How to Prevent Eugenic Abortions

Post Reply New Topic

Umm... you do pay for their medical treatment. It's called "paying taxes"...

Nonetheless, many people here die or otherwise suffer greatly because they can't afford medical treatment. And believe me, I would be happy to have my taxes go to help them. Hmm, perhaps I have defeated my own argument.

Callista wrote:

In the vast majority of cases, I would say it is ethical to force people to do things (up to a point at least, and there's no reason to get lost in the muddle of trying to define that point here and now) that will prevent others from dying.

But again....we are talking about a being which knows little or no suffering when it's life is terminated

That includes the suffering/fear involved in having one's conscious will to live thwarted. Like I said before, even in the case of severely disabled people who can't communicate their "to be or not to be" preference, I think we ought to assume they wish "to be".


I realize that it's only a matter of time before a fetus can make this decision, but the issue goes a little deeper for me.


That is....are we really willing to unleash this whirlwind of suffering upon pregnant women who don't wish to carry to term and upon society as a whole? Not to mention the suffering of a child forced to emerge into rather grim circumstances. After all....it seems to me that a consistent prolife position would equally entail opposition to abortion in both Darfur and Beverly Hills.

All this suffering for beings who feel little or no suffering when they're destroyed? Beings who've never even seen the light of day so to speak? Beings who don't even know they exist at all? Beings who won't be "missed" to the extent that other humans out of the womb usually are? All this suffering merely to add one more ant to an already overburdened hill?


Catholic theologians will tell you that god permits both the devil and damned souls to exist simply because existence is always preferable to nonexistence irrespective of the price of existence.

As a person who is hardly the happiest camper on earth, I can actually relate to this. As miserable as I am, i'm still unable to take my own life. I realize there's a specific neurobiology related to suicidality, but that's another story.

Aside from the suicidal, nonexistence is a very undesirable prospect for most of us. But this is only because we have tasted existence and in most cases, the prospect doesn't become more desirable even when we have tasted little but bitterness.

The fetus, on the other hand, is oblivious to existence. The fetus desires existence about as much as Nebuchadnezzar desired the internet.


So when we get to this extent....I really can't comprehend the prolife position. The price of birth at any cost seems far too pointless and far too high to my mind.

the antiabortion folk would consider that "cheating" - after all, many of them believe that sex should be for procreation ONLY and NEVER for pleasure on the woman's part.

Just because others have that belief does not mean I do.

If a woman uses two forms of birth control simulteneously, the chance of pregnancy is far lower. Say a woman uses the Norplant implant (0.1 in 100 pregnancies per year of use) as well as a condom (2 percent chance per year). The odds are highly in her favor that she won't become pregnant.

I don't want something messing up my endocrine system. I have enough of that toxin known as 'estrogen' pumping around in there.

I want to get surgically sterilized, but I shall still use condoms for safety.

i am not sure why everyone obsesses over abortion when something like domestic abuse, which is much more harmful to families, does not receive as much attention.

I am pro-life because I am opposed to abortion, but I do not believe that it should be made illegal because doing so would not stop or significantly reduce abortions. There would be illegal abortions with their high risk of death or serious injury to the mother. I don't like the term 'pro-life' with its implication that those whose are 'pro-choice' are anti-life.

From my knowledge of the political scene in the US most 'pro-lifers' are not socially progressive like Callista here. It seems that pro-life often goes with a constellation of objectionable right-wing opinions.

In current political discourse pro-life is entirely limited to being opposed to abortion being legal. But if a person is really pro-life then onsistently they should be opposed to capital punishment and be pacifist. If not strictly pacifist, then rejecting all military action in which there is any risk of death or injury to non-combatants. In the Iraq war in which US planes bombed Iraqi cities, pregnant women and their unborn children would have been killed. But as far as I know few pro-lifers objected to that, or to that war.

To oversimplify: pro-life is associated with being conservative or right-wing, pro-choice with being liberal or left-wing.

I agree most with the opinions expressed here by anbuend and Callista .

I've never met a single pro-lifer who actually believed that. I think it may have existed in the past (like, 100 years ago), or maybe some really, really extreme people believe it; but the mainstream... No. It's more like a strawman that the pro-choice people set up, just like the way pro-life people sometimes claim that pro-choice people want women to use abortion as birth control.

Now, many pro-lifers would prefer the abstinence-until-marriage thing; that's about as extreme as we get (and I personally think that is best as I've seen people really hurt from going too fast without any commitment; but don't feel like it's my right to tell anybody to do it because I'm asexual and don't know what they're feeling; plus it's actually illegal for some couples to get married so you can't very well say that they must do so)... The majority are not against birth control (except for the morning-after pill), and quite a few, like me, are trying to push for better sex education.

Don't mean to a be a complete dick here, but could we get this thread moved to the "Psychotic desire to conform others to my beliefs" forum? It is REALLY off topic and is only pissing me off just seeing the thread here.

I'm not seeing any impoliteness here, really. As far as abortion debates go, this one's not gotten anywhere near the flame-war level.

When people have strong opinions, they will want to convince others of those opinions. It's perfectly natural that we should. If it gets personal, sure, you can object. Or you can hold the opinion that nobody should ever try to convince anybody of their own ideas. But this is the Internet. People have opinions and we will talk about them.

Yeah marriage is not for everyone. I feel it's unhealthy to push yourself into this ideal where you only have sex with one person ever and you stay with them for life. That's not for me.

That said I am not a typical female and commitment isn't really an issue for me. I feel it's an unnecessary ideal that isn't for everyone. I would rather just have a good time with another human being who I desire and also care about and treat with respect.

My beef with the pro-life stance is this: while it's reasonable to ban late-term abortions, in the 1st/2nd trimester it's a different kettle of fish entirely. During that period the fetus isn't even developed enough to feel or think. Why would you value a nonsentient piece of tissue over a woman's body, her wishes, and her autonomy? Senseless.

I understand the sentiment, and given the initial thread was about EUGENIC abortion (which I do not endorse even though I am quite vociferously pro-choice) some of the debate is less relevant. However, having participated in many debates on this and many other philosophical and political issues, this one has been an extremely civil one. Even with eugenic abortion, though, I would rather have ppl recognize through education that diversity is a good thing than start playing nanny-state to control why women have abortions.

~Kate

They may not be a majority, but they certainly have a strong lobby pushing for abstinence only "education." Look at Texas.

What do you mean by a woman's very nature? Motherhood? I'm a woman and that's NOT my nature, don't presume to speak for other women, just because I'm a woman doesn't mean I want to squeeze out the next generation.

If I ever get pregnant I damn sure want the option of getting rid of it, I DON'T WANT a child, I DON'T WANT to give birth to one.