Abortion as a form of Birth Control

LordOpie · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Yes, I know there's already a killin' babies thread, but I dont want this to get lost in the frey.

For those of you who are pro-choice, and feel that abortions are not actually killing a living being, how do you feel about abortion as a form of birth control?

Clearly there are better means, but if someone were to just practice unprotected sex numerous times and keep getting abortions....would that be okay, since there's nothing morally wrong with abortions?

It's a trap, run away, run away!

A woman who uses birth control as a means of abortion is certainly irresponsible.

RhinofromWA · Mar 12, 2004

Some radio talk show....Tom Likus?? don't remember. I think it was last night on the drive home.

Talking about a woman getting manslaughter charges for drinking while pregnant or something........I think she lost the baby in a miscarriage.

anyway.

(I am sure I am paraphrasing) A man called in and defined that for him, a fetus is a parasitic being solely dependent on the woman. And it had no rights until it was seperated from the woman or something.

That even set me back in my seat. I don't think I have ever heard that arguement (if it can be called that) about when a fetus has rights.

I am still amazed I heard it.......

Sorry, not exactly linked to your post but I think this guy would have been OK with abortion as a form of birth control. :eek:

Me not so much. I think that the option should be there...but arent' there a lot of possible complications with abortion....especailly if you get one ever couple months. :confused:

Once in you life when it was your best option....OK. A form of birth control (like as in continueing utilization for) no.

ummbikes · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
So, its ok to kill ONE but just not MANY?

What's the acceptable number:devil:

666

:devil:

RhinofromWA · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
So, its ok to kill ONE but just not MANY?

What's the acceptable number:devil:

Well they could have done ONE MORE when you were in the womb.....don't try and goat me.

I can get viscious. but by any means continue. :devil:

I believe in having the option available. Not always utilizing it.

Evel Monkey · Mar 12, 2004

As long as abortion is legal, then fine. It's up to those people to deal with their morality issues, not anyone else.

Don't get me wrong, I know it's fun to discuss these things, but discussing them and actually putting a persons beliefs on someone else are two different deals.

Responsibility is a different question Certainly there are cheaper methods of control, use them.

I guess for my final argument Judge (dont' take that offense, just role playing

), as long as it is legal, go ahead.

RhinofromWA · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Im just sayin' people cant have it both ways.

If you believe that its nothing to have an abortion. That removing a few random cells out of the uterus is not morally wrong in any way. Than why would you have a problem with it as a form of birth control?

If you beleive that there is something morally wrong with it...than allowing just one abortion should be wrong, i would think.

Help me out here.

How is it having it both ways? Many more popular methods like barriers and hormonal methods do it without the intrusive operation of an abortion.

But if you are looking for me to say it is OK for you to have an abortion I say go for it. :rolleyes:

But you don't need my approval.......

I believe the abortion itself isn't as safe as using a condom or the pill, etc. (do we need to discuss this part further?) There are possible complications in abortions that just aren't there from the others. It is a last resort not a form of birth control.

Birth control and abortion are two seperate matters....unless you can't seperate them. That isn't my problem.

It isn't a "moral" issue, or have I not made my self clear this time? It isn't a "Rhino" approved form a Birth Control.

If you use a condom you just aborted any chance of that sperm joining the egg. That is similiar to abortion....but we have been killig sperm since puberty so it isn't an issue for us guys.

Evel Monkey · Mar 12, 2004

Fine, how about this: Morally, I feel they can do what they want, it's legal.

Do you feel otherwise, or are you just playing devil advocate.

RhinofromWA · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
We know its legal dude, that's not the argument. Really, there is no argument, Im just trying to get a feel for how people morally feel about this issue.

I hear people alot of the time say "abortion shouldnt be used as a form of birth control" yet they're still pro-choice. Im trying to figure out if they say that because they feel there is some value to a the to-be-terminated fetus, or what.

They are pro choice. Because someone thinks it shouldn't be used as a form of birth control....

Does NOT mean they dissapprove of access to abortions.

Birth control, to me, is a method used continously (the pill) or every time you get the chance (condom

) to prevent the initiation of the fetus. Once it is started then I prefer there to be choices. All choices so the person involved can decide what works out better for them.

Abortion is not a FORM OF BIRTH CONTROL. Linking abortion to Birth control is where you are breaking away and causing the debate. Pro-choice doesn't mean you approve of surgery every time you get pregnent (used as a birth control)

I believe the choice should be available (legal) if it is needed. Doesn't mean I promote irresponsibilty

Evel Monkey · Mar 12, 2004

Is this a question of religious or legal morallity?

Anyway, I see no difference between it being used for birth control, or preventing a birth due to rape.

RhinofromWA · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
It is actually. It does control whether or not a baby is born. That's what Im getting at here.

You are correct partially but you are making an arguement when there isn't one.

But you are way wrong.

You must be able to see the difference between advocating as a choice of birth control (like the pill, condoms, etc) and a choice after the fact.

But if you must keep them rose colored blinders on. I hope question the next time you use a condom....baby killer. No different, actually. Condoms are the same as abortion....by you. SO you condone abortions....for shame.

Plastic floatie love'n is a form of abortion too.

TCoop924 · Mar 12, 2004

I am definitely pro-choice on the matter for one....but for a person to repeatedly use abortion as birth control...that seems kind of ridiculous....not sure if it should be illegal persay, but still ridiculous....and yes, there are negative (physical and emotional) aspects to it. It just seems ridiculous since there are so many more responsible methods that cost less, aren't nearly as controversial, and aren't nearly as damaging (if at all) to the woman.

Evel Monkey · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
what is legal morality and why are 'legal' and 'religious' the only two choices given?

Im not religious for one, and Id still have the same feeling regardless of the law.

But thanks for finally answering.

My answer is the same as it was a few posts ago, you're welcome.

Having a bad day, or you just being mean?

Evel Monkey · Mar 12, 2004

It's alright, just thought I'd ask before jumping to conclusions.

the law · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Im just sayin' people cant have it both ways.

Wrong! There are a myriad of other reasons (other than the notion that abortion kills a human being) why people might object to the repeated use of abortions instead of contraceptives as birth control.

ohio · Mar 12, 2004

If someone has to repeatedly get their stomach pumped because they drink too much is that okay, even though drinking isn't morally wrong? If they use stomach pumping as their "method" of drinking responsibly, are you down with that?

the law · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
as long as they have health insurance.

Hehe. Or a fat checkbook.

the law · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Im not asking about those reasons. All that aside, Im asking if morally, having numerous abortions is ok.

And I am saying that there are possibly a myriad of other reasons, based on an individual's personal perception of morality, that may cause that person to believe that having numerous abortions for the purpose of birth control is morally wrong, despite also believing that having one abortion is neither morally wrong or murder.

Maybe you should frame your question narrower?

If having one abortion is not murder, then having multiple abortion is not mass murder.

edited

RhinofromWA · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
No, no.

Trust me, I do.
Im saying I think abortion is morally wrong, though it does control birth. Im saying condoms are morally ok, since they do not kill anyone. You're misinterpreting everything.

Im asking if people who think abortion is morally OK, have any moral problem with abortion as a form of birth control.

Ok ok I took it wrong I guess.

BUT Condoms stop the mirecal of life happening just the same as an abortion. It dissallows the little guys a chance at life. That is murder.....if abortion is murder. I guess it stems from your own personal thoughts on when life starts...yada yada yada another thread.

I have no problem allowing abortions....when needed. Moral or otherwise. I have a problem of using abortion as the only form of that persons birth control. It isn't a morals issue for me, but if someone opposed abortions, on morals, than it would be to them.

llkoolkeg · Mar 12, 2004

Ugh...why must we continue to pick at this nasty scab. Those who believe abortion is some sort of inalienable right will not be convinced that unnaturally ending the life of their offspring is something they should feel bad about. Why burdon their ethereal consciences with ethical dilemmas when the rainforest, gay marriage and animal products demand their attention?

BuddhaRoadkill · Mar 12, 2004

Abortion is a form of surgery and comes with risk, much greater risks than condoms, pill, etc... The more one has, the more one is putting themselves in danger. That is what I see as being wrong with multiple abortions - reckless endangerment of self. With any luck the fool will render themselves infertile within the first few operations.

As for the parasite

, not much difference between blowing your nose once or blowing it all day long - both being morally benign in my opinion.

ALEXIS_DH · Mar 12, 2004

the entire argument of abortions is basically a defense for the idea, it is not a logical sequence that ends with the idea of abortion being morally correct.

is an intent to justify an action a priori, to reduce the consequent stress or remorse.

ALEXIS_DH · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
Ok ok I took it wrong I guess.

BUT Condoms stop the mirecal of life happening just the same as an abortion. It dissallows the little guys a chance at life. That is murder.....if abortion is murder. I guess it stems from your own personal thoughts on when life starts...yada yada yada another thread.

I have no problem allowing abortions....when needed. Moral or otherwise. I have a problem of using abortion as the only form of that persons birth control. It isn't a morals issue for me, but if someone opposed abortions, on morals, than it would be to them.

thats the argument of the catholic church on condoms, but u gotta draw a line somewhere.

what makes an abortion different than a condom? sperm IS NOT another being itself, its part of you. wasting a little bit for recreational purposes is not morally wrong, as triming your nails or cutting your hair is not morally wrong.

the problem is when sperm and an egg get together, thats not anymore you. thats a complete different human being. how? it has another DNA. that makes a difference. but, another issue is deffining when does life starts, is it when when u mix an egg and sperm? or does it starts when this little mix implants on the womb?

ALEXIS_DH · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
i think something just exploded inside my head.

For some reason that last sentence was really hard for me to read.

my bad, its my spanish talking head trying to write english.

golgiaparatus · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by BurlySurly
So, its ok to kill ONE but just not MANY?

What's the acceptable number:devil:

LMAO! Dud you are on today.

Evel Monkey · Mar 12, 2004

Hey man, I'm on,......I'm on....

RhinofromWA · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by ALEXIS_DH
thats the argument of the catholic church on condoms, but u gotta draw a line somewhere.

what makes an abortion different than a condom? sperm IS NOT another being itself, its part of you. wasting a little bit for recreational purposes is not morally wrong, as triming your nails or cutting your hair is not morally wrong.

the problem is when sperm and an egg get together, thats not anymore you. thats a complete different human being. how? it has another DNA. that makes a difference. but, another issue is deffining when does life starts, is it when when u mix an egg and sperm? or does it starts when this little mix implants on the womb?

I agree, but stopping the sperm from doing what they do....creating life, is as good as killing them down the road if one were to argue that way.

The sperm is an essential part of that future possible being. You esentially are stopping it from countinuing along the path to fertilization. I don't care to argue when life begins and how that applys to this....that has so many opinions it will never be accepted by everyone. You are a baby killer if you use a condom (but please use one, for goodness sake) It is killing the future baby. This isn't rocket science.

If you are against abortion....by the way Burly was asking the question you would have to be against the use of contraception. When contraception is used you are killing the chance the egg can be fertized. You are killing an unformed fetus. :rolleyes:

Since it is OK to murder sperm if it is solely yours, then a group (partners) choice to abort, the ladies and mans material, should be OK too. But we then get into when does it all begin debate.....

ALEXIS_DH · Mar 12, 2004

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
I agree, but stopping the sperm from doing what they do....creating life, is as good as killing them down the road if one were to argue that way.
...

there is a huge difference, u are not letting something that does not exist to happen, which is very different from letting something that already exists to die.

u cannot be accounted for killing some new DNA it doesnt even exist.

another thing is killing them once they are already there, and another is not letting them happen.

When contraception is used you are killing the chance the egg can be fertized. You are killing an unformed fetus.

thats way different. killing an unformed fetus? how can u kill an unformed thing??
this is different from unborn. unformed means unexistant. and as a matter of fact, you are not killing anything, because there is nothing to be killed.
killing a chance, is only that. killing a future embryo??. future exists nowhere else than in your mind.

Click to expand...

Since it is OK to murder sperm if it is solely yours, then a group (partners) choice to abort, the ladies and mans material, should be OK too. But we then get into when does it all begin debate.....

sperm is solely of the owner, an egg is solely of the owner.

but a fetus is not anymore moms and dads. its him or herself.

its a different DNA. since its a different DNA, its a different being,

thus making the "group" unable to exercise any right over it.

your logic is also ambigous, as it doesnt mark any length. following that logic of a fetus being part of mans and lady, you are stiil your moms and dads "material" until you die. so why arent you, in that logic, part of their bodies, and their property for the rest of your life?

i define my body as any celule with my DNA. a fetus or embryon is not my DNA. it may be based on mine, but its not mine anymore. its not my body anymore. therefore i cannot kill it, split it or whatever.

might be small, not talk or whatever, but, its a different person.
:confused:

BuddhaRoadkill · Mar 15, 2004

Originally posted by ALEXIS_DH
might be small, not talk or whatever, but, its a different person.

Your not actually trying to say that DNA constitutes a person ... are you?

Silver · Mar 15, 2004

Originally posted by BuddhaRoadkill
Your not actually trying to say that DNA constitutes a person ... are you?

Yes, it certainly appears that he is...

Abortion as a form of Birth Control

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

MOTHER HEN

Brevity R Us

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Don't mess with the Santas

Brevity R Us

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Monkey

Brevity R Us

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Monkey

Brevity R Us

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Monkey

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Brevity R Us

Monkey

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Monkey

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Monkey

Monkey

The Fresno Kid

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Monkey

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Monkey

Brevity R Us

Ranger LL

I suck at Tool

Tirelessly Awesome

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again

Tirelessly Awesome

Tirelessly Awesome

Out of my element

Monkey

Brevity R Us

Tirelessly Awesome

I suck at Tool

find me a tampon