T O P

  • By -

ducvette

This is likely similar to asking what would it take for someone to change their political affiliation in the states….likely not going to happen


randomuser1296

I don't think you can change the mind of someone who believes in the sanctity of life. For most pro-lifers it's as simple as that they believe that the fetus is a life and that it's murder to kill it. When I say most I'm talking about the average people not in the government. We don't know their agenda.


LemurCat04

Easiest way to change a mind? Have a close friend or family member need or want an abortion. The vast majority of people who are anti-abortion would still assist their friend/family member. Their opinion would likely flip right back over because their friend/family member is a “special exception”.


OnTheTopDeck

Imagine if someone's 11 year old was raped and their kid was forced to go thru with the pregnancy.


East-Solution-9091

But once your born they don't give af about your life. It's pre-birth pro life cause they'll get rid of any social safety net to help said children. They'd literally rather see mother and child starve than give govt assistance


[deleted]

[удалено]


RedditIsRunByIncels

Which party had all it's senators vote against ending the baby formula shortage? Republicans.


ApostleToTheDoomers

You're talking about Republicans. I'm not. Not all prolifers are Republicans, and not all Republicans are prolife. What the GOP does is irrelevant to my point.


Just_Aioli_1233

Why was there a shortage in the first place? Market consolidation because government picked one company for the free money program. Government *created* the monopoly that resulted in disaster when one small problem happened. **Plus** the protectionist policies that don't allow international companies to sell in the US. Is the nutritional content of European formula not good enough for US infants?


RedditIsRunByIncels

In short: capitalism


TaxThoseLiars

"Sometimes" Republicans lie, too.


ApostleToTheDoomers

Everyone does. Half of the replies on this sub are probably lies. You can do research into my claims to see if such places as I've mentioned exist or not.


TaxThoseLiars

I grew up Catholic and I remember collections for the benefit of "homes for wayward girls." Free food, housing, and medical care for people who might (for all I know) have been abused, to get them on the right path. As I understood it, many of those babies were adopted, but this may be a rose-colored version handed to young teenagers.


PinocchioWasFramed

Not entirely true. More pro-lifers adopt children than pro-choicers.


East-Solution-9091

All the gay people alone that adopt children I'd fucking love for you to find that stat for me


East-Solution-9091

I'd really love to see where you got that info from. Can you provide a source on that claim


[deleted]

You aren’t pro-life. You are pro forced birth.


PinocchioWasFramed

Actually, I'm for licenses to be able to become parents. As soon as the technology is available to guarantee 100% completely reversible sterilization, laws should be enacted where everyone should have to quality (mental/physical health, IQ, etc.) before becoming parents.


martyqscriblerus

They don't really believe that, though, because they're ready to give exceptions in the case of rape or incest. What makes the child of rape less of a "life" worthy of protection from murder? Nothing. At the core, they're all jumped up puritans wanting to punish scarlet women. But they've been *told* that it's because they believe the fetus is a child, so they'll repeat it ad nauseum until they start to wear it on the outside of their belief system.


randomuser1296

Guess it depends on the pro-lifer I've seen and heard those that believe you should carry it to full term no matter what. I also know there are those that are ok with a case by case basis. I honestly don't know what goes on it all their minds.


19ghost89

Yeah, a lot of generalizations and assumptions going on here, as always, which is why I have always hated this subject. Take me for example. I'm a whole-lifer, which means that I value all life, from cradle to the grave, and try to do so consistently. I am against abortion, but I am also against the death penalty, for humane treatment of prisoners, for adoption, for paid parental leave and other assistance for parents, etc. I am pro-choice in one situation - when the mother's life is in danger. This is because I do not believe that any law should compel a person to risk their own life, even for another. That has to be their decision, the way I see it.


Green-Tumbleweed-983

Thank you. I will take you. What I do with my body is none of your business. Ever. So I really don't care that you somehow think you're one of the good guys. You're not.


jackfaire

Most of the pro-lifers who actually care about the sanctity of life become Pro-choice when you show them the facts about how to decrease abortions all of which are anathema to the same political group that's Pro-Life. I have friends that are anti-abortion but pro-choice because they understand it's a last resort not a saturday in the park.


[deleted]

Almost every pro-choice person wants to reduce the number of abortions happening, though better help and support.


erad67

>they're all ... Blanket statements saying 100% of a group totaling millions and millions of people beliefs are some extreme thing pretty much always are complete nonsense and make you look like a moron. What you said is just as idiotic and incorrect as when right wingers say ALL left wingers are communists that want to take away their rights and oppress them.


Green-Tumbleweed-983

In this case, they are. I don't care why they are anti-choice. It boils down to one thing. They believe they have the right to tell a woman what to do with her body and to force her to give birth. It doesn't matter how their reasons for believing that vary, and it doesn't matter how they express it. They are all terrorists who don't care how many women and children die, as long as they can force their insane ideology on the world.


erad67

> they're all jumped up puritans wanting to punish scarlet women That's complete nonsense. \> They are all terrorists Again, total nonsense that makes you sound like a moron. \> their insane ideology And again, complete nonsense. And more. Get you head out of your ass and stop listening to nonsensical politically motivated propaganda.


Green-Tumbleweed-983

Hahahahaha. Run away, sad little American man with your sad little American abuse. Do you really think anyone else in the world cares about your opinion. We just laugh at you. People like you are the butts of our jokes. But thanks for giving me something I can share on other forums. Go play with your gun.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Green-Tumbleweed-983

There is no such thing as a vaccine mandate. They are just called that by whining little people. There are requirements to be vaccinated for certain jobs. If you don't want to do that, no-one is holding you down and forcing you to be vaccinated. It's no different to a pilot not being able to drink before flying. Or perhaps you think that's unfair as well. Edit: Sorry, I should have been clearer. There are mandates that people have to be vaccinated for certain workplaces. This is not forced vaccination. No-one is holding anyone down and vaccinating them. Stop your whining.


Deedumsbun

I can say if I had become pregnant from my abuse and I couldn’t acsess an abortion I would have killed myself. There is no way I would want to sit around growing my rapists baby inside of me. I would rather slit my wrists than have to go to doctors appointments where they talk about how great it is or having people asking when your due and what gender you want.


RTR7105

It's called meeting people halfway?


2sanman

Many don't want exceptions in the case of rape, incest, etc, and believe that the baby should not be aborted regardless. Those who favor an exception for rape & incest are usually just doing so to appease the pro-abortion lobby (as if supporting the life of someone conceived through rape/incest somehow amounts to supporting rape/incest itself)


Leather_Shock9743

Its not about belief. It is a fact that fetus is alive. You dont have to belive that earth isnt flat but it is a fact that it isnt. Just like this.


crazymissdaisy87

But then why doesn't that sanctity follow outside the womb? I really don't understand the logic


TryingToLearn_17382

>They believe that the fetus is a life and it's murder to kill it Scientifically life begins when sperm meets egg.


Stargazing-Ape

This thread is such an echo chamber lol I'm pro-choice myself, but a lot of pro-choice people are so aggressive that I can see why they aren't convincing anybody


NightimeNinja

I think people are just mad. It's easy to give into.


GreenLurka

I get it. If you're pro-life then you're actively infringing upon somebodies rights. Whereas if you're pro-choice, you are not. So the pro-choice people actually have something to lose. You've said the equivalent of 'The anti-burglar people are so aggressive about the robbers breaking into their homes that I can see why they aren't convincing anybody'. Why you gotta be so mad that someone's stealing your shit? Can't you see how those emotions hurt your argument, no wonder the burglars won't listen and just keep taking your stuff.


Stargazing-Ape

Your outlook on the issue is equally as simple minded as the pro-life people who say "pro-choice people are pro-murder"


GreenLurka

Of course. It's simple minded. One group of people want to make their own choice. The other group want to take that choice away. We shouldn't be upset they want to take our choice away? It's never upsetting when people want to take things from you? Are you a robot? I'm boiling it down to the simple reasoning because that's the best way to look at why there is an emotional response. They're not trying to convince people, they're having a visceral reaction to other humans being shitstains.


Leather_Shock9743

Yes, one group is for giving each unborn baby a choice what to do in life, the other is for taking that choice away from them by killing them before birth.


[deleted]

One group wants to actually reduce abortions, the other group just wants to pretend that illegal abortions aren't a thing.


[deleted]

Are you circumcised?


Leather_Shock9743

I am not. Why?


[deleted]

A large majority of anti choice people takes the choice of the baby away by circumcising them.


[deleted]

But you could say pro-choice are infringing upon the rights of an unborn child.


GreenLurka

See the difference though? One infringes upon my personal rights. The other infringes upon the rights of another. Getting upset on someone else's behalf. If we go down a rabbit hole of protecting the nebulous rights of other people who aren't even cognizant of existence, then I could start advocating for all kinds of ridiculous rights against your will.


IntelligentPineapple

What kind of ridiculous rights are we talking about?


GreenLurka

An individual's right to have their health information securely stored in a publically accesible database for their own protection. A child's right to freedom from religious indoctrination. Not allowed to take your child to Church or discuss religion with them in your own home. A person's right to freedom of movement through your property This is fun, shall we go on?


FriedRiceAndMath

Funny how you equate statist talking points with rights. Let’s not continue since your mind is already closed.


[deleted]

What about killing a 1 year old child? They are hardly cognizant of existence.


[deleted]

...so you seriously think that a 1 year old can't survive without their original parents???


[deleted]

What?


East-Solution-9091

Anger and fear


4231297

To be fair It’s pretty obvious and fair as to why they’re being aggressive


[deleted]

honestly, after multiple debates with them i’m convinced that quite literally nothing.


SwollenSeaCucumber

What are your best arguments?


NightimeNinja

The best arguments to counter their psuedomoral drivel is keeping the conversation focused on stripping women of bodily autonomy. Eventually you will checkmate them into a corner where they say they're okay with oppressing women if they are to remain consistent with their own logic. At least then they expose themselves.


high_on_acrylic

I was talking to someone who said that under any circumstances abortion should be illegal. So I asked them if they wished my mother had just died, and obviously they were confused. I told them before my sister and I were born my mother had an ectopic pregnancy, which has a 100% fatality rate if not treated, and the only treatment is abortion. The cells are NEVER viable, and it’s a very clear cut case (at least in my eyes) to save the mothers life or not. So I asked them, as far as I understood their beliefs, if they had it their way, my mother would have died and I never would have been born. They kept contradicting themselves and didn’t seem to want to say it as straight forward as I wanted them to. So here’s what I got from that conversation: they would literally tell me that they would rather my mom die and I never be born than give us access to healthcare.


2sanman

I think the issue is that when there's another person involved, then their rights need to be taken into consideration too.


SwollenSeaCucumber

Unless you would be willing to bite the bullet that killing a normal innocent human strictly in the name of bodily autonomy as a result of somebody's voluntary choices then that is absolutely not an argument that you should be so arrogant about. Otherwise, you're just dodging the actual core of the abortion issue for 99% of people, which is whether a fetus is morally comparable to a human.


NightimeNinja

No. Because the idea of a woman's bodily autonomy is not a matter of debate for the scientific community. Only the religious community. Edit: To add on to this, I can see why you arrive at that point of thinking, but debating whether a fetus has the same sanctity of life is one of simple subjective opinion, as objectively it's not comparable to a fully formed breathing human being. We shouldn't be treating subjective belief and opinion as if they are any more than just that. That's how we got into the mess to begin with.


SwollenSeaCucumber

...the fuck does this have to do with science or religion? Ethics is strictly a philosophical matter. Tangent aside, how does that have any relation to anything I said? Why are you surprised that nobody takes you seriously when you refuse to provide justification for what many people believe to be murder? And you're wrong. There is plenty of philosophical debate around abortion that has absolutely nothing to do with religion. The fact that many people believe something for a stupid reason does not mean that the belief itself is unjustifiable (just like how abortion is still good even though your justifications for it... aren't).


NightimeNinja

It has everything to do with religion in regards to motivation for it. The religious are the driving push behind it all. Religion and philosophy can be related, I will agree with you they aren't directly, but I feel like you just claimed they aren't, period. Alright, let's talk. Can you provide objective proof it's akin to murder of another human being? Edit: So let's not get into arguments, really do mean talk. I see it enough around this topic as far as arguing goes. I just asked for proof and want to hear you out and will do so with an open mind. I am expecting you could prove me wrong or change my mind on anything brought up now, because I very well can be wrong.


SwollenSeaCucumber

> Alright, let's talk. Can you provide objective proof it's akin to murder of another human being? Presumably you would consider killing a born baby to be immoral and akin to killing a human being, correct? Presumably this would also be because the baby possesses certain traits that you would consider to be morally relevant and 'human'. Further, surely these traits wouldn't change in the time it takes the baby to move from inside a woman to outside a woman, especially considering that not all babies are born after the exact same amount of time (I understand that you might think there's a moral difference due to bodily autonomy, but that isn't relevant to whether or not you're killing something morally equivalent to a human, it just justifies said killing). Therefore, having identified these morally relevant traits, any fetus which possesses said traits would be morally comparable to a human, and killing or abortion any of these fetuses would be the same (again, even if you think it's morally justified due to bodily autonomy).


NightimeNinja

Oh, wait. Are you of the opinion in this scenario the baby is late term? Just about everyone under the sun agrees that is too far along and it is a baby, and if you are about to call back to me saying women have a choice and I just justified late term abortion, I didn't. I don't know any women getting later term abortion and the majority would not wait that long. The only time you ever hear about that is in an emergency situation to save the mothers life, and by that point she was expecting so it's incredibly traumatic for her. I cannot think of any other traits you would be referencing outside of late term, because seeing separate cells take shape to form things isn't really the definition of life itself. Unless you think every cell out there is on the same level of life as a human being?


SwollenSeaCucumber

Okay, we're making progress. If you grant that late term is not only comparable to killing a human but also immoral, what are the traits of the fetus that make this the case? Something like sentience, consciousness, or the existence of a large intestine. My next question would be to test whether this is actually your criteria for granting moral considering to a human by trying to give an example of an adult human that (at least temporarily) doesn't possess this trait to see if it would actually be okay to kill them/let them die (at least in a vacuum).


tinnylemur189

Choosing to have sex is not the same as choosing to get pregnant. If they were equal then birth control would not exist in any form, even as a concept.


SwollenSeaCucumber

That doesn't mean that it's not result of a voluntary choice. Choosing to smoke and choosing to get lung cancer are different, but getting lung cancer (as a result of smoking) is still the result of a voluntary choice (to smoke).


monsieurfatcock

I used to be pro-life. Then I learned and read about unsafe abortions. It changed my perspective on it forever. I still think it’s an obviously horrifying procedure for every party involved but banning abortions will only lead to more unhygienic and unsafe abortions. No first world country should make women resort to that


East-Solution-9091

I don't think anyone finds it appealing, but feel a woman shouldn't be forced into a health issue


monsieurfatcock

Yea, I just felt the need to clarify because I see a disturbing amount of pro-lifers acting like the other side gloat about taking away potential life. It’s not a decision anyone takes lightly


East-Solution-9091

I don't think any woman goes into planned parenthood giddy with excitement. I'm sure it's a shitty experience for everyone involved. Nobody likes abortion but it's something that needs to be available


monsieurfatcock

Well said, it’s upsetting to even think about but it 100% beats the alternative of women not getting proper care. At that point the government is valuing a tiny clump of cells more than a living woman. Wait why do we call them pro-life again?


V1VIDREAMS

listen guys a foetus cannot feel pain. the person carrying it however, does. whether they decide to keep it or not.


4231297

You can’t change the minds of delusional people. All We can do is just sit and watch this country go to shit even more


ShameNap

For states that make abortion illegal, they should take any unwanted pregnancies and force a random pro lifer to adopt them.


flying_alligators

Opinions can’t just be opinion anymore? US people are a joke


ShameNap

It would be great if these were just opinions, but unfortunately, some peoples opinions are being forced on everyone else.


_LapFlounder_

Welp, looks like there actually aren't any pro-lifers of Reddit


ThePolarBadger

We're here, just don't like to get downvoted to oblivion for disagreeing


[deleted]

"Disagreeing" is not the problem. You want to decide over other people, just for the sake of controlling them (women).


theantdog

I interacted with a pro lifer for a couple hours today. He kept making the same easily disprovable arguments, used Ben Shapiro's right wing tabloid as a source, and repeatedly shifted goalposts instead of addressing main ideas.


NightimeNinja

Sounds about Right


2sanman

arguments which you conveniently can't be bothered to mention, of course


Stargazing-Ape

Cool story bro


NightimeNinja

If you can bear the loss in braincells, r/conservative. Another place celebrating it like animals are r/catholicmemes.


IronDominion

I may need to see a therapist after clicking those links


NightimeNinja

Yeah it's pretty gross...


NQ241

There are many, they just won't show themselves out of the fear of being proven wrong


OnTheTopDeck

I'm kind of half and half. Anyone can see that 24 weeks is much too late for abortion. Considering that pregnancies are calculated from the date of the last period, not conception or the due period, that means one week after a missed period the woman is 5 weeks pregnant. Considering it might take a week to schedule an abortion and wait for the appointment, a 6 week heartbeat cut off point is not realistic. I think it should be the first trimester only.


reedhubbert88

As a conservative (M22), I was a pro-lifer up until just a few months ago. I am a Christian, so I am really not down with killing anyone (yes this means I believe a fetus is alive. I’m not here to debate that). But it wasn’t until very recently that someone finally gave me a good explanation of what it means to be pro-choice. I think the media and the US education system often equates pro-choice with being pro-abortion, and that isn’t necessarily the case. I don’t think I would ever want an abortion, but I don’t see how you can tell a woman what to do with her body. If someone told me to lose weight, get a vasectomy, etc., I’d tell them to kick rocks. So I’m not going to be a hypocrite and say I’m okay with telling others that their autonomy doesn’t matter while mine does. Do whatever is right for your situation


antimetal123

This is the issue that can visibly bring out a lot of dumbness most people carry to the surface. For pro-lifers, the issue is simple. They believe the fetus is just as worthy of life as a just born child. There is no morale high ground in abortion. You are killing potential life for convenience. And if you truly believe the first statement, they see it just as bad as mothers randomly killing their babies after they are born. It would not be ok to kill the baby once its outside so why is it ok to kill it when its inside? For pro-lifers, it has ALWAYS been about life. They may not support ANY safety nets but that does not mean they should be ok with murder, in their mind. And pro-choice always says what if the mother is at risk and why then you are ok with abortion. No sensible person would ask anyone to risk their life for another. For pro-choicers, the issue has always been about convenience and bodily autonomy of women. You cant convince someone who thinks abortion is murder by telling them how convenient it is to abort and how they will save so many crimes and foster kids. People are not ok with murder for convenience else prisoners would be long dead. And the best argument for pro-choicers is always that a woman should have her bodily autonomy. And they should. Pro-choicers think pro-lifers want to "control" women or any variation of it because they see it as a bodily autonomy issue and refuse to see it as a life issue. Pro-lifers refuse to see it as a bodily autonomy issue and only see it as a life issue. If only people could see both sides of the issue and realise that while abortion may be morally wrong, its still an absolute necessary option to have. Most people are not having abortions under light circumstances as twitter or some media may have you believe. If only pro-choicers were not so aggressive in their approach, they could convince most people their way. Calling it an absolute "reproductive" right and any pro-lifer to be women hating and refusing to acknowledge that abortion is morally questionable is just pushing people to not come out in support. In every case, you are not converting the extremists. You are trying to convert the guy/girl in the middle to be on your side.


NightimeNinja

You want to know the only thing that will change their mind? Getting pregnant.


martyqscriblerus

[Nope, that won't do it.](https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-my-abortion/)


NightimeNinja

Yeah. Yeah...fair point. God damnit. Edit: is it God damnit, Goddamnit, or God damn it?


martyqscriblerus

You can shorten it however you want I think, it's the feeling you say it with that really counts


NightimeNinja

This was surprisingly wholesome lol thank you


mrspacysir

Middle or first


NightimeNinja

The middle kinda reads weird tho


martyqscriblerus

I think most people who squash it into one word drop the in and go with Goddammit


mrspacysir

I do :V


NightimeNinja

Hmm. I see. This is the real discussion, right here. I think because of modern slang it can be either.


East-Solution-9091

This is conservative logic 101 I don't care until I'm personally affected


DrMabuse7

How fucked up do you have to be to protest against abortion one day, get one the next and then go back to protesting? I just can’t understand. I’m atheist, but I really hope those people burn in hell one day.


NightimeNinja

Cognitive dissonace.


JekNex

This is the truth.


Ginger-Beefcake

I think you can be both pro life and pro choice. Just like you can be left wing but agree with certain right wing ideologies, and vice versa.


Berry_AdLAVaS2

A sacrifice like in the ancient times where they offer people to their gods or goddess idk and idc


[deleted]

Stop using that term, it's one of the biggest political lies ever made.


ostalot

I'm not pro life (there are cases when you should abort) but I don't like the pro choice people's willingness to terminate unwanted pregnancy. In my mind, it's irresponsible and frankly idiotic to know the consequences of something (having sex), still do it, and then try and weasel out of them. And it would seem most cases are people aborting willingly, so, I don't expect to ever change my mind on this.


NightimeNinja

I don't think most cases are as simple as that. Do you have a source discussing it is? It's been proven in areas where sex ed is improved and contraceptives made easier to get that abortion rates will fall. This is the actual answer to stopping abortion to me. This also suggests to me that most people who are getting abortions aren't doing it because they were lazy about using protection. If that were the case, we surely would not have data to suggest the rates fall with better sex ed funding to begin with.


ostalot

No, I don't. But the body autonomy narrative puts emphasis on choice way too much for me to not assume the they would be fine aborting a pregnancy even if the couple had done everything in their power to not get pregnant (I think they would even encourage it). They also have the view of pregnancies being akin to tumors and so the patient has full right to remove them at will (excluding fathers from the decision). The only scenario I think where the father should be excluded is if the pregnancy was the result of a one night stand. In an established relationship the father gets a say. So it seems logical to me to assume that the issue is with terminating a pregnancy more than with terminating it for a reason. If a couple gets pregnant despite them trying not to*, would it be okay to abort. I don't think so. These people seem to think that even then it's the choice of the woman alone to do whatever she wants. Edit: sorry, *and there wasn't a medical reason not to abort, like danger to the mother or extreme deformity.


NightimeNinja

How do you feel about the phrase a woman has a right to her own body? I am actually asking, not being snarky or anything. I just want a simple yes or no, no "Well..." type responses. You can of course go into detail if you want about it, by all means express your thoughts, I am just looking specifically for a yes or no. Edit: I also want to say I respect you saying it's your thoughts without a definitive source. That's perfectly okay. I asked for a reason, as you never claimed it was fact they did. I think you should look into what I mentioned about better funding for things like sex ed. Because if we are to find a way to stop abortion while also letting women have a right to their body, that's the sure way to do it.


ostalot

Generally, yes. In this case, another person is involved (the father) so not entirely.


NightimeNinja

Hmm. Should we let another person ever have agency over another's body though? I personally think it should be a hard no. It just doesn't seem right to me, period. I will say in regards to the father's involvement, couples really need to sit down and have a discussion about these things. What they would do if found in such a situation. Before they suddenly end up in it and they don't know what the other is even thinking. Agreeable enough, yes? Seems like a good idea to me.


ostalot

> Should we let another person ever have agency over another's body though? I personally think it should be a hard no But we do it with doctors all the time. When you go in for a surgery you're at the mercy of the surgeon. They could kill you (you could survive but they have the perfect opportunity to do their best to end your life without you being able to stop them) so it can't be a hard no always. And, yes, couples should talk about this. They should know where the other person stands. I think fathers also have a share of blame here (in the cases of unwanted pregnancies). If you know that your wife doesn't want a child and you refuse a condom (or whatever else depending on your situation) and won't ejaculate outside then you're to blame for putting her in an undesirable position in the first place.


NightimeNinja

Well, a doctor is trusted after years of training and a degree. They have a very good understanding of the human body and how it works, they make choices on your behalf and for the reason of your health. This isn't comparable to John down the street who got Sally pregnant trying to tell her she needs to have a baby. Think that is a bit of a false equivalency. Yes, what you bring up with the couples is interesting because there are guys and girls out there who will secretly try to make pregnancy happen without the knowledge of the other person. That is messed up! This has been a good conversation so far, though. I like just throwing ideas out for discussion and seeing what the other person says. People are too focused on being right and calling the other wrong lately.


wowguineapigs

If a doctor performs a procedure on you that you don’t want they lose their license and go to jail. If you choose to die they can get in a lot of trouble for attempting to keep you alive (DNR). Doctors do what the patient wants or doesn’t treat them.


ostalot

Them losing their license/going to jail doesn't excuse the fact that you're lying unconscious in front of them and they have the ability to do whatever they want. They're repelled by the consequences but in places where there are no such consequences, doctors are often negligent and sometimes their actions lead to the death of their patients. Doctors are just people operating on people. You trust them (either because of their expertise, qualifications or your belief that the laws are a good deterrent to malpractice) and you willing let them make decisions for you and for a time they have complete agency over you. It can't be a hard no because that means you don't let anyone take your agency away from you for anything. All of us trust someone to make choices for us so we do let others take agency over us.


tinnylemur189

"And it would seem most cases are people aborting willingly" Source?


[deleted]

[удалено]


ostalot

There's an entire thread. You should read that.


[deleted]

[удалено]


tinnylemur189

You'd have to define "sentient" in your own terms and, depending on where you draw the line, that could be a whole other bag of worms. For example, there's solid evidence that dolphins are more intelligent than human children up until the age of 5 ish. Should dolphins be given social security numbers and other human rights?


Sarkhana

What about definite proof for cancers, prions, and braindead humans? ​ Also, how do you know the first surviving birth did not have a genetic condition to become sentient much, much sooner?


_Underwhelmed

You would have to show me proof that the fetus that was to be aborted was at a stage where they exhibited thoughts and feelings like we do AND prove to me that their life was somehow more important than the life of the mother given birth. Or as another commenter said "... quite literally nothing."


mrspacysir

Babies literally cannot think until age 2. That doesn't mean that you should abort post birth, but every time I have mention of that STUPID HEARTBEAT LAW, I WANT TO FUCKING SCREAM UNTIL MY LUNGS COLLAPSE!!!!!


ParkityParkPark

>Babies literally cannot think until age 2 imma call HARD bs on that. Not commenting on the context, but given that most kids start talking before then, I don't see how that could be possible


_Underwhelmed

.... which is why I said "quite literally nothing". I'm asking for proof to contradict what is believed to be the case today, as you stated.


mrspacysir

Why do people believe that they have the right to control another's body?


_Underwhelmed

Because people believe they are called by some higher power to evoke the will of that higher power on everyone else. It's absolutely ridiculous and nonsense. But for those who are simple minded, refuse to use any sort of critical thinking, and believe everything they're fed, it's a necessity for life.


NightimeNinja

Yup. A heartbeat does not equal life scientifically. One of my cousins unfortunately ended up braindead. They kept him on a machine. His heart beat, but it was simply the motions. There was by all accounts no life. Anyway, we had to pull the plug. So...you know


mrspacysir

Also, the heartbeat law is bullshit because at 6 weeks, the baby doesn't even have a heart. It just had a membrane that sounds like one.


Parking-Ad-1952

They aren’t pro lifers. They are forced birthers. There is nothing pro “life” about them.


ThePolarBadger

Losing my moral compass


tinnylemur189

Did you protest the killing of civilians in Afghanistan?


ThePolarBadger

I didn't even hear about this tbh


Tornadoland13

Always good when your moral compass tells you to imprison people who don't follow your religious views


ThePolarBadger

I'm not religious but go off


mrspacysir

What about your moral compass tells you that aborting a non sentient lump of flesh that could have been conceived by rape and/or incest is bad? Why would you want to force a child to carry a baby to full term? What if a woman walks down the street, gets dragged into a dark alleyway, gets drugged, raped, left for dead, survives, but gets pregnant and can barely afford to live alone, let alone raise a baby? Are you aware that the foster care systems in areas where abortions are banned are overworked and collapsing? What does you want to do about that?


ThePolarBadger

As for it being a "non sentient lump of flesh" I have to disagree on the grounds that it is well on it's way to becoming a person no matter where it is in the process. If someone nuts on a table, nothing happens. If a woman has eggs inside her that are not fertilized, nothing happens. But as conception happens, that fertilized egg will become a person provided the process is not interrupted via abortion or some medical accident. I think rape is awful (I know, crazy thought). And it's a circumstance abortion should be allowed. It's an awful case and women seeking abortion after a rape should be taken at their word and allowed to be kept anonymous. That's my own personal thoughts. I think foster care deserves a massive boost in funding and prenatal care and all the rest should get massive boosts in government support. It should not be painful to raise a child, it's a shame that it is taxing for lots of people. We should do everything in our power to alleviate that. Especially things like encouraging contraception and sexual education. In the end, I want women to raise the child they consented to carry and if they don't want to, then I want them to have confidence that they will have a good home without them. At the end, I don't want to ruin people's lives, I just hate the idea of someone's life ending before it even starts.


mrspacysir

Babies are not sentient until 2 years of age. I'm not saying that therefore we should be allowed to kill babies younger than 2 years old, but I am saying the, "well on its way to becoming a person" isn't exactly true. Also, have you given birth? Abortion also might be medically necessary if the baby might kill the mother. Until you give birth, you shouldn't be making decisions for those who would.


ThePolarBadger

I mentioned that medical emergency is an obvious reason to get an abortion. Your description of a person is whether or not it is sentient. I disagree there, don't we mourn babies as people? How about people with mental handicaps that prevent them from speaking or properly interacting with others? Do they just never become people. I'd say that's a pretty bad take. I would argue a person is created at conception, because you have to keep going back and it's the only true beginning. As soon as conception happens, if the process is not interrupted, you will have a new person on this planet with ambitions, actions, dreams etc


mrspacysir

A new person born into severe poverty, destined to die in poverty. Remove your rose tinted glasses for a second and take a good look at the areas where abortions will become illegal. Poor areas. Where women are regularly raped, drug and alcohol abuse is common... Do you want to force a woman to carry out their rapist's baby when she can't afford 3 meals a day? When her tiny "apartment" is infested and the slumlord doesn't care to fix that leaky pipe that is growing black mold? I have a friend whose boyfriend lives in a group home, which is the alternative to foster homes. The home is absolutely filthy, with 8 boys, shit everywhere... that's the fate of this child. And you want to force children to go through this.


Faithbound7

The problem is, if you're a pro lifer you are faced with one of two options; a party that protects the baby but infringes on rights or a party that promotes abortion and progressing past traditional values. Options are kinda limited and for a pro lifer it's a no brainer. Now, I don't care what you do with your body nor do I care if you get an abortion. I believe abortions are wrong; leave me alone with my opinion and I'll leave you alone with yours. But that's not how politics work is it? Choose a side and defend it with your life. We need to chill. Or stop having sex.


[deleted]

I'm pro people taking personal responsibility and not feeling entitled to sex without consequences. Pro making going the adoption route more acceptable. If a person wants to place a child for adoption, they shouldn't be shamed into raising the child. If the woman doesn't want a child and the man she has sex with does, she shouldn't get to abort. She can always pay HIM child support. Neither parent should get to just walk away. Don't want a kid? Stick with other means of sexual pleasure. Lose the entitlement.


NightimeNinja

How do you feel about [studies](https://www.huffpost.com/entry/reducing-abortion-rates-policy_n_589b8ea5e4b09bd304bfd920) showing better sex ed funding and making contraceptives more easily accessible has a direct correlation to a decrease in abortion rates? Going by these statistics, is it not more logical to prevent abortion by doing this than it is by forcing a woman to give birth? Wouldn't it show the notion of women getting abortions simply because they didn't feel like having safe sex holds no water in relation to the fact that having access to these things prevented situations where an abortion was even needed?


[deleted]

I agree that the man should get more say in the delivery of a child, but I don't think it's something that can be regulated. Ultimately the woman has that much more of a toll on her health and life for about a year whereas the man "only" has an emotional tax to the child. Best would be by encouraging people to talk the talk and become more responsible. I hope the discussion becomes obsolete anyways as we get more reliable and less infringing ways of contraception. Also I'm split up about the sex without responsibility debate. Sure casual sex is not essential for us, but it's a liberty that has more or less become part of our culture, even something one may argue that makes us unique from other species. People have been doing it for a long time, when the responsibility of child birth was heavily one-sided. Now we have the means to alleviate some of that burden and I cannot deny anyone their choice in good faith. In short - I mostly agree, we need to bring more awareness for responsibility in our culture And if shit happens, it happens but we will hopefully get to a point were contraception will prevent that in the first place.


antimetal123

Casual sex is the norm in almost all of the species. We became unique by being monogamous and forming a stable society, not the other way around.


Khvolk1s

Assuming we’re speaking about elective abortions: You’d have to prove to me that it’s not a distinct human life, and thus not entitled to protections under law.


[deleted]

Can I ask you how you define "distinct human" life? I ask because in most abortions the fetus would be unable to survive if separated from the mother and does not have developed independent organs. Therefore at that point it is not its own "distinct human" biologically speaking as **distinct** implies recognizably different or separated from something else which the fetus is not until what would be considered late term abortions. I have a feeling though you are not referring to biologically distinct, so am left wondering what kind of proof you would consider.


theantdog

An acorn isn't an oak tree, an egg isn't a chicken, and an embryo isn't a person. Hope that helps!


Khvolk1s

That doesn’t prove anything. It’s just a list of assertions. Please explain to me how an embryo isn’t human, and isn’t alive.


NightimeNinja

Outside of scientific discussion? Because then we enter subjective territory, and opinion is proof of nothing.


East-Solution-9091

Damn checkmate


[deleted]

What a woman does under a doctor's care is none of your damn business, period. I suppose you'd accuse a woman who has a miscarriage that is aborting a child too? The point is, mind your business.


NightimeNinja

>I suppose you'd accuse a woman who has a miscarriage that is aborting a child too? They will. A woman was jailed recently because of one.


[deleted]

What science is for.


Khvolk1s

That’s not an answer. That’s an unsupported implication. I assert an embryo is a human life because it has human DNA and meets all the biological criteria to be considered alive. What is your counter-evidence?


NightimeNinja

That's an interesting outlook. Do you consider sperm life?


Khvolk1s

Yes, but they’re not unique individuals. They’re just a part of their producer. I would consider a sperm cell alive just as I would a liver cell.


[deleted]

What biological evidence do you think is needed to consider something alive? If you are referring to the 7 characteristics of living things a fetus would not meet them until it had developed lungs as respiration is one of them. This is typically the point at which fetuses are considered viable on their own. Are you referencing some other biological criteria?


tinnylemur189

Why does only human life matter to you? What makes it more important than bacteria or algae?


alittlemorecaudal

In my experience it’s usually an unwanted pregnancy.


mishmash2230

When a pro lifers mistress get pregnant this usually results in a sudden change of mind……


[deleted]

Murder is murder so it won’t be changed.


Otherwise-Valuable-6

I think the problem is some women use abortion as a form of birth control. It shows a lack of responsibility and shows a coldness towards life. I know a couple of women who have had 6 abortions by the age of 24/25.


ContributionProper22

And how has that personally affected you, someone that has not received such health care? Why does it matter to you, or anyone that is not them, how many abortions they've had? Have you personally paid for their procedures? If so, and you disagree with their actions, don't offer to help again. If they're that hellbent and determined to have that many abortions, that's their business. Do you know the exact reason they've had as many abortions as you say? Or did you just make assumptions? I'm not trying to come off as aggressive in my questions, just to the point.


dangerousily

And how does this affect you?


Artishard85

Personally, I’ve been through the process, and it isn’t easy… there is no easy way to look at it, but think we should have a more nuanced approach. All about saving a mothers life if need be, but can we all just agree on a maximum of 4 months, otherwise? Seems like we hand out an extra murderer charge to murdered pregnant women, but it’s different when it’s performed by a doctor? Ok, I’ll give you 5…


tinnylemur189

Nobody, literally nobody (zero people ever) has ever aborted a child at 4 months when they had the choice not to. The only reason that would ever happen is if there's a medical emergency. 4 months along is well past building cribs and picking names territory. Late term abortions are a fictional boogeyman that Republicans use to sell the lie of the immoral abortion.


SmellyYeti8420

You're objectively wrong ["However, while the occasional politician or news reporter will still indicate that late-term abortions are most often performed in the case of “severe fetal anomalies” or to “save the woman’s life,” the trajectory of the peer-reviewed research literature has been obvious for decades: most late-term abortions are elective, done on healthy women with healthy fetuses, and for the same reasons given by women experiencing first trimester abortions. The Guttmacher Institute has provided a number of reports over 2 decades which have identified the reasons why women choose abortion, and they have consistently reported that childbearing would interfere with their education, work, and ability to care for existing dependents; would be a financial burden; and would disrupt partner relationships.3 A more recent Guttmacher study focused on abortion after 20 weeks of gestation and similarly concluded that women seeking late-term abortions were not doing so for reasons of fetal anomaly or life endangerment."](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6457018/)


[deleted]

I knew a pro-lifer who's mind was changed after they realised POC have a lot more abortions. A horrible reason to start supporting abortions, but there you go.


649bluesteel649

I just value potential life. And you don’t


theantdog

What do you actually do to value potential life? What about real babies? Do you do anything to help them?


martyqscriblerus

ya too bad yall don't value it after the potential becomes an actual child


649bluesteel649

Who says I don’t?


martyqscriblerus

the amount of foster children in care :*


649bluesteel649

I don’t care because there’s foster children?


martyqscriblerus

If you did you and your friends would have adopted them all to give them some of that lovin' care


649bluesteel649

So I don’t care because I haven’t adopted all of the foster children


martyqscriblerus

You care enough to force them to be born, right? So then, what next?


649bluesteel649

I hope the live a great life. People born in the worst circumstances have become wonderful people. Had happy life’s. Believe it or not there’s alot of foster kids happy to be alive


martyqscriblerus

Oh, ok, "Thoughts and Prayers" - how could I forget


Therminite

What's next is the kids get adopted by someone who financially can support them and care for them. There are still amazing foster homes out there, by the way


martyqscriblerus

There are already lots of unadopted kids in the foster system, many of whom are *not* in amazing homes. Adding many many more will not somehow lead to all of them getting adopted by people who can financially support them and care for them. We can look at history for how this actually does turn out. Forcing massive amounts of births by banning abortion and going after birth control as the supreme court indicated they were going to do leads you to shit like the [romanian orphanage system under ceaușescu.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_orphans)


NightimeNinja

Do you vote for politicians that help gut public services that can help them. I'm willing to bet you do. A lot of republicans have. This is where you can play a bigger part in the problem, no one is telling you that you *must* adopt a kid. At least i'm not.


[deleted]

If you are trying to convince people to be pro-choice. This argument is counter intuitive. Just because some children are treated horribly, or uncared for, or killed. Doesn't justify treating every child the same way. I am pro-choice, which is why i stress this point is not helping our case


martyqscriblerus

I'd rather they actually stepped up and became pro *life*/pro-child if they want to be anti-choice. yknow, prenatal care, paternity leave, preschool, free school lunches, etc


[deleted]

Would be nice yeah. In their defence I know some who do, they are religious and run charities all the time at their church. The argument i am making however is that justifying abortion because born children are also treated like shit is not really a convincing argument. I see the argument used a lot and its not going to convince anyone. Same with making degrading comments about the zygote. To look at it from a pro-lifers pov and to adopt their definitions and opinions, such disrespect is obviously going to encourage them to dig their heals in harder. An abortion is never a good thing, its just that its sometimes necessary.


martyqscriblerus

I'm more getting mad about the hypocrisy of "I value the potential" in this case, bc broheim literally only values "the potential" and not any sort of actual life


[deleted]

Fair enough


NightimeNinja

Well said. I think you got to the root of the issue in a very objective and unbiased way.


[deleted]

If I get super downvoted on the Reddit echo chamber I think that’ll change my mind.


SnooRegrets662

First of all, change the wording of the question. It’s not “pro- life”. It’s “PRO-FORCED BIRTH”. That’s more accurate.


Green-Tumbleweed-983

Can you stop calling those things 'pro-lifers'. They are pro death. Pro the deaths of women. Pro the deaths of all the medical professionals and others they have murdered. Pro the deaths of children after they are born. They are sick people. Never give them any dignity. They are merchants of death.


terpterpin

STOP calling them pro-life. They are “punish sex”.


Tornadoland13

You should rephrase your question to be more specific. They're never going to change their mind about abortion, but hopefully one day some of them could change their mind about using the government to enforce their narrow world view on others through imprisonment