What's an ethical alternative to abortion for women who can't afford health care?

  • Thread starter Thread starter roseproject
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
francisca said:
Roe vs Wade ruling is about protecting women, so they won’t be criminalized.
Click to expand...
Where are you getting this information? It is not consistent with this:
casebriefs.com:
Discussion. The Court finds that an abortion statute that forbids all abortions except in the case of a life saving procedure on behalf of the mother is unconstitutional based upon the right to privacy. However, it does allow for regulation and proscription of abortion when the statute is narrowly tailored to uphold a compelling state interest, such as the health of the mother or the viable fetus. The court declined to address the question of when life begins.
Click to expand...
You can’t criminalize any clinics by go against Roe v Wade ruling. If ever the SCOTUS change this ruling, then whatever pro-life victory you get is this: all abortion clinics will close down period.

You can only criminalize clinics by go agaist illegal practices.

Meanwhile unwanted pregnancy will continue, so long we still allow permissive culture and porn campaigning agressively promoting adultery to the public.

In a situation where everywhere you look nothing but immorality, then what you do is: to pick your battle to save whatever can still be saved. To improve what can still be improved.

May one day be that we realize porn and permissive culture has to stop. Until that day come, abortion is a reality in which legality/ illegality won’t stop it…

.
Click to expand...
None of these things justify the murder of innocents.
 
davidv said:
Where are you getting this information? It is not consistent with this:

None of these things justify the murder of innocents.
Click to expand...
Legality of porn shows that we justify adultery, despite adultery is intrinsicly immoral.
 
francisca said:
Legality of porn shows that we justify adultery, despite adultery is intrinsicly immoral.
Click to expand...
So because porn is legal, then abortion should be too? That makes no sense. Porn is wrong. So is abortion.
 
Regina7 said:
So because porn is legal, then abortion should be too? That makes no sense. Porn is wrong. So is abortion.
Click to expand...
Porn do business by promoting adultery. Abortion is an inevitable outcome of such business.

A good justice system should punish the (immoral) business instead of the victims of such business.

The customers of porn are also guilty to contributing to such business. But you can’t punish only a certain group of people (that may or may not be the customers/ contributors) while let go the rest of the group that contribute to the immoral business that give rise to abortions.

Criminalizing women, but letting go porn business is a jeopardized social-justice.

You will be prosecuting women and their fetus, instead of prosecuting the businesses (the clinics & the porn & the pimps)
 
francisca said:
Porn do business by promoting adultery. Abortion is an inevitable outcome of such business.

A good justice system should punish the (immoral) business instead of the victims of such business.

The customers of porn are also guilty to contributing to such business. But you can’t punish only a certain group of people (that may or may not be the customers/ contributors) while let go the rest of the group that contribute to the immoral business that give rise to abortions.

Criminalizing women, but letting go porn business is a jeopardized social-justice.

You will be prosecuting women and their fetus, instead of prosecuting the businesses (the clinics & the porn & the pimps)
Click to expand...
So you think that abortion will go away if the porn industry shuts down?
 
francisca said:
Legality of porn shows that we justify adultery, despite adultery is intrinsicly immoral.
Click to expand...
False dichotomy.
Both are wrong and both should be illegal.

In all of your arguments you never address one simple fact. The unborn is completely innocent, completely human, and completely deserving of dignity and respect.

Why do your insist that these children should not be protected by the law?
Are you or are you not pro life?
 
vz71 said:
In all of your arguments you never address one simple fact. The unborn is completely innocent, completely human, and completely deserving of dignity and respect.
Click to expand...
The unborn depends it’s life on the mother. If you doesn’t treat the mother with justice and respect, you can’t give any fetus inside her body any justice and respect either.
Why do your insist that these children should not be protected by the law?
Are you or are you not pro life?
Click to expand...
Which law protects the unborn should we illegalize abortion? There is no law left to protect them, because now they’re under illegality !
 
francisca said:
The unborn depends it’s life on the mother. If you doesn’t treat the mother with justice and respect, you can’t give any fetus inside her body any justice and respect either.

Which law protects the unborn should we illegalize abortion? There is no law left to protect them, because now they’re under illegality !
Click to expand...
You are ducking the question.
The unborn child is alive.
The unborn child is fully human.
Yet you propose it is not worth legal protection.

How can you claim to be pro life?
 
francisca said:
The unborn depends it’s life on the mother. If you doesn’t treat the mother with justice and respect, you can’t give any fetus inside her body any justice and respect either.
Click to expand...
This is truly one of the strangest statements I’ve ever run across in my 30+ years of discussing abortion on the Internet. Could you expand or clarify this please ?
 
vz71 said:
You are ducking the question.
The unborn child is alive.
The unborn child is fully human.
Yet you propose it is not worth legal protection.
Click to expand...
You only assume that after you illegalize abortion, then the number of death will be less.
So therefore you think you’re giving legal protection to the unborn by illegalizing abortion.
What if the number of death remain the same or even more than when it is legal?
Will you still think you’re giving some legal protection to the fetus? How about he mother, will her death be counted?

How can you claim to be pro life?

Because I strongly believe the number of death will increase if we illegalize abortion.

We wont only be killing the fetus, we will also be killing the women too.
 
francisca said:
You only assume that after you illegalize abortion, then the number of death will be less.
So therefore you think you’re giving legal protection to the unborn by illegalizing abortion.
What if the number of death remain the same or even more than when it is legal?
Will you still think you’re giving some legal protection to the fetus? How about he mother, will her death be quote]

I showed you proof that abortions were significantly decreased when abortion was illegal.
Click to expand...
 
Regina7 said:
francisca;13251499:
You only assume that after you illegalize abortion, then the number of death will be less.
So therefore you think you’re giving legal protection to the unborn by illegalizing abortion.
What if the number of death remain the same or even more than when it is legal?
Will you still think you’re giving some legal protection to the fetus? How about he mother, will her death be quote]

I showed you proof that abortions were significantly decreased when abortion was illegal.
Click to expand...
You assertions are totally baseless.They are examples of the mental gymnastics some Catholics put themselves through in their attempt to rationalize supporting evil.
Click to expand...
 
estesbob said:
This is truly one of the strangest statements I’ve ever run across in my 30+ years of discussing abortion on the Internet. Could you expand or clarify this please ?
Click to expand...
What I meant by
Originally Posted by francisca
The unborn depends it’s life on the mother. If you doesn’t treat the mother with justice and respect, you can’t give any fetus inside her body any justice and respect either.
Click to expand...
Example
If a pregnant woman is so poor, she can only eat once a day. Does her poverty starve the fetus inside her too? Yes, because the fetus is living inside her body.
If a policy impoverish women, can you then say you only impoverish women but not the fetus inside their body?
So in the above case, I am showing that whatever you do to the mother, you do it to the unborn too.
I hope you agree now that-- with the above reasoning-- we can’t say, “I protect the child from the mother, so I prosecute the mother in order to protect the child’s right”.

Now If a pregnant woman has decided-- alone, in the darkness of her situation, with nobody to talk to-- that she doesn’t want her fetus, can any of us help the fetus without helping the mother? We can only help the fetus by helping the mother.

If a mother has decided she do not want the fetus, can illegality of abortion protect the child’s right?
We only assume that these women wouldn’t find ways to go the the back alleys. But what if they do?
Who among us can protect the unborn from its own mother by then?
 
francisca said:
What I meant by

Example
If a pregnant woman is so poor, she can only eat once a day. Does her poverty starve the fetus inside her too? Yes, because the fetus is living inside her body.
If a policy impoverish women, can you then say you only impoverish women but not the fetus inside their body?
So in the above case, I am showing that whatever you do to the mother, you do it to the unborn too.
I hope you agree now that-- with the above reasoning-- we can’t say, “I protect the child from the mother, so I prosecute the mother in order to protect the child’s right”.

Now If a pregnant woman has decided-- alone, in the darkness of her situation, with nobody to talk to-- that she doesn’t want her fetus, can any of us help the fetus without helping the mother? We can only help the fetus by helping the mother.

If a mother has decided she do not want the fetus, can illegality of abortion protect the child’s right?
We only assume that these women wouldn’t find ways to go the the back alleys. But what if they do?
Who among us can protect the unborn from its own mother by then?
Click to expand...
You do realize many children are victims of child abuse, often fatally.

There could be so many catalysts to the abuse, stress, poverty, mental illness, personality disorders etc.

We don’t say that moms are going to abuse their children for these reasons, so until we fix these reasons, child abuse should be “legal”.

Yes we help the mother. But the unborn baby should have some protection especially if the mother won’t protect her own child.
 
francisca said:
What I meant by

Example
If a pregnant woman is so poor, she can only eat once a day. Does her poverty starve the fetus inside her too? Yes, because the fetus is living inside her body.
If a policy impoverish women, can you then say you only impoverish women but not the fetus inside their body?
So in the above case, I am showing that whatever you do to the mother, you do it to the unborn too.
I hope you agree now that-- with the above reasoning-- we can’t say, “I protect the child from the mother, so I prosecute the mother in order to protect the child’s right”.

Now If a pregnant woman has decided-- alone, in the darkness of her situation, with nobody to talk to-- that she doesn’t want her fetus, can any of us help the fetus without helping the mother? We can only help the fetus by helping the mother.

If a mother has decided she do not want the fetus, can illegality of abortion protect the child’s right?
We only assume that these women wouldn’t find ways to go the the back alleys. But what if they do?
Who among us can protect the unborn from its own mother by then?
Click to expand...
There will always be women who abort their babies, regardless of the law. However, we can significantly reduce the number of babies being slaughtered by making abortion illegal. If abortion is illegal, a woman has to do many things to get an abortion, breaking the law among one. This in itself will stop many women.

You seem to think that if we can’t stop every “back ally” abortion, we shouldn’t even try. There have been over 55 million babies aborted since Roe v. Wade- not even close to the number of abortions before. Think of all the millions of babies who’d be here right now.

You seem solely focused on the mom. Except for rape, which accounts for less than 1% of all abortions, these women choose to have sex. It’s their choice. The baby never has a choice. Yet you keep talking about having to protect these poor women. What about the poor babies?

Francesca, you seem intent on trying to justify abortion. It’s not working. I think even you can see that.
 
francisca said:
What I meant by

Example
If a pregnant woman is so poor, she can only eat once a day. Does her poverty starve the fetus inside her too? Yes, because the fetus is living inside her body.
If a policy impoverish women, can you then say you only impoverish women but not the fetus inside their body?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Regina7 said:
There will always be women who abort their babies, regardless of the law. However, we can significantly reduce the number of babies being slaughtered by making abortion illegal. If abortion is illegal, a woman has to do many things to get an abortion, breaking the law among one. This in itself will stop many women.

You seem to think that if we can’t stop every “back ally” abortion, we shouldn’t even try. There have been over 55 million babies aborted since Roe v. Wade- not even close to the number of abortions before. Think of all the millions of babies who’d be here right now.

You seem solely focused on the mom. Except for rape, which accounts for less than 1% of all abortions, these women choose to have sex. It’s their choice. The baby never has a choice. Yet you keep talking about having to protect these poor women. What about the poor babies?

Francesca, you seem intent on trying to justify abortion. It’s not working. I think even you can see that.
Click to expand...
Roe v Wade was a long time ago. Nowadays our culture is different compared to then.
Your central argument is only “the number will drop once it is illegal”. But the statistic you showed me isn’t relialbe. I have answered the statistics you showed me before.

The jump (the sudden increase of number) from then to now may due to the increase of permissive culture, and not because it is legal. Besides, compared to before Roe vs Wade, the number of womans death now is lower. Still under-reported in the time when it was illegal was great as I showed you that there are ways that doesn’t need surgery to abort a pregnancy and death may be reported as suicide.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top