they're not making people take responsibility for their actions. When people believe these things are okay (supported by Obama) then people have an excuse-
Yes but freakanomics also points to several other factors in the decrease of crime such as an increase in the number of police, changes in drug markets, and an increased reliance on prisons
6. "Over 70,000 women die every year from unsafe abortion attempts." According to the Center for Disease Control, only 39 maternal deaths occured in the U.S. due to illegal abortions in 1972 (the year before Roe v Wade)
7. "Women will continue to have abortions even if it is illegal." People participate in violent gangs at great risk to themselves. That doesn't mean we make it legal.
6. where did I say those statistics are from the United States? Can you please give a reference to your 39 deaths? What time period did it cover? A day, a month, a year?
7. by your same argument, nothing should be illegal because merely living life represents a great risk (seeing that it always ends in death). :P
@imrational 6. I was just giving the U.S. statistics so everyone understood what the result would be if Roe v Wade was overturned. And I did reference when I said the CDC reported it the YEAR before Roe v Wade.
7. Haha true, but your argument that "people will do it anyways" doesn't hold up either considering that people still break just about every law in the world but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have these laws. And I'm glad we could discuss without going crazy, which people do so often.
5. "At one time, women had a hard time finding a doctor, or anyone else, to have an abortion." In 1960, a decade before Roe v Wade, Dr. Mary Calderon (the pro-legal abortion medical director of Planned Parenthood) said, "90% of illegal abortions are being done by physicians."
3. "[Most women obtaining abortion] already have children." 50% of women obtaining abortions are under 25 so it's unlikely that most of them "already have children." 50% of women obtaingin abortions are teenagers and this percent isn't exactly negligable.
4. "Roe v Wade coincides with a massive drop in the crime rate." Massive flaws have been found in Levitt and Dubner's theory and it in no way proves that Roe v Wade caused this drop.
4. I've read about the flaws in L&D's theory. If you've followed it, then you should have noted that their theory holds up even with the corrected data.
1. "Most abortions are in developing countries." The U.S. is only second to Russia in number of abortions.
2. "Where women don't have access to proper sex education or contraception." In America, only 8% of women getting an abortion had never used a contraceptive. 54% report using a contraceptive during the month they conceived.
science????????????? What about morals and giving an unborn child a chance at life. I wonder what you would think if your mother told you "you know I was going to have an abortion when I found out I was pregnant with you. But it was too late." How about giving a baby up for adoption to those who can't have children or living with the idea that "hmmmmm if i have unprotected sex I just might get pregnant and will have to deal with it and not run to the easiest and most cruel way out."
Unfortunately, a great number of people look down on people giving children up for adoption, so there is a social stigma that way too, not to mention the hardships and expenses of carrying a baby to term.
The best solution is to make sex education and birth control readily available to those having sex. Once again, however, we have people who are against things like that.
I'm sure the NAZIS, tried to justify their actions 2.....
I have 7 sons,the last 2 through IVF................Our last try for girls,we gave our 8 left over frozen embryos to a nice couple...There were many that wanted to adopt the 8 little frozen ones ...
Oh ,you never brought up adoption....
At the end of the day,one person ,one vote ,and Christians are having bigger families by far.......Fast forward 20 years,where do you think we are headed...
"At the end of the day,one person ,one vote ,and Christians are having bigger families by far.......Fast forward 20 years,where do you think we are headed..."
Overpopulation with lots of people not understanding science?
Roe v Wade precipitated a drop in crime 20 years later? Unless of course that crime rate doesn't include the murders of millions unborn babies. Despite your efforts to seem objective here, your bias shines through.
if a baby is unborn, it is not a baby, it is a fetus. At the stage of development that legal abortions occur, we are not even talking fetuses, we are talking about embryos. An embryo is a collection of cells with the POTENTIAL of becoming a baby.
You are very reticent to respond to the other scenario I painted. You are smart. Most people would say, "Sure, it would probably be a good thing for that insane woman with the drunk husband to have an abortion, since obviously the kid won't amount to anything." To which I, of course, respond, "Congratulations, you just killed Charlie Chaplin." Thank goodness you can see the foolishness of trying to project things into the future.
Your projection into the future cannot be proven. Also, poverty or difficult circumstances do not necessarily indicate the need for an abortion. Here is one for you...a woman is pregnant. She is married but her husband is an alcoholic who is probably on his way to drinking himself to death. She already has another child and feels overwhelmed by the need to now basically take care of the entire family -- she is on the brink of insanity. Should she have an abortion? Please answer.
My projection is testable however. We can look at communities where abortion is made more difficult/illegal and see if those children later on go to commit more crimes than other age brackets.
No where did I say that any circumstances necessitate a need for abortion other than strictly medical ones (like child is brain dead or puts the mother at risk).
Should the woman in your example have an abortion? That's not my decision because it is not my body. It is the woman's decision.
@imrational, it is not her body either (I think you are forgetting the life in the womb). Also, she is on the brink of insanity, perhaps ready for a mental institution, so she probably is not able to make a good decision. Should the state step in and demand she get an abortion? Or should people encourage her to have an abortion?
I am a Libertarian and feel the State shouldn't be intruding into people's lives like that. As to her being close to insane... you're making it sound like she'd be an unfit mother. As to people advising her to have an abortion, that's between her and her friends/family and is not for me to say.
I have a question for you. If a pregnant woman drinks a cup of coffee or smokes a cigarette, does that mean she should be arrested for attempted murder?
@imrational, well, I sincerely applaud you for being a Libertarian. I suppose we have that in common. I am an Independent who is strongly leaning towards being a Libertarian, but I would be more like Ron Paul (pro-life Libertarian).
The woman in this situation has not family or friends -- she has not family and no time for friends. And yes, she is barely able to keep herself together. Should she have an abortion.
What on earth does coffee or cigarettes have to do with murder?
@imrational, I did watch the video. Do you know the definition of murder? It is the deliberate, unjust taking of an innocent human life. Obviously one cigarette or one cup of coffee (that is what you said, by the way, "drinks a cup of coffee or smokes a cigarette" is probably not going to cause a miscarriage, and even if it does, it is hard to imagine that someone would smoke a cigarette in order to deliberately miscarry. So it cannot be murder.
Numerous women have shoved coathangers up into themselves to cause abortions (documented fact). If drinking a lot of coffee and smoking a lot of cigarettes might get the same result, then yes... some women would do that.
Regardless, there is a chance that such behaviors puts the potential life of the fetus at risk. Should women be forced to avoid any action that puts the fetus at risk? According to your logic that it is not just their body, your answer should be "yes".
@chrisman737 ""Murder is when a man of sound memory and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any county of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's peace, with malice aforthought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wo, or hurt etc. die of the wound or hurt etc."
I highly recommend reading the chapter on Freakonomics that deals with the issue, as well as the rebuttals and the further responses from the authors. They address other issues as possible causes for the reduction in crime.
I love the idea of using abortion to keep the crime rate down. A sort of pre-emptive death penalty for those presently innocent of any crime but who may be more likely than others to commit one in the future (and I think we all know who they are). Fantastic. All you need now is the little moustache and the shirt with the peculiar cross motif. Give me a shout when you're ready and I'll bring the Zyklon B.
I have written extensively on abortion and am unwilling to go into all of it in 500 words or less. Anways looked at the MSNBC chart (I am banned by that site by the way) it looks like you are mainly talking about China and Russia. (The chart obscures this for political reasons) Both countries are in deep hurt for the abortion policies they chose and are trying to reverse it without success. I got an interesting stat on wiki that shows 98% of women chose late term abortion out of convenience.
Yeah looks like 350 women die from legal abortions a year in america. So what? Ok you talk about abortions outside america. What influence can you have with that. Ok with abortion in america and crime rate. You are quoting some crap from the 70's for god sake. Maybe it was the crappy govt housing they lived in maybe it was the rats that were prevalent back then. Anyways this post is snuff and you should reexamine the issue.
I find it very hard to suggest that wanted unborn children deserve protection while unwanted unborn children don't. There doesn't seem to be a difference between the unborn children, the only difference lay with the parents. I consider the idea that children should be punished for the inequity of their parents ironically a biblical concept, and therefor appropriately ludicrous.
The crime rate coincides with the incidence of single-mothers, the real matter: the decline of the nuclear family.
I do think parents not spending time with their children, i.e. kids raised by day-care/gangs are a societal problem along the lines of "Lord of the Flies", but I think it is unfair to blame the decline of the nuclear family. There have been plenty of alternative family structures that work. Personally, I think the government should get out of the marriage biz and let people define "family" as they see fit.
I'm sorry but gang violence was not a problem among the black community over 50 years ago, and teenage pregnancy, and the number of single mothers was overwhelmingly lower. The decay of the nuclear family is what led to a breakdown in their communities. If you ask Thomas Sowell, or Clarence Thomas, their communities were safe growing up, but now aren't.
The fact that you think killing unborn children is the best solution to this problem shows, in part, this social degeneracy.
Your entire video was about the merits of abortion and how it lowers crime, supposing that if it were not illegal, crime would be more rampant. You offered no alternative, you seemed comfortable if not satisfied with it, and if I somehow inferred something from that that is unfair then I apologize.
watch the video again. The "entire" video was not about the merits of abortion. I pointed out that abortions happen more in countries without access to contraception and that women still attempt abortions even when illegal, at grave risks to themselves. So yes, you did infer things that were unfair.
@Re5Publica Abortion does need to be reformed,but not banned.Woman do need easy access to birth control and education.Catholic churches and some Christians will not prove this type of reasoning.Their solution is abstinence and adoption.Guess what! One abstinence is not going to work,it hasn't for centuries,why would it work in this time frame. -continue-
@ashatbulaparanormal That's the common belief, but a study was published just this year in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, that showed the opposite. As CNN reported: "An abstinence-only education program is more effective than other initiatives at keeping sixth- and seventh-graders from having sex within a two-year period, according to a study described by some as a landmark." - Ashley Hayes, CNN, "Study: Abstinence program most effective at delaying sex among youths"
@Re5Publica Who's studies?Abstinence program is full of crap and why I say this? I practice Abstinence program with my husband,guess what! I'm divorced. Here another, waiting until marriage,only leaves people getting married just so they can have sex,which in the results of divorced as well. Why send Divorce rate sky rocketing again even higher then what it is?
@ashatbulaparanormal Why didn't you read my comment? I posted who the study was done for, and the name of the article from CNN summarizing its conclusions. The information I gave you was more than enough to research it yourself, which is why I provided it all.
@Re5Publica I did read your comment and about the CNN Ashley Hayes,the research done by Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine is not 99.99% complete researched.Most of it come from surveys,most people lie on those. Their providing numbers to our government so they will continue the abstinence-only education program funding.
@Re5Publica It didn't work cause President Obama cut funding for abstinence-only education in his 2010 budget.He knows their numbers are wrong and I know their wrong on their research.You can't believe everything you read,its best to look around you.In my area,we've got a baby booming going on here and most had the abstinence-only education.
@Re5Publica In my area Abortion is down,due to the fact we don't have abortion clinic,but birth is at its all time high.So as you can clearly see that program does not work.In the State of Ohio survey abortion is down,but birth is at a all time high.
@Re5Publica Now I've read all your comments,to my finding.Your really not for woman's choice.You come off that you are,but your not, are you? Be honest with people on this board.Your research show pro-life activist.Now I could be wrong,but my gut feeling tells me different.
@ashatbulaparanormal I'll put it this way, I don't believe killing unborn children is progressive. Abortion, along with other forms of infanticide, has been practiced for millennia by barbarous and primitive people. I support the right to life, it being the most fundamental of all rights, the right which without it you would have no other rights, over the right to kill an unborn child. We already put limitations on rights when they violate the rights of another.
@Re5Publica So your pro-life,just as I thought.Heard this speech a million time,invalided in my book. don't abort an unborn fetus,but lets abort the mother,let abort a country that we want to take over.Lets abort people who disagrees with us.You see everything we do there is an unknown reason a lesson to be learned.But we all ignore and push our belief on others.-continue-
@ashatbulaparanormal That is what we call a strawman. "Let's abort the mother?" !?
Btw, why can't you make 1 comment instead of 4?
I have no problem with contraception that doesn't kill embryos.
There are some extremely rare instances, like the one you mentioned, when abortion can be justified.
I don't think defending the right to life has all the negative consequences you mentioned, lol. It's the most basic of all rights; the basis on which we have any rights at all.
@Re5Publica some mother will die giving birth and pro-life is okay with that,just as long the fetus is born.As far as my comments I go below 150 characters it won't post my comments. What do you think contraception is,do you do any research on it? Do some research and go back as far as the 1920's to the present,Also check out videos in my favorites,then piece it all together.Don't turn a blind eye,really watch and listen,put your self in these people's places.
@Re5Publica you last statement "it being the most fundamental of all rights, the right which without it you would have no other rights" that can go both ways.You banned abortion,then its birth control, then they target families and start taking kids away simply cause the parents are poor or a mother is unwed/widow or a young mother.Where would be everyone's rights then?We still see a lot of this stuff happening today.-continue-
@Re5Publica Your words"Abortion, along with other forms of infanticide, has been practiced for millennia by barbarous and primitive people." I hope your not talking about birth control? I see nothing wrong with birth control,I've used it.
@Re5Publica How primitive is it to birth a fetus that is full of cancer with no cure?Is it fair to make that fetus suffer,struggle until it finally dies?Sometimes it is necessary to end a pregnancy, but not use abortion as a form of birth control.
@Re5Publica Adoption Agencies know this, bank on people giving birth no matter what and handing the child over to them to fill their orders.I'm not saying abortion is the answer either.But adoption Agencies play a big part in banning of abortion,birth control and educating woman on their reproductive.-continue-
@Re5Publica banning abortion is only going to cause more and more deaths,not just babies alone,but mothers as well. Woman will be scared to death.This is why I think Adoption Agencies,abortion and social services all need to be reformed that best suits everyone and not the industries itself,but for the people.
3. To reiterate you are saying increased abortions resulted in decreased crime rates. Now you know from the 70's to 90's average world temperatures were increasing. So is it also safe to say increased abortions led to global warming?
Can you site the study that showed the abortions were the major reason for the decrease crime rate and not something like economic growth, increased avg salaries, increasing incomes, etc? I just want to make sure the rates are attributed properly.
If you're interested in the study, then you want to read "Freakonomics"... although critics found flaws in his study, even when adjusted for those errors, his findings still hold up.
Interesting I did read some of the reviews of "Freakonomics". I will research further. One question, even if the findings are true then the morality or ethics of abortion would come into play, do you agree? Will you discuss it in a future video?
Isn't the more important about responsibility? I understand there being a benefit to not having children if you are not able to care for the chile. However, do you think abortion should be birth control?
I agree ethics is a part of it... however, I doubt that I'll address them in the future much. It seems that in order to debate on a level playing field, you need to start with the same basic principles. The problem is, the pro and cons tend to have different underlying assumptions, like the meaning/purpose of life, what is consciousness, etc.
In other words, I think people are not very likely to change their views without a large change in their worldview.
Yes you are probably correct. Very difficult to change world views. I enjoyed our discussion. thanks.
One last parting thought....isn't it odd we are appealing to a standard in this debate? I think there is a moral order in this world and it goes beyond just debate. I believe the author of the order is an all knowing, all powerful, all just, and all loving God.
I don't think it's odd to appeal to standards. In order for a society/civilization to function, there has to be some base standard. For example, if random murder or theft was condoned, then trade would fail and the civilization fall.
I personally think that religions usurp these underlying ethics/morals and falsely claim them as their own.
1. The biggest problem with abortion is the fact that you are eliminating a human life. The US Constitution protects your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Roe v Wade really only protected the right of the mother to privacy. What if by some other ruling the life of the unborn was recognized and did get protected?
2. Furthermore, where do you draw the line? If abortion through the 9 months is allowed would it lead to euthanasia?
1. abortion is not eliminating a human life. It is eliminating a possible human life. As to some future ruling where the unborn was recognized... I cannot speculate as to that because no such ruling has occurred.
2. The line appears to be drawn at birth, although some states do make late-term abortions illegal. Personally, i think that the ultimate definition of human death is brain-dead. So, why not the start of human life be the finding of active brainwaves in the fetus?
1. To continue the debate further we would have to get into the definition of a human life? How do you define a human life? I would be curious to hear how you define it and what is your basis? Please take a stab, I believe your answer will lead you down a very slippery slope.
2. I guess you are correct. The line has been drawn at birth although I don't agree. Looking at facts, viability of the baby, brainwaves, etc. would be better as you suggested. I believe at conception is the best line.
1. hmm... my initial thoughts would be that all life is precious on some level, with increasing importance give to self-awareness and then intelligence/ability to see and plan for/against future outcomes. "Human" life appears to rank highly there, so it is the most precious.
2. Why should conception be special? You do realize you then run into the moral problems of fertilized cells that are unused from artificial insemination?
What imrational is suggesting is that if women don't have abortions, crime rate will go up. Because we have to get rid of the "bad stock". This is based off of Eugenics, a pseudoscience. Which was adapted by: charles davenport, joseph mengele, adolph hitler, Eugen Fischer, imrational, ect.... Now we analzye history on what happened as a result
imrational human behavior is far too unpredictable to ever make that correlation to begin with. It be the same thing if I said, "All kids that live in the inner-city, in poverty, are going to grow up to be criminals, therefore they should all be aborted." What you are proposing is scary. This is the kind of thinking that led up to the holocaust. Choose Life
Mr. Rational, are you a eugenicist? This is Eugenics that imrational is proposing to all of you. Adolf Hitler held these beliefs. Scary, Mr. Rational, that you are even presenting these ideas. It really is scary
I am not proposing Eugenics. I would also like to point out that discussing beliefs and ideas are not scary. What is scary is people acting on beliefs and ideas without discussing them.
imrational I just recently wrote something on eugenics. It's terrible that a girl would despair that much, and feel that hopeless, that she is willing to shove a coat hanger inside of herself in order to kill her child. That's despair
I agree that it is a horrible thing for a woman to attempt to self-induce a miscarriage. The best solution is to make sure women and men have ready and easy access to birth control methods to reduce those instances as much as possible.
1. There are ways to educate women without condoning contraception. Natural family planning (NFP) can work wonders if people use it. True love programs also seem to be working in places like Australia and Africa.
2. Correlation does not equal causation. I think it is assuming too much to say that abortion lowers the crime rate. I would like to see more solid evidence.
3. We want to illegalize abortions as well as provide safeguards and options for women. We won't just stop at illegalization.
NFP is an option, but it's also unreliable. A condom or the birthcontrol pill is far more reliable and condoms help reduce STDs
You can check the information on abortion & the crime rate. Some people already pointed out flaws with the initial research. However, even when corrected, the research still held up to further scrutiny.
The Catholic church has not encouraged other safeguards or options. They still advocate against the use of condoms and medical birth control.
NFP is actually extremely reliable, granted it is not 100% reliable (but what is?). It relies on testing for hormones and establishing infertile periods. STDs can be reduced through true love programs which I mentioned are already working in Australia and Africa.
When I looked into the abortion-crime relation, I was able to find evidence that the crime rate spiked as much as 3.5 times after abortion was made legal. I don't believe it, but now neither do I believe it was reduced.
When were you looking at the crime data? Immediately after RvW? That's not when we're talking about. We're talking about 18 years after RvW, when all the unwanted children would have entered the adult criminal justice system.
Nothing is 100% reliable, but NFP has among the lowest success (if not the lowest), and all because of a religious mandate. What's wrong with condoms? What's wrong with the pill?
No the data that I looked at dealt with the children who were born after RvW compared against children born before, which would satisfy the demands of such an experiment. The study was done specifically to test whether RvW reduced crime rates.
There don't seem to be consistent results to back you here.
NFP does not have a low success rate. Explain to me what you believe it is, because I really think you don't know. Or else provide me this data about NPF that you seem to have and I don't.
If your study looked at crime data immediately after RvW, then the crime data wouldn't reflect the children. It is important to look starting 18 years later, when those children would have entered the criminal justice system.
Can you point out to me where NFP has equivalent or higher effectiveness than ANY other form of birth control?
Yes, NFP is said to be 99% effective by the research I've looked at.
You misunderstood me. The data I looked at focused on children born after RvW. Therefore this pool of children would include the children that you are talking about. It didn't look at children after RvW, it looked at children BORN after RvW.
The study you mentioned in Africa was indeed biased, but that is absolutely not what I'm referring to. The studies I'm talking about looked at all men and women in the program.
There are different methods of NFP. I'm not sure which one you are referring to, but the method I'm speaking of (symptom-based NFP) does indeed have a 99% effectiveness rate.
I am a registered nurse with a bachelor's degree in nursing. Please PM me with links to the method you are talking about so I can research it and possibly refer future patients to it as an option.
Nope. Not in the least. I debate to try and reach a better understanding of the Truth. If I'm wrong, then by arguing with you, I will have learned something new and you will have helped me correct my view of reality.
The Catholic Church does include safeguard and options, granted they may not be as physical as you would like. They offer options such as NFP, which I think many reject without understanding it.
Their safeguards include neo-abstinence t prevent unplanned births and STDs. I know, you probably think that is useless, but as I said before it is working well in Africa (particularly Uganda) and Australia (or perhaps the Philippines) to reduce STD rates.
I think you need to look at how the data you are looking at is collected. Are STD rates actually falling in Africa because of abstinence? Please look again at the information gathered and how it was gathered.
The information was gathered from groups specifically being targeted with these programs. Studies eliminated variables such as interference from condom-based programs, making the results reliable.
Abstinence before marriage and fidelity within marriage is a success in developing areas. It hasn't proved to be working in more developed areas like the U.S. for some reason or another, but that's why we take a different approach there.
One such study about Africa and STDs only looked at pregnant women... by choosing a group that we absolutely know is having traditional intercourse, the sampling was biased.
I believe that life is sacred, my Religion has similar stances on life not different from Catholicism.
But I am pro-choice because I want is available just in case for a woman who was rapped, if the baby is hurting the mother or Gods forbid the baby won't last out of the womb. Although I'd much prefer adoption or better yet people using safer-sex methods more often and thinking more with with they're head then they're crotch.
Where did I say in this video that I support abortion? I support sex education and access to contraceptives. I never said anything about my stance on abortion.
Personally, I want to have kids and hope that any partner that I chose wouldn't abort any embryo that I help create.
isn't the rape charges in the phillipines higher since all the alter boys get raped by the priest (yes perverted caths)
and
WTF U TALKING ABOUT fetus are not people they do not talk, they do not breath, they don't even think and they certainly do not feel pain
ps would you rather feel a short pain then death or face a whole life of neglect, abuse, rape (most likely) i think a quick death is alot better then that of a life time of pain and suffier
also, did i mention that fetuses are conscious beings that can sense pain? i think the only case where abortion is to be legal is when it is a mortal threat.
I don't know if you can prove that catholicism is a preventative for AIDS. With the phillipines, you have a land mass separated by water... i.e. a natural barrier to disease transmission. It might just be that it hasn't really hit there heavily yet.
Just wait until it hits the priests' population... the next thing you'll see are all the little boys will get it and the numbers will skyrocket :P
I don't have the book anymore... but he's got a lot of his stuff online. From my understanding, he simply took the easily available government statistics.
just because it legal, it doesn't mean you have to do it! thats the thing i cant get past--people who want to make it illegal just bc they dont want to do it.
Although I believe both men and women ought to be better educated on the subject... I still am for abortion. Although it is easy enough said that a woman can simply carry the child till birth then give it away- it isn't always an option. It is an emotional and trying experience being pregnant and family and friend reactions can effect the health of the mother. In countries without better medical services childbirth is at high risk of death.
Abortion ought to be used as a last resort though.
"Although it is easy enough said that a woman can simply carry the child till birth then give it away..."
I think people who say this should be present at the birth of an animal while receiving a massive dose of oxytocin, and then be asked to give the baby animal away.
It's fascinating. Subjects were given $20 & squirted either NaCl or oxytocin up their nose, then went to see a "financial guide". They could give the guide as much of the $20 as they wanted. The guide would immediately receive triple the amount received. They could give whatever they wanted back to the test subject. So, they could reward or screw the subject.
It's a trust question. If the subject trusted the guide, they could get up to 3x's their $20 back.
I feel abortion should be legal for healthy and safety reasons. I feel though if you don't want a baby though you should give the baby up for adoption. There are tons of people on waiting lists for years to adopt a child. I am not pro-choice or pro-life. I am pro-responsibility
I pretty much agree with your stance, but I would never want to pass laws restricting abortion. I think we should push for responsible sex/birth control and encourage adoption avenues.
So basicallly pragmitism rules over the life of the child? So basically killing human beings isn't wrong if it is done in a way to have greater humanity for everybody else? This is the kind of logic I saw from your video.
Is this your rule of ethics? You know regardless of the morality; look how good it is for the rest of us if the baby dies. Putting aside who knows what geniuses were aborted, the strength of your argument is contingent on whether an abortion is the killing of a baby.
You were presenting information in a way of an argument. You perpusefully gave the good points of allowing abortion and totally ignored the main reason people object to it. Unless you want to compare the unborn babies life to the mother's life and societies well being you are not dealing with the issue properly. Nobody who believes abortion is murder should see any persuasive power in your argument. On the other hand if it isn't murdering a baby, there is good reason for abortion.
Your argument "who knows what geniuses were aborted" is a poor one. We also do not know how which Hitlers or Stalins were aborted either.
The whole abortion issue rests on where an embryo becomes "human". Personally, I think we should define it as when brainwaves occur (if that is possible to determine). A timeline had been set on that previously, but has been called into question.
"Your argument "who knows what geniuses were aborted" is a poor one"
That's why i said putting that asside. Ok it was dumb to even mention, but is that all you can criticize me for?
"Personally, I think we should define it as when brainwaves occur."
But it's still very arbitrary. I don't want to commit the fallacy of the beard, but life and death seems to be a very black and white issue. Somehow with abortion we can fuzz it all. Technically life starts at conception.
darkforce333-Basically I was mocking his notion that the egg is somehow more alive after merging with a sperm. Because, the way I figure it: whether it's a clump of cells, or a single cell, if there are no brainwaves, it is not human. Basically I'm saying-if you're gonna defend one form of potential life, you should defend it all.
Life does start at conception. I wasn't that it wasn't. Your skin cells are "life".
I was saying that when brainwaves occur is when a person becomes "human". The hardcore, ultimate determination of medical "death" for a human being is the ending of brain function. Wouldn't it make sense to therefore go to the opposite? When brain waves start to function marking when a clump of cells become human?
There are documented medical accounts of people who have come out of total brain failure after hours of having no brain waves. But that's besides the point. Anyways don't brain waves start pretty early on in the baby? I guess if you reduce human kind to just tissue that isn't much different than your view. Considering your an atheist I wouldn't blame you for thinking that way.
You have to admit abortion is kind of cold. Would you have no problem being an abortionist doctor? I'm just saying it's a lot easier to kill when you don't see it happen or the person you kill isn't intellegent enough to know something is being cruel.
Personally, I want kids... so I wouldn't want a girl to abort my child (although if it were majorly handicapped or would put the woman's life at risk is a different story). However, I would never dream of mandating what a woman does with her body.
if we did not have abortion then the world would be even more overpopulated as it is. even in britain where i live there are about 60 million people(alot) and have you seen the size of this country, it's not very big.
I have always said that abortion is a complicated issue. Birth control should be first and abortion should be last but churches seem to try to stop both. As long as we deny sex education, we can expect abortion to be a continued practice.
So I'm driving down the highway just in time to read a sign with "Abortion stops a beating" posted on it. Confused and going through all the scenarios as to who had the nerve to put it up (not to mention that it hadn't been destroyed yet) put me in a interesting state of mind. Namely, that it kind of made sense, and that AntiAbortionists would be the first to rage and tear it down. After happening by it again I noticed the "heart" picture that was supposed to complete the sentence.
If ProLife advocates spent as much time caring about the mothers instead of the 'innocent unborn child' there might actually be the conclusion they 'profess' they want. Good luck with that one eh?
Sorry, but I think you need to reread your bible. God actually encourages his chosen people to dash infants against rocks. How many infants disobey they laws of god?
imrational is correct. The Israelites in the old testament exterminated people to take their land in true ethnic cleansing fashion. Also lets not forget the mass murder by Jehovah himself of Egyptians and others like in the great flood.
Do you want to hide behind your name the fact that you are not actually that rational ...? As a NORMAL human being every man is rational, why so many justifications for a natural thing? If you are rational this is obvious from your actions not from your words!
Imrational, why do you fell the necessity to tell us that you are rational? If your viewers are rational too, they will agree with you anyway, if they are not, they will not understand you even if you try to explain to them. Then what is the rational purpose for showing us your rationality?. This is a proof that you are not actually rational; this can be seen from the simple fact that you want to explain the contrary. Your name (Imrational) confirms that
You have completely missed the whole point of debate over abortion. By putting the "moral/ethical" part of the issue to the side, you've put the WHOLE issue at the side. The video is ultimately pointless because it does not deal with the issue of abortion in even the slightest way.
Sorry, let me clarify: I think all of the issues you addressed here are secondary to the issue of the personhood of the un-born baby/fetus. Once that issue is tackled then the whole issue of abortion is determined regardless of the issues you bring up here because if the fetus is not a person, than its abortion is moral and ultimately all of the above issues are remedied, but if the fetus is a person then his/her's death can in no way be justified even in light of the issues brought up here.
While on one hand it makes human life cheap and devalued.
On the other hand if you've seen some teen mothers living on the street, no money, no job trying to raise a child in that environment. most of the babies end up in orphanages or the care of the state without parents or dead anyway.
It still is in a way, murder, but it is also in a way, a mercy killing.
If war was upon a country some parents have killed their kids to save them from a worse fate...
Cheap and devalued? By "human" people usually mean emotional and sentient, properties not found in an embryo. It cannot suffer and it allows the mother the freedom of her own body.
but having sex without any protection or thought about what could happen is your own fault. there are consequences to everything and people need to be responsible to their actions, they cant just erase whats been done.
If this were to become a legal procedure, they would need to take everything into account.
a pregnant mother who is perfectly capable and has the resources to raise their child should, by no means, have an abortion purely because "it is a bad time" or "she doesn't want a child", that is what the pill was invented for...
-to not pay their taxes or to take sex seriously. And most people think they can solve this by taking responsibility for the actions of others. Obama thinks he can solve this by allowing abortion and gay marriage, when it only increases the problem. When will people ever get this?
VeritatemQuaerens 1 month ago in playlist More videos from imrational
I mean no offense to anyone and please correct me if I am offensive to anyone.
But I think pro-abortionists, pro gay-marriage people and a majority of democrats aren't seeing the big picture. They wonder why our economy is bad but they're not opening up their eyes. What they don't see is that these things are making people lazier, and they're not making people take responsibility for their actions. When people believe these things are okay (supported by Obama) then people have an excuse-
(cont.)
VeritatemQuaerens 1 month ago in playlist More videos from imrational
Yes but freakanomics also points to several other factors in the decrease of crime such as an increase in the number of police, changes in drug markets, and an increased reliance on prisons
TheDonutboy123 6 months ago
6. "Over 70,000 women die every year from unsafe abortion attempts." According to the Center for Disease Control, only 39 maternal deaths occured in the U.S. due to illegal abortions in 1972 (the year before Roe v Wade)
7. "Women will continue to have abortions even if it is illegal." People participate in violent gangs at great risk to themselves. That doesn't mean we make it legal.
KellyOR16 6 months ago
@KellyOR16
6. where did I say those statistics are from the United States? Can you please give a reference to your 39 deaths? What time period did it cover? A day, a month, a year?
7. by your same argument, nothing should be illegal because merely living life represents a great risk (seeing that it always ends in death). :P
imrational 6 months ago
@imrational 6. I was just giving the U.S. statistics so everyone understood what the result would be if Roe v Wade was overturned. And I did reference when I said the CDC reported it the YEAR before Roe v Wade.
7. Haha true, but your argument that "people will do it anyways" doesn't hold up either considering that people still break just about every law in the world but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have these laws. And I'm glad we could discuss without going crazy, which people do so often.
KellyOR16 6 months ago
5. "At one time, women had a hard time finding a doctor, or anyone else, to have an abortion." In 1960, a decade before Roe v Wade, Dr. Mary Calderon (the pro-legal abortion medical director of Planned Parenthood) said, "90% of illegal abortions are being done by physicians."
KellyOR16 6 months ago
3. "[Most women obtaining abortion] already have children." 50% of women obtaining abortions are under 25 so it's unlikely that most of them "already have children." 50% of women obtaingin abortions are teenagers and this percent isn't exactly negligable.
4. "Roe v Wade coincides with a massive drop in the crime rate." Massive flaws have been found in Levitt and Dubner's theory and it in no way proves that Roe v Wade caused this drop.
KellyOR16 6 months ago
@KellyOR16
4. I've read about the flaws in L&D's theory. If you've followed it, then you should have noted that their theory holds up even with the corrected data.
imrational 6 months ago
1. "Most abortions are in developing countries." The U.S. is only second to Russia in number of abortions.
2. "Where women don't have access to proper sex education or contraception." In America, only 8% of women getting an abortion had never used a contraceptive. 54% report using a contraceptive during the month they conceived.
KellyOR16 6 months ago
science????????????? What about morals and giving an unborn child a chance at life. I wonder what you would think if your mother told you "you know I was going to have an abortion when I found out I was pregnant with you. But it was too late." How about giving a baby up for adoption to those who can't have children or living with the idea that "hmmmmm if i have unprotected sex I just might get pregnant and will have to deal with it and not run to the easiest and most cruel way out."
themeyo89 7 months ago
@themeyo89
Unfortunately, a great number of people look down on people giving children up for adoption, so there is a social stigma that way too, not to mention the hardships and expenses of carrying a baby to term.
The best solution is to make sex education and birth control readily available to those having sex. Once again, however, we have people who are against things like that.
imrational 7 months ago
Check your facts population in the US Is 34 per click,excluding Alaska...KNow before you speak....
ClarksonsinUSA 11 months ago
I'm sure the NAZIS, tried to justify their actions 2.....
I have 7 sons,the last 2 through IVF................Our last try for girls,we gave our 8 left over frozen embryos to a nice couple...There were many that wanted to adopt the 8 little frozen ones ...
Oh ,you never brought up adoption....
At the end of the day,one person ,one vote ,and Christians are having bigger families by far.......Fast forward 20 years,where do you think we are headed...
;)
TheChristianRight09 11 months ago
@TheChristianRight09
"At the end of the day,one person ,one vote ,and Christians are having bigger families by far.......Fast forward 20 years,where do you think we are headed..."
Overpopulation with lots of people not understanding science?
imrational 11 months ago
Roe v Wade precipitated a drop in crime 20 years later? Unless of course that crime rate doesn't include the murders of millions unborn babies. Despite your efforts to seem objective here, your bias shines through.
KnightOwl2006 11 months ago
@KnightOwl2006
if a baby is unborn, it is not a baby, it is a fetus. At the stage of development that legal abortions occur, we are not even talking fetuses, we are talking about embryos. An embryo is a collection of cells with the POTENTIAL of becoming a baby.
imrational 11 months ago
60 idiots think that adult women are less necessary than dumb wombs...
insanewarlock666 1 year ago
You are very reticent to respond to the other scenario I painted. You are smart. Most people would say, "Sure, it would probably be a good thing for that insane woman with the drunk husband to have an abortion, since obviously the kid won't amount to anything." To which I, of course, respond, "Congratulations, you just killed Charlie Chaplin." Thank goodness you can see the foolishness of trying to project things into the future.
chrisman737 1 year ago
@chrisman737
Oh, I think projecting things into the future is an important ability. I just didn't think it was my place to make such a decision for someone else.
imrational 1 year ago
Your projection into the future cannot be proven. Also, poverty or difficult circumstances do not necessarily indicate the need for an abortion. Here is one for you...a woman is pregnant. She is married but her husband is an alcoholic who is probably on his way to drinking himself to death. She already has another child and feels overwhelmed by the need to now basically take care of the entire family -- she is on the brink of insanity. Should she have an abortion? Please answer.
chrisman737 1 year ago
@chrisman737
My projection is testable however. We can look at communities where abortion is made more difficult/illegal and see if those children later on go to commit more crimes than other age brackets.
No where did I say that any circumstances necessitate a need for abortion other than strictly medical ones (like child is brain dead or puts the mother at risk).
Should the woman in your example have an abortion? That's not my decision because it is not my body. It is the woman's decision.
imrational 1 year ago
@imrational, it is not her body either (I think you are forgetting the life in the womb). Also, she is on the brink of insanity, perhaps ready for a mental institution, so she probably is not able to make a good decision. Should the state step in and demand she get an abortion? Or should people encourage her to have an abortion?
chrisman737 1 year ago
@chrisman737
I am a Libertarian and feel the State shouldn't be intruding into people's lives like that. As to her being close to insane... you're making it sound like she'd be an unfit mother. As to people advising her to have an abortion, that's between her and her friends/family and is not for me to say.
I have a question for you. If a pregnant woman drinks a cup of coffee or smokes a cigarette, does that mean she should be arrested for attempted murder?
imrational 1 year ago
@imrational, well, I sincerely applaud you for being a Libertarian. I suppose we have that in common. I am an Independent who is strongly leaning towards being a Libertarian, but I would be more like Ron Paul (pro-life Libertarian).
The woman in this situation has not family or friends -- she has not family and no time for friends. And yes, she is barely able to keep herself together. Should she have an abortion.
What on earth does coffee or cigarettes have to do with murder?
chrisman737 1 year ago
@chrisman737
You didn't watch the video, did you? Drinking coffee or smoking cigarettes greatly increases the odds of miscarriage.
imrational 1 year ago
@imrational, I did watch the video. Do you know the definition of murder? It is the deliberate, unjust taking of an innocent human life. Obviously one cigarette or one cup of coffee (that is what you said, by the way, "drinks a cup of coffee or smokes a cigarette" is probably not going to cause a miscarriage, and even if it does, it is hard to imagine that someone would smoke a cigarette in order to deliberately miscarry. So it cannot be murder.
chrisman737 1 year ago
@chrisman737
Numerous women have shoved coathangers up into themselves to cause abortions (documented fact). If drinking a lot of coffee and smoking a lot of cigarettes might get the same result, then yes... some women would do that.
Regardless, there is a chance that such behaviors puts the potential life of the fetus at risk. Should women be forced to avoid any action that puts the fetus at risk? According to your logic that it is not just their body, your answer should be "yes".
imrational 1 year ago
@chrisman737 ""Murder is when a man of sound memory and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any county of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's peace, with malice aforthought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wo, or hurt etc. die of the wound or hurt etc."
A fetus is not:
1. a reasonable creature
2. in rerum natura
3. in the King's peace.
pirbird14 9 months ago
I agree with point 1 and 3. Point 2 is an essentially unprovable projection.
SirElspeth 1 year ago
1st point. Women in the USA do have access to sex education and contraception so the analogy with countries that do not, is not really appropriate.
2nd point. I disagree, I think crime waves a far too complex to directly link to abortion.
3rd point, yes I agree.
Coffee? I wouldn't bet my shirt on it :-D
MickeyMcGoo 1 year ago
@MickeyMcGoo
I highly recommend reading the chapter on Freakonomics that deals with the issue, as well as the rebuttals and the further responses from the authors. They address other issues as possible causes for the reduction in crime.
imrational 1 year ago
I love the idea of using abortion to keep the crime rate down. A sort of pre-emptive death penalty for those presently innocent of any crime but who may be more likely than others to commit one in the future (and I think we all know who they are). Fantastic. All you need now is the little moustache and the shirt with the peculiar cross motif. Give me a shout when you're ready and I'll bring the Zyklon B.
kkkaldav 1 year ago
Crime issue sounds pretty moot. Not going to read it.
MNBrant 2 years ago
I have written extensively on abortion and am unwilling to go into all of it in 500 words or less. Anways looked at the MSNBC chart (I am banned by that site by the way) it looks like you are mainly talking about China and Russia. (The chart obscures this for political reasons) Both countries are in deep hurt for the abortion policies they chose and are trying to reverse it without success. I got an interesting stat on wiki that shows 98% of women chose late term abortion out of convenience.
MNBrant 2 years ago
Yeah looks like 350 women die from legal abortions a year in america. So what? Ok you talk about abortions outside america. What influence can you have with that. Ok with abortion in america and crime rate. You are quoting some crap from the 70's for god sake. Maybe it was the crappy govt housing they lived in maybe it was the rats that were prevalent back then. Anyways this post is snuff and you should reexamine the issue.
MNBrant 2 years ago
@MNBrant
I always re-examine my stands on issues... it goes with being a Skeptic, I try to be skeptical of my own stances as well.
As to the crime rate info, that actually came from analysis done in the past ten years.
imrational 2 years ago
I find it very hard to suggest that wanted unborn children deserve protection while unwanted unborn children don't. There doesn't seem to be a difference between the unborn children, the only difference lay with the parents. I consider the idea that children should be punished for the inequity of their parents ironically a biblical concept, and therefor appropriately ludicrous.
The crime rate coincides with the incidence of single-mothers, the real matter: the decline of the nuclear family.
Re5Publica 2 years ago
Re5Publica,
I do think parents not spending time with their children, i.e. kids raised by day-care/gangs are a societal problem along the lines of "Lord of the Flies", but I think it is unfair to blame the decline of the nuclear family. There have been plenty of alternative family structures that work. Personally, I think the government should get out of the marriage biz and let people define "family" as they see fit.
imrational 2 years ago
I'm sorry but gang violence was not a problem among the black community over 50 years ago, and teenage pregnancy, and the number of single mothers was overwhelmingly lower. The decay of the nuclear family is what led to a breakdown in their communities. If you ask Thomas Sowell, or Clarence Thomas, their communities were safe growing up, but now aren't.
The fact that you think killing unborn children is the best solution to this problem shows, in part, this social degeneracy.
Re5Publica 2 years ago
Re5Publica,
Please do not put words in my mouth. Please show the "fact" where I thought killing unborn children is the "best" solution?
The fact that you would attempt to insult and denigrate me in such a manner, I think, shows your degeneracy.
imrational 2 years ago
@imrational
Your entire video was about the merits of abortion and how it lowers crime, supposing that if it were not illegal, crime would be more rampant. You offered no alternative, you seemed comfortable if not satisfied with it, and if I somehow inferred something from that that is unfair then I apologize.
Re5Publica 2 years ago
Re5Publica,
watch the video again. The "entire" video was not about the merits of abortion. I pointed out that abortions happen more in countries without access to contraception and that women still attempt abortions even when illegal, at grave risks to themselves. So yes, you did infer things that were unfair.
imrational 2 years ago
@Re5Publica Abortion does need to be reformed,but not banned.Woman do need easy access to birth control and education.Catholic churches and some Christians will not prove this type of reasoning.Their solution is abstinence and adoption.Guess what! One abstinence is not going to work,it hasn't for centuries,why would it work in this time frame. -continue-
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@ashatbulaparanormal That's the common belief, but a study was published just this year in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, that showed the opposite. As CNN reported: "An abstinence-only education program is more effective than other initiatives at keeping sixth- and seventh-graders from having sex within a two-year period, according to a study described by some as a landmark." - Ashley Hayes, CNN, "Study: Abstinence program most effective at delaying sex among youths"
Re5Publica 1 year ago
@Re5Publica Who's studies?Abstinence program is full of crap and why I say this? I practice Abstinence program with my husband,guess what! I'm divorced. Here another, waiting until marriage,only leaves people getting married just so they can have sex,which in the results of divorced as well. Why send Divorce rate sky rocketing again even higher then what it is?
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@ashatbulaparanormal Why didn't you read my comment? I posted who the study was done for, and the name of the article from CNN summarizing its conclusions. The information I gave you was more than enough to research it yourself, which is why I provided it all.
Re5Publica 1 year ago
@Re5Publica I did read your comment and about the CNN Ashley Hayes,the research done by Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine is not 99.99% complete researched.Most of it come from surveys,most people lie on those. Their providing numbers to our government so they will continue the abstinence-only education program funding.
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@Re5Publica It didn't work cause President Obama cut funding for abstinence-only education in his 2010 budget.He knows their numbers are wrong and I know their wrong on their research.You can't believe everything you read,its best to look around you.In my area,we've got a baby booming going on here and most had the abstinence-only education.
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@Re5Publica In my area Abortion is down,due to the fact we don't have abortion clinic,but birth is at its all time high.So as you can clearly see that program does not work.In the State of Ohio survey abortion is down,but birth is at a all time high.
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@Re5Publica Now I've read all your comments,to my finding.Your really not for woman's choice.You come off that you are,but your not, are you? Be honest with people on this board.Your research show pro-life activist.Now I could be wrong,but my gut feeling tells me different.
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@ashatbulaparanormal I'll put it this way, I don't believe killing unborn children is progressive. Abortion, along with other forms of infanticide, has been practiced for millennia by barbarous and primitive people. I support the right to life, it being the most fundamental of all rights, the right which without it you would have no other rights, over the right to kill an unborn child. We already put limitations on rights when they violate the rights of another.
Re5Publica 1 year ago
@Re5Publica So your pro-life,just as I thought.Heard this speech a million time,invalided in my book. don't abort an unborn fetus,but lets abort the mother,let abort a country that we want to take over.Lets abort people who disagrees with us.You see everything we do there is an unknown reason a lesson to be learned.But we all ignore and push our belief on others.-continue-
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@ashatbulaparanormal That is what we call a strawman. "Let's abort the mother?" !?
Btw, why can't you make 1 comment instead of 4?
I have no problem with contraception that doesn't kill embryos.
There are some extremely rare instances, like the one you mentioned, when abortion can be justified.
I don't think defending the right to life has all the negative consequences you mentioned, lol. It's the most basic of all rights; the basis on which we have any rights at all.
Re5Publica 1 year ago
@Re5Publica some mother will die giving birth and pro-life is okay with that,just as long the fetus is born.As far as my comments I go below 150 characters it won't post my comments. What do you think contraception is,do you do any research on it? Do some research and go back as far as the 1920's to the present,Also check out videos in my favorites,then piece it all together.Don't turn a blind eye,really watch and listen,put your self in these people's places.
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@Re5Publica you last statement "it being the most fundamental of all rights, the right which without it you would have no other rights" that can go both ways.You banned abortion,then its birth control, then they target families and start taking kids away simply cause the parents are poor or a mother is unwed/widow or a young mother.Where would be everyone's rights then?We still see a lot of this stuff happening today.-continue-
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@Re5Publica Your words"Abortion, along with other forms of infanticide, has been practiced for millennia by barbarous and primitive people." I hope your not talking about birth control? I see nothing wrong with birth control,I've used it.
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@Re5Publica How primitive is it to birth a fetus that is full of cancer with no cure?Is it fair to make that fetus suffer,struggle until it finally dies?Sometimes it is necessary to end a pregnancy, but not use abortion as a form of birth control.
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@Re5Publica Adoption Agencies know this, bank on people giving birth no matter what and handing the child over to them to fill their orders.I'm not saying abortion is the answer either.But adoption Agencies play a big part in banning of abortion,birth control and educating woman on their reproductive.-continue-
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
@Re5Publica banning abortion is only going to cause more and more deaths,not just babies alone,but mothers as well. Woman will be scared to death.This is why I think Adoption Agencies,abortion and social services all need to be reformed that best suits everyone and not the industries itself,but for the people.
ashatbulaparanormal 1 year ago
continued....
3. To reiterate you are saying increased abortions resulted in decreased crime rates. Now you know from the 70's to 90's average world temperatures were increasing. So is it also safe to say increased abortions led to global warming?
Can you site the study that showed the abortions were the major reason for the decrease crime rate and not something like economic growth, increased avg salaries, increasing incomes, etc? I just want to make sure the rates are attributed properly.
holirumicsfriend 2 years ago
holirumicsfriend,
If you're interested in the study, then you want to read "Freakonomics"... although critics found flaws in his study, even when adjusted for those errors, his findings still hold up.
imrational 2 years ago
Interesting I did read some of the reviews of "Freakonomics". I will research further. One question, even if the findings are true then the morality or ethics of abortion would come into play, do you agree? Will you discuss it in a future video?
Isn't the more important about responsibility? I understand there being a benefit to not having children if you are not able to care for the chile. However, do you think abortion should be birth control?
holirumicsfriend 2 years ago
holirumicsfriend,
I agree ethics is a part of it... however, I doubt that I'll address them in the future much. It seems that in order to debate on a level playing field, you need to start with the same basic principles. The problem is, the pro and cons tend to have different underlying assumptions, like the meaning/purpose of life, what is consciousness, etc.
In other words, I think people are not very likely to change their views without a large change in their worldview.
imrational 2 years ago
Yes you are probably correct. Very difficult to change world views. I enjoyed our discussion. thanks.
One last parting thought....isn't it odd we are appealing to a standard in this debate? I think there is a moral order in this world and it goes beyond just debate. I believe the author of the order is an all knowing, all powerful, all just, and all loving God.
holirumicsfriend 2 years ago
holirumicsfriend,
I don't think it's odd to appeal to standards. In order for a society/civilization to function, there has to be some base standard. For example, if random murder or theft was condoned, then trade would fail and the civilization fall.
I personally think that religions usurp these underlying ethics/morals and falsely claim them as their own.
imrational 2 years ago
I have two comments:
1. The biggest problem with abortion is the fact that you are eliminating a human life. The US Constitution protects your right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Roe v Wade really only protected the right of the mother to privacy. What if by some other ruling the life of the unborn was recognized and did get protected?
2. Furthermore, where do you draw the line? If abortion through the 9 months is allowed would it lead to euthanasia?
holirumicsfriend 2 years ago
holirmicsfriend,
1. abortion is not eliminating a human life. It is eliminating a possible human life. As to some future ruling where the unborn was recognized... I cannot speculate as to that because no such ruling has occurred.
2. The line appears to be drawn at birth, although some states do make late-term abortions illegal. Personally, i think that the ultimate definition of human death is brain-dead. So, why not the start of human life be the finding of active brainwaves in the fetus?
imrational 2 years ago
1. To continue the debate further we would have to get into the definition of a human life? How do you define a human life? I would be curious to hear how you define it and what is your basis? Please take a stab, I believe your answer will lead you down a very slippery slope.
2. I guess you are correct. The line has been drawn at birth although I don't agree. Looking at facts, viability of the baby, brainwaves, etc. would be better as you suggested. I believe at conception is the best line.
holirumicsfriend 2 years ago
holirumicsfriend,
1. hmm... my initial thoughts would be that all life is precious on some level, with increasing importance give to self-awareness and then intelligence/ability to see and plan for/against future outcomes. "Human" life appears to rank highly there, so it is the most precious.
2. Why should conception be special? You do realize you then run into the moral problems of fertilized cells that are unused from artificial insemination?
imrational 2 years ago
What imrational is suggesting is that if women don't have abortions, crime rate will go up. Because we have to get rid of the "bad stock". This is based off of Eugenics, a pseudoscience. Which was adapted by: charles davenport, joseph mengele, adolph hitler, Eugen Fischer, imrational, ect.... Now we analzye history on what happened as a result
Oliver1456 2 years ago
Oliver1456,
Wow, way to misrepresent me. Where did I say there was "bad stock"? Don't put words in my mouth, it's dishonest.
What I'm saying that is, apparently, a link has been found between children growing up unwanted by their parents and the crime rate.
imrational 2 years ago
imrational human behavior is far too unpredictable to ever make that correlation to begin with. It be the same thing if I said, "All kids that live in the inner-city, in poverty, are going to grow up to be criminals, therefore they should all be aborted." What you are proposing is scary. This is the kind of thinking that led up to the holocaust. Choose Life
Oliver1456 2 years ago
Oliver1456,
Where did I say that anyone should be aborted? What am I proposing. Again, don't put words in my mouth.
I was point out information for discussion. Don't presume to assign the mailman with a stance when he was just delivering the letter.
imrational 2 years ago
Mr. Rational, are you a eugenicist? This is Eugenics that imrational is proposing to all of you. Adolf Hitler held these beliefs. Scary, Mr. Rational, that you are even presenting these ideas. It really is scary
Oliver1456 2 years ago
Oliver1456,
I am not proposing Eugenics. I would also like to point out that discussing beliefs and ideas are not scary. What is scary is people acting on beliefs and ideas without discussing them.
imrational 2 years ago
imrational I just recently wrote something on eugenics. It's terrible that a girl would despair that much, and feel that hopeless, that she is willing to shove a coat hanger inside of herself in order to kill her child. That's despair
Oliver1456 2 years ago
Oliver1456,
I agree that it is a horrible thing for a woman to attempt to self-induce a miscarriage. The best solution is to make sure women and men have ready and easy access to birth control methods to reduce those instances as much as possible.
imrational 2 years ago
Mr. Rational. My own personal opinion is, you should seek to save yourself
Oliver1456 2 years ago
Oliver1456,
My own personal opinion is that you should seek to learn more about reality and less about how you want reality to conform to what you want.
imrational 2 years ago
1. There are ways to educate women without condoning contraception. Natural family planning (NFP) can work wonders if people use it. True love programs also seem to be working in places like Australia and Africa.
2. Correlation does not equal causation. I think it is assuming too much to say that abortion lowers the crime rate. I would like to see more solid evidence.
3. We want to illegalize abortions as well as provide safeguards and options for women. We won't just stop at illegalization.
SeptemberCatholic18 2 years ago
SeptCatholic,
NFP is an option, but it's also unreliable. A condom or the birthcontrol pill is far more reliable and condoms help reduce STDs
You can check the information on abortion & the crime rate. Some people already pointed out flaws with the initial research. However, even when corrected, the research still held up to further scrutiny.
The Catholic church has not encouraged other safeguards or options. They still advocate against the use of condoms and medical birth control.
imrational 2 years ago
NFP is actually extremely reliable, granted it is not 100% reliable (but what is?). It relies on testing for hormones and establishing infertile periods. STDs can be reduced through true love programs which I mentioned are already working in Australia and Africa.
When I looked into the abortion-crime relation, I was able to find evidence that the crime rate spiked as much as 3.5 times after abortion was made legal. I don't believe it, but now neither do I believe it was reduced.
SeptemberCatholic18 2 years ago
SeptemberCatholic,
When were you looking at the crime data? Immediately after RvW? That's not when we're talking about. We're talking about 18 years after RvW, when all the unwanted children would have entered the adult criminal justice system.
Nothing is 100% reliable, but NFP has among the lowest success (if not the lowest), and all because of a religious mandate. What's wrong with condoms? What's wrong with the pill?
imrational 2 years ago
No the data that I looked at dealt with the children who were born after RvW compared against children born before, which would satisfy the demands of such an experiment. The study was done specifically to test whether RvW reduced crime rates.
There don't seem to be consistent results to back you here.
NFP does not have a low success rate. Explain to me what you believe it is, because I really think you don't know. Or else provide me this data about NPF that you seem to have and I don't.
SeptemberCatholic18 2 years ago
If your study looked at crime data immediately after RvW, then the crime data wouldn't reflect the children. It is important to look starting 18 years later, when those children would have entered the criminal justice system.
Can you point out to me where NFP has equivalent or higher effectiveness than ANY other form of birth control?
imrational 2 years ago
Yes, NFP is said to be 99% effective by the research I've looked at.
You misunderstood me. The data I looked at focused on children born after RvW. Therefore this pool of children would include the children that you are talking about. It didn't look at children after RvW, it looked at children BORN after RvW.
The study you mentioned in Africa was indeed biased, but that is absolutely not what I'm referring to. The studies I'm talking about looked at all men and women in the program.
SeptemberCatholic18 2 years ago
SeptemberCatholic,
NFP has a failure rate of 13-20%
imrational 2 years ago
There are different methods of NFP. I'm not sure which one you are referring to, but the method I'm speaking of (symptom-based NFP) does indeed have a 99% effectiveness rate.
SeptemberCatholic18 2 years ago
SeptemberCatholic,
I am a registered nurse with a bachelor's degree in nursing. Please PM me with links to the method you are talking about so I can research it and possibly refer future patients to it as an option.
imrational 2 years ago
Gladly. I hope you are not being sarcastic.
SeptemberCatholic18 2 years ago
SeptemberCatholic,
Nope. Not in the least. I debate to try and reach a better understanding of the Truth. If I'm wrong, then by arguing with you, I will have learned something new and you will have helped me correct my view of reality.
imrational 2 years ago
(continued...)
The Catholic Church does include safeguard and options, granted they may not be as physical as you would like. They offer options such as NFP, which I think many reject without understanding it.
Their safeguards include neo-abstinence t prevent unplanned births and STDs. I know, you probably think that is useless, but as I said before it is working well in Africa (particularly Uganda) and Australia (or perhaps the Philippines) to reduce STD rates.
SeptemberCatholic18 2 years ago
SeptemberCatholic,
I think you need to look at how the data you are looking at is collected. Are STD rates actually falling in Africa because of abstinence? Please look again at the information gathered and how it was gathered.
imrational 2 years ago
The information was gathered from groups specifically being targeted with these programs. Studies eliminated variables such as interference from condom-based programs, making the results reliable.
Abstinence before marriage and fidelity within marriage is a success in developing areas. It hasn't proved to be working in more developed areas like the U.S. for some reason or another, but that's why we take a different approach there.
SeptemberCatholic18 2 years ago
SeptemberCatholic,
One such study about Africa and STDs only looked at pregnant women... by choosing a group that we absolutely know is having traditional intercourse, the sampling was biased.
imrational 2 years ago
I believe that life is sacred, my Religion has similar stances on life not different from Catholicism.
But I am pro-choice because I want is available just in case for a woman who was rapped, if the baby is hurting the mother or Gods forbid the baby won't last out of the womb. Although I'd much prefer adoption or better yet people using safer-sex methods more often and thinking more with with they're head then they're crotch.
My 2 cents.
ginkiba3 2 years ago
Abortion is a fucking crime...I accept it only in some cases...Ok imrational..Why not bomb the slums with high crime rates?
Its life we are talking about..Not religion.
Oh yeah and i dont belive in religion so dont say i want to "force beliefs".
ViolentFactor1928 2 years ago
ViolentFactor1928,
Where did I say in this video that I support abortion? I support sex education and access to contraceptives. I never said anything about my stance on abortion.
Personally, I want to have kids and hope that any partner that I chose wouldn't abort any embryo that I help create.
imrational 2 years ago
isn't the rape charges in the phillipines higher since all the alter boys get raped by the priest (yes perverted caths)
and
WTF U TALKING ABOUT fetus are not people they do not talk, they do not breath, they don't even think and they certainly do not feel pain
ps would you rather feel a short pain then death or face a whole life of neglect, abuse, rape (most likely) i think a quick death is alot better then that of a life time of pain and suffier
but then again you won't listen
riotguards 2 years ago
also, did i mention that fetuses are conscious beings that can sense pain? i think the only case where abortion is to be legal is when it is a mortal threat.
Kalahridudex 2 years ago
in the phillipines, where everyone is catholic, AIDS barely even exists.
Kalahridudex 2 years ago
Kalahridudex,
I don't know if you can prove that catholicism is a preventative for AIDS. With the phillipines, you have a land mass separated by water... i.e. a natural barrier to disease transmission. It might just be that it hasn't really hit there heavily yet.
Just wait until it hits the priests' population... the next thing you'll see are all the little boys will get it and the numbers will skyrocket :P
imrational 2 years ago
Nice...Very humanitarian :)
Francie32 2 years ago
So many other ways...Well at the end theres no respect for life by this "people".
Im only in favour when the womans live is in real danger...Or by rape.
ArturNemov 2 years ago
where'd this guy get this information about developing countries and crime rate?
lovechild872 2 years ago
I don't have the book anymore... but he's got a lot of his stuff online. From my understanding, he simply took the easily available government statistics.
imrational 2 years ago
just because it legal, it doesn't mean you have to do it! thats the thing i cant get past--people who want to make it illegal just bc they dont want to do it.
drakiepoo 3 years ago
"people who want to make it illegal just bc they dont want to do it."
That's simple. An overbearing religion is always going to want to force their beliefs on others... and the easiest method, is through the law.
AutodidacticPhd 3 years ago
Although I believe both men and women ought to be better educated on the subject... I still am for abortion. Although it is easy enough said that a woman can simply carry the child till birth then give it away- it isn't always an option. It is an emotional and trying experience being pregnant and family and friend reactions can effect the health of the mother. In countries without better medical services childbirth is at high risk of death.
Abortion ought to be used as a last resort though.
QueenOfTheKelpies 3 years ago
"Although it is easy enough said that a woman can simply carry the child till birth then give it away..."
I think people who say this should be present at the birth of an animal while receiving a massive dose of oxytocin, and then be asked to give the baby animal away.
AutodidacticPhd 3 years ago
Autodidactic,
Wow... that's definitely an interesting idea. ;)
I'm actually very interested in the recent studies about oxytocin and neuroeconomics.
imrational 3 years ago
"I'm actually very interested in the recent studies about oxytocin and neuroeconomics."
Huh, hadn't heard about this... I'm taking neuropsychopharmacology this semester, so I may just have to ask my prof about it.
AutodidacticPhd 3 years ago
Auto,
It's fascinating. Subjects were given $20 & squirted either NaCl or oxytocin up their nose, then went to see a "financial guide". They could give the guide as much of the $20 as they wanted. The guide would immediately receive triple the amount received. They could give whatever they wanted back to the test subject. So, they could reward or screw the subject.
It's a trust question. If the subject trusted the guide, they could get up to 3x's their $20 back.
imrational 3 years ago
Well, the subjects who squirted NaCl up their nose acted normally. The ones with oxytocin gave the guides more money more often.
So, oxytocin does affect our daily decisions regarding things like money, etc.
imrational 3 years ago
"Subjects were given $20 & squirted either NaCl or oxytocin up their nose, then..."
I think I found the article. Journal Nature vol 435, Antonion Damasio, correct?
I'll have to swing by the science library sometime this week. ...I love having student access to all the journal archives.
AutodidacticPhd 3 years ago
AutodidacticPhd,
"I love having student access to all the journal archives."
bastard. :P
I miss university libraries. :(
imrational 3 years ago
The US has a much higher abortion rate then the rest of the industrialized world.
I chalk this up to a sexually constricted culture. With this said, abortion is disgusting.
ModelAnarchist 3 years ago
Your implication on "spiking crime rates" seems like the result of a confusion. i.e. confusing correlation and causation witheachother.
bwhahrhr 3 years ago
bwhahrhr,
I recommend reading "Freakonomics". He addresses that.
imrational 3 years ago
very well said.
realk1234 3 years ago
I feel abortion should be legal for healthy and safety reasons. I feel though if you don't want a baby though you should give the baby up for adoption. There are tons of people on waiting lists for years to adopt a child. I am not pro-choice or pro-life. I am pro-responsibility
SurfAngel1623 3 years ago
SurfAngel1623,
I pretty much agree with your stance, but I would never want to pass laws restricting abortion. I think we should push for responsible sex/birth control and encourage adoption avenues.
imrational 3 years ago
I agree.
SurfAngel1623 3 years ago
So basicallly pragmitism rules over the life of the child? So basically killing human beings isn't wrong if it is done in a way to have greater humanity for everybody else? This is the kind of logic I saw from your video.
Is this your rule of ethics? You know regardless of the morality; look how good it is for the rest of us if the baby dies. Putting aside who knows what geniuses were aborted, the strength of your argument is contingent on whether an abortion is the killing of a baby.
darkforce333 3 years ago
darkforce333,
Nope. It is not necessarily my rule of ethics. I was presenting information to encourage rational debate.
imrational 3 years ago
You were presenting information in a way of an argument. You perpusefully gave the good points of allowing abortion and totally ignored the main reason people object to it. Unless you want to compare the unborn babies life to the mother's life and societies well being you are not dealing with the issue properly. Nobody who believes abortion is murder should see any persuasive power in your argument. On the other hand if it isn't murdering a baby, there is good reason for abortion.
darkforce333 3 years ago
Your argument "who knows what geniuses were aborted" is a poor one. We also do not know how which Hitlers or Stalins were aborted either.
The whole abortion issue rests on where an embryo becomes "human". Personally, I think we should define it as when brainwaves occur (if that is possible to determine). A timeline had been set on that previously, but has been called into question.
imrational 3 years ago
"Your argument "who knows what geniuses were aborted" is a poor one"
That's why i said putting that asside. Ok it was dumb to even mention, but is that all you can criticize me for?
"Personally, I think we should define it as when brainwaves occur."
But it's still very arbitrary. I don't want to commit the fallacy of the beard, but life and death seems to be a very black and white issue. Somehow with abortion we can fuzz it all. Technically life starts at conception.
darkforce333 3 years ago
Technically, it starts with sperm an egg production.
starfishsicko 3 years ago
starfishsicko
Depends on your statement. Are you responding to me or to darkforce333?
imrational 3 years ago
darkforce333-Basically I was mocking his notion that the egg is somehow more alive after merging with a sperm. Because, the way I figure it: whether it's a clump of cells, or a single cell, if there are no brainwaves, it is not human. Basically I'm saying-if you're gonna defend one form of potential life, you should defend it all.
starfishsicko 3 years ago
Life does start at conception. I wasn't that it wasn't. Your skin cells are "life".
I was saying that when brainwaves occur is when a person becomes "human". The hardcore, ultimate determination of medical "death" for a human being is the ending of brain function. Wouldn't it make sense to therefore go to the opposite? When brain waves start to function marking when a clump of cells become human?
imrational 3 years ago
There are documented medical accounts of people who have come out of total brain failure after hours of having no brain waves. But that's besides the point. Anyways don't brain waves start pretty early on in the baby? I guess if you reduce human kind to just tissue that isn't much different than your view. Considering your an atheist I wouldn't blame you for thinking that way.
darkforce333 3 years ago
darkforce333,
The only cases I've heard of people who were diagnosed with brain death and later lived had absolutely no documentation that of the "brain death".
Brain waves may start early. I've read conflicting accounts and think that there needs to be better research into this.
imrational 3 years ago
You have to admit abortion is kind of cold. Would you have no problem being an abortionist doctor? I'm just saying it's a lot easier to kill when you don't see it happen or the person you kill isn't intellegent enough to know something is being cruel.
darkforce333 3 years ago
Personally, I want kids... so I wouldn't want a girl to abort my child (although if it were majorly handicapped or would put the woman's life at risk is a different story). However, I would never dream of mandating what a woman does with her body.
imrational 3 years ago
Coffee Stock? I'll take that in mind!!! Maybe if we had the abortion and let the gays have adopt some kids, life will improve... somewhat?
Still crime will never truly be stopped... oh well
RoyalKnightVI 3 years ago
of course,i remember classes we had about contraception in elementry school and great lections in highschool.thats the way it should be.
lanananans 3 years ago
also what if you knew that your child was going to be born with a terminal illness, would you still keep that child to suffer when it is born.
idontsignin 3 years ago
if we did not have abortion then the world would be even more overpopulated as it is. even in britain where i live there are about 60 million people(alot) and have you seen the size of this country, it's not very big.
idontsignin 3 years ago
Awesome video! I'm subscribing :D
Elol22 3 years ago
I have always said that abortion is a complicated issue. Birth control should be first and abortion should be last but churches seem to try to stop both. As long as we deny sex education, we can expect abortion to be a continued practice.
cboxgo 3 years ago
So I'm driving down the highway just in time to read a sign with "Abortion stops a beating" posted on it. Confused and going through all the scenarios as to who had the nerve to put it up (not to mention that it hadn't been destroyed yet) put me in a interesting state of mind. Namely, that it kind of made sense, and that AntiAbortionists would be the first to rage and tear it down. After happening by it again I noticed the "heart" picture that was supposed to complete the sentence.
b4skin 3 years ago
wow... I'm really surprised that a billboard would have that.
imrational 3 years ago
If ProLife advocates spent as much time caring about the mothers instead of the 'innocent unborn child' there might actually be the conclusion they 'profess' they want. Good luck with that one eh?
b4skin 3 years ago
That is heavy reasoning, brother.
opinionhead444 3 years ago
It should always be illegal to kill American children. NO EXCEPTIONS!!!
Seekmosttoprophesy 3 years ago
stfu.
lovechild872 3 years ago
rolf! wwjd?
imrational 3 years ago
if u read d bible.only people who were murderers n drastically disobeyed d laws of God were put to death,
lovechild872 3 years ago
lovechild872,
Sorry, but I think you need to reread your bible. God actually encourages his chosen people to dash infants against rocks. How many infants disobey they laws of god?
imrational 3 years ago
what on earth areu talking about?
lovechild872 3 years ago
Hosea 13:16 "... their little ones dashed to death against the ground, their pregnant women ripped open by swords."
Numbers 31:17-18 "Now therefore kill every male among the little ones....
Isaiah 13:16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
Now you could argue that the parents were being punished... but what had their children done?
imrational 3 years ago
imrational is correct. The Israelites in the old testament exterminated people to take their land in true ethnic cleansing fashion. Also lets not forget the mass murder by Jehovah himself of Egyptians and others like in the great flood.
jotunobsidianeyes 3 years ago
yay I would love a Bible movie, would be a great NC-17 movie!!!
RoyalKnightVI 3 years ago
Do you want to hide behind your name the fact that you are not actually that rational ...? As a NORMAL human being every man is rational, why so many justifications for a natural thing? If you are rational this is obvious from your actions not from your words!
rascolnicc 3 years ago
Imrational, why do you fell the necessity to tell us that you are rational? If your viewers are rational too, they will agree with you anyway, if they are not, they will not understand you even if you try to explain to them. Then what is the rational purpose for showing us your rationality?. This is a proof that you are not actually rational; this can be seen from the simple fact that you want to explain the contrary. Your name (Imrational) confirms that
rascolnicc 3 years ago
rascolnicc,
I think you need to watch my video, "Why I am imrational".
I am not saying that I am rational, it's more that I am striving to BE rational. My ID is more for me than for you.
imrational 3 years ago
You have completely missed the whole point of debate over abortion. By putting the "moral/ethical" part of the issue to the side, you've put the WHOLE issue at the side. The video is ultimately pointless because it does not deal with the issue of abortion in even the slightest way.
VoSpader73 3 years ago
I disagree. I think that we have to consider information like the stuff I presented here as well.
imrational 3 years ago
Sorry, let me clarify: I think all of the issues you addressed here are secondary to the issue of the personhood of the un-born baby/fetus. Once that issue is tackled then the whole issue of abortion is determined regardless of the issues you bring up here because if the fetus is not a person, than its abortion is moral and ultimately all of the above issues are remedied, but if the fetus is a person then his/her's death can in no way be justified even in light of the issues brought up here.
VoSpader73 3 years ago
so to you, human life or the potential for human life should never be ended under any circumstances?
imrational 3 years ago
Abortion is a tough subject...
While on one hand it makes human life cheap and devalued.
On the other hand if you've seen some teen mothers living on the street, no money, no job trying to raise a child in that environment. most of the babies end up in orphanages or the care of the state without parents or dead anyway.
It still is in a way, murder, but it is also in a way, a mercy killing.
If war was upon a country some parents have killed their kids to save them from a worse fate...
universalJok3r 3 years ago
Cheap and devalued? By "human" people usually mean emotional and sentient, properties not found in an embryo. It cannot suffer and it allows the mother the freedom of her own body.
R055HP 3 years ago
There is always that, but the churches don't seem to realise there are worse fates than death and eternal damnation...
universalJok3r 3 years ago
A fate like being trapped in heaven with evangelicals and born-again-Christians.
R055HP 3 years ago
There is always that too... I could be worse though... It could be Hare Krisna's...
universalJok3r 3 years ago
i agree.
but having sex without any protection or thought about what could happen is your own fault. there are consequences to everything and people need to be responsible to their actions, they cant just erase whats been done.
knoxrox167 3 years ago
If this were to become a legal procedure, they would need to take everything into account.
a pregnant mother who is perfectly capable and has the resources to raise their child should, by no means, have an abortion purely because "it is a bad time" or "she doesn't want a child", that is what the pill was invented for...
universalJok3r 3 years ago
all the none sense to make abortion validated.
learnermind 3 years ago