Abortion is a medical procedure resulting in the termination of a human pregnancy and death of a fetus. Abortion was banned in 30 states until the 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade. The ruling made abortion legal in all 50 states but gave them regulatory powers over when abortions could be performed during a pregnancy. On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade in the case Dobbs v. Jackson. The court ruled that the substantive right to abortion was not “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history or tradition”, nor considered a right when the Due Process Clause was ratified in 1868.
@ISIDEWITH13yrs13Y
Pro-choice
Removed by author11mos11MO
Top Disagreement
It isn't a woman's sole choice to make as the child in her womb is a separate life, a separate person, with distinct DNA and everything. In no circumstance would we approve of killing children outside the womb, inside the womb is no different.
@9G9MS7B9mos9MO
I agree. Biology tells us that life starts at the moment of conception so when the sperm fertilized the egg, a new human being is formed and should be protected. Exceptions to abortion are miscarriages, rape, incest, and If it endangers the life of a mother. If none of those apply there are millions of couples in the USA on waitlists to adopt a child because they’re infertile.
@ClamNora9mos9MO
This is because up to 50% of all fertilized eggs spontaneously abort, often before the woman knows she's pregnant. Is this considered a life lost?
Also, while adoption is indeed a noble path, it's important to consider the reality of the system. There are currently over 400,000 children in foster care in the USA, with a third eligible for adoption. Yet, most prospective parents prefer to adopt babies, leaving older children and teenagers in the system. This suggests that the adoption system has its challenges and isn't a simple solution to unwanted pregnancies.
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on these points. Do you think defining the exact moment life begins is straightforward? And how can we improve the adoption system to better accommodate these children?
@9JJFZFC 5 days5D
a spontaneous abortion is another way of saying miscarriage… which is entirely different than purposefully taking the life of another human. Most miscarriages are wanted pregnancies and no one goes out of their way to induce them (hence why they are considered spontaneous) but yes this is a life lost 😔. (I mean woman who’ve had miscarriages sure believe so…) Just because someone doesn’t know they are pregnant or want to be pregnant doesn’t automatically deem that life illegitimate.
Rather than sacrifice a life (that isn’t your right to sacrifice) because a system is shot, let’s focus all this attention, as woman, on restoring this system to benefit, not only aborted potentials, but the many other children displaced for various reasons.
@Bi11R1ghtsPigletGreen9mos9MO
While it's true that a unique set of DNA is formed at conception, it's important to note that biological life and personhood are not synonymous. There are different philosophical, religious, and cultural beliefs about when personhood begins.
As for adoption, it's indeed a beautiful thing, but it's not a simple alternative to pregnancy. Pregnancy and childbirth have profound physical and psychological impacts on a woman's body, and no one should be forced to go through them unwillingly.
@9JJFZFC 5 days5D
but “personhood” is developed, developed overtime. It can even change. A baby doesn’t have the same rationality as an adult, does that make the baby less of a person. It does us no good when we try to prescribe personhood to individuals because once it becomes subjective, and we have seen that mistake all throughout history, we start to discriminate against race, gender, babies, heck even the disabled. Ironically Margaret Sanger (a known eugenist, racist and founder of planned parenthood) believed the very thing you said. See how that mindset (of prescribing “personhoo… Read more
@9H4DL4B8mos8MO
I mostly agree with this position. However, I would like to say that incest shouldn't be an exception; most of the time, the incest exception is there as a result of concerns about genetic defects in the child. Disability shouldn't take away your right to life.
Moreso, I've seen some testimonies from medical professionals that abortion is almost never required to save the mother's life. I don't know this for sure, though, so I would look into that yourself for more detail. Just a thought I've had.
@9FT2ZWJ10mos10MO
Yes I agree. But abortions should still be available to the public because sometimes there will be certain situations like rape, incest and child pregnancies. Abortions shouldn’t be glorified though as I see it as something that no one should be proud of. But yes abortions should be allowed.
@9FCBW4C10mos10MO
Abortion does not equal killing children. When a women decides to treat her own body and get an abortion, she is preventing the embryo from forming into a child, meaning that there is no baby yet and it is not murdering anyone. A women should be allowed to make her own choices and if she feels that the baby would not have a good life at that point in time then she may choose to rightfully terminate her pregnancy.
@9JJFZFC 5 days5D
What? an embryo is literally a baby in the early stages of development. It only takes a simple google search to figure that out. But forget about the baby being in the mother, you literally just rationalized dissent and human sacrifice simply because someone deemed that life not fit (“the baby would not have a good life”? what’s a good life? who has a good life? and how do you determine if that life is good enough to live?). See how that makes no sense? It’s not a “woman’s choice” to kill another life. Period.
You're reasoning in a circle. Your argument for the morality of abortion assumes the morality of abortion – otherwise it's completely incoherent. Rather than defend the ideas that
(1) Abortion has to do with a woman's body, not the aborted baby's body, and
(2) An "embryo" is not a child
You assume the anti-life position in order to argue for it. This entire argument is irrational.
@9P2VH7S1mo1MO
Do your research. It depends on how far along the woman is. Sometimes they kill it after it's developed. It's not always just an embryo.
@AffectedBoars10mos10MO
Indeed, the topic of when life begins is a central point in this debate. While some argue that life begins at conception, owing to the distinct DNA and potential for development, others assert that life starts at a later stage when the fetus can survive outside the womb.
Consider this, if we discovered a single-celled organism on Mars, wouldn't we proclaim we've found life? Yet, when it comes to a zygote, a multi-cellular organism in the womb with unique human DNA, why do we deny its life status?
Furthermore, the argument that women should have a choice is definitely valid. Howe… Read more
A major party of the woman's life, she will have the child under her responsibility. if she thinks that she is not able to give to this baby a great life, its better for her to abort.
@L3ftyCodyRepublican10mos10MO
I understand where you're coming from, but consider this: adoption. There are many loving families who are unable to have children of their own and are waiting for the opportunity to adopt. If a woman feels she cannot provide a good life for her child, adoption offers another option. What are your thoughts on this as an alternative to abortion?
@LehiMello 1mo1MO
This sounds like a great way of both sides winning, the child will live, and the mother won't be the one taking care of them
@9HGMXYXIndependent8mos8MO
Yeah i agree because if the father finna dip why we gotta take care of the baby WE DIDNT WANT...not only that but if the child is going to have a trumatic life why bring a baby into this world.
Then what about all the homeless drug addicts in Portland, Seattle, LA, New York, and Atlanta? They don't have "great lives" so is it fine to murder them? If you had any logical consistency on this issue, you'd have to argue for that.
@9GXXGW79mos9MO
Hmmm, maybe if the woman took responsibility in the bedroom with her partner, this discussion would not be happening.
@9G2MC2PRepublican 10mos10MO
Everyone has the right to live, even an unborn baby. Just because of whatever decisions the father or mother made does not justify the death of the child.
@9G66DB810mos10MO
I disagree, because most women who would wan't an abortion have probably wen't through something traumatic like rape or etc.
@9G2W76P 10mos10MO
Yes! I agree, punish the rapist not the baby. Parents dont have a right to dictate the life of another individual. Even if they are in their womb.
@9CJ6CB69mos9MO
I know people who would've been killed by their abusive spouses if they still had any remaining link to them, I know that they had no other viable option other than abortion to prevent from being abused, and that they would only ever be away from that spouse if they didn't have the kid. There are THOUSANDS of reasons people have them, and that is their right to choose. We do not force people to donate organs because it'll save a life, same way as we don't force people to give birth.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution8mos8MO
You would then punish a child for the mistakes of other people – punish with DEATH, DEATH! In what world is that right? The child did nothing wrong, the child's not even old enough to think of sinning! Two wrongs don't make a right. once you're a mother you're a mother forever.
@GloopdevIndependent1mo1MO
You know people who MAY have been killed by their abusive spouses. The risk of danger does not give you the right to dismember an innocent party. Also, if there is such a serious issue regarding the safety of the mother, the problem is not the baby. Sacificing innocent lives because of a poor abuse support system is not acceptable in any way, and there are many other ways to deal with such a situation. There may be thousands of reasons to have an abortion, but they are actually just thousands of bad reasons. These reasons always boil down to "I don't see this life as worthy of existing therefore I will kill it".
@9HGMXYXIndependent8mos8MO
“not the baby”
you've got to be joking. That poor mother..
@9G3L78W10mos10MO
Yes, I believe that every baby should have the right to live a life. if the mother or father is not ready for that then they can put the child up for adoption and have another capable family take care of it.
@9G53LFT10mos10MO
I'm conflicted. I agree but at the same time things can happen: rape, sexual abuse/assault, incest, not being able to even afford the child. These things happen and while in some cases abortion shouldn't be legal, in other cases it should not be. In some cases, why put yourself and the child through the pain and struggles then you both go through it? In others you're being selfish and irresponsible, you're taking the life of your child because of your mistakes. I honestly think abortion should be legal.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution8mos8MO
In cases of rape, sexual abuse/assault, incest, and unaffordability the child is just as human as he/she would otherwise have been. D-mn the circumstances, it's a human being, do not murder it.
@9KTPRPNLibertarian5mos5MO
Children that are products of incest do not have a good quality of life. They have increased genetic disorders, fluctuating facial asymmetry, lower birth weight, and higher infant mortality and child mortality rates. Not to mention, 95-97% of children that were conceived because of incest report to being sexually abused as small children. I will and would always abort a child if I was raped by my father or brother. You have absolutely no say in what I do with my body, as a man.
@9F4RHRPRepublican 9mos9MO
From my perspective, the core argument is about the inherent value of life. Pro-choice often focuses on a woman's autonomy, but excludes the unborn child's right to life. This child, though not yet fully developed, has the potential to become a fully functioning human being. It's not about current capabilities, but potential ones. Shouldn't we, as a society, prioritize preserving the potential for life over personal convenience or circumstance? It's a delicate balance, but for me, upholding the sanctity of life is paramount.
@9H57ZGBRepublican8mos8MO
To say 'potential for life' is to deny this child's already months-old life. We do not (or should not) as a country hold that some lives are more important than others-- especially if we espouse any form of egalitarianism. All life in all stages ought to be protected. A pro-life sentiment does not go far enough to say the unborn need protection -- we must do more to assist the struggling single mother and to address the conditions that lead to cycles of poverty and despair in our country.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution8mos8MO
The way to address these conditions is to get the government to leave people the heck alone.
@9JJCG8C 6mos6MO
Its funny you say that because your stance on the issue is putting an unborn baby's life over a 13 year old who is pregnant from being raped by her uncle. Everyone cares about the unborn babies lives but when the baby is born its no longer your problem. The ban on abortions is about nothing other than control.
@GloopdevIndependent1mo1MO
“putting an unborn baby's life over a 13 year old who is pregnant from being raped by her uncle”
It is reasonable to hold the importance of life in higher regard than a 13 year old girl's trauma. Emotions don't justify a killing. The ban on abortions IS about control, and that control is good and righteous because it is there to protect the unprotected.
@9GYXRV3Independent8mos8MO
I agree, and I would also like to add that we should invest in programs and policies to help parents in difficult situations so that they don't view abortion as the most "convenient" option
@Patriot-#1776Constitution8mos8MO
We should just ban it
@9HHK57Q 8mos8MO
“ban it”
how would just baning it help the parent figure out what they want to do if the dad fina dip let him dip just let the mother do what she gona do if she dont want no baby let her have an abortion.
@9GY74R39mos9MO
I completely agree. Life should be of the utmost importance. Our Constitution declares life as one of our God-given rights. There are plenty of opportunities for adoption in the U.S., so if having a child is too much for a person to handle, adoption centers will take care of the child.
@9GYJVFF9mos9MO
I believe that you should be able to get abortion but only in rape, incest, or risk to mother or child
@GloopdevIndependent1mo1MO
Why incest? I have never heard a single good argument for that. Rape is at least somewhat understandable, though the logic is still downright idiotic. Why does incest specifically mean that we have the right to kill the baby?
@9GMWPQD 9mos9MO
people should be able to do whatever they want with their body not have it decided by anyone else that is their own choice. Some people also get into situations that are not their fault like rape and they shouldn't be forced to keep that baby if they dont want to that wasn't their fault and wouldn't have the proper mental health in that moment either to raise a child, people should just respect peoples choices cause at the end of the day the person getting the abortion knows whats best for them and that child.
@9GMZZXZ9mos9MO
people who are impregnated by rape should be offered free delivery fees to keep people from aborting babies. The baby is still a human regardless if it is 2 weeks old or 6 months old.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution8mos8MO
The baby is a human from the point of conception
@9GP35TZRepublican9mos9MO
No abortion is not best for the child. In no logical way is killing the child best for them. There are many other options if you are not in a place to raise the child.
@9GMXXKG 9mos9MO
So you can't smoke a cigarette in a hospital for the same reason you can't punch people. Your right to swing your fist ends at someone's face. Rape and incest make up less than 1% of abortion so to use such a small portion to justify that 99% is illogical. Science also teaches us that things are alive, dead, or will never be alive. If the baby isn't alive, it's dead or it's nonliving. It's the same species as us just at a different stage, and a newborn isn't able to sustain its own life and neither is a two year old or a ninety nine year old. I agree… Read more
@9GMX8849mos9MO
People have the right to choose what goes on in their own body. What they do to their own body is not your problem.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
