Pro-Choice, or 'Fuck you, pro-life propaganda!' Login to Kupika  or  Create a new account 
 

This diary entry is written by neoeno. ( View all entries )
 
Previous entry: Cheating: Sexual and Emotional in category (general)
.....

Pro-Choice, or 'Fuck you, pro-life propaganda!'Category: (general)
Tuesday, 1 May 2007
04:13:25 PM (GMT)
I've just read the ridiculous from-the-perspective-of-a-foetus
text. It makes me angry.

It makes me angry because abortion is such a force for good (and not-bad), it's
unbelievable. Having a child is something that no-one should ever go
into with half a heart. You're toying with many many lives here, and if you can't
bring up that child well then you're introducing a hell of a lot of bad.

I can imagine pro-lifers with their mouth open wide now. How can I possibly claim
that abortion is a huge force for good?! Let me, instead, state why abortion
is not as bad as it is portrayed by these propaganda 'artists'.

The foetus is not human. It's not even remotely human until a long way into its
development. What's more, it's not concious until a way in either. It hasn't been
determined just how _far_ in it is, but estimates say not until the third trimester.
Without experiencing conciousness, it cannot have the thoughts it is given in the
above link.

"But it's going to be a human!". I know some of you think that's a good argument.
Every egg in a woman's ovaries has the potential to be human. Every month, another
one perishes. The only difference between an egg that's going to be human and one
that isn't is whether a sperm cell happens to turn up. The only difference between a
foetus that's going to be human and one that isn't is whether certain chemicals turn
up.

The funny thing is, I'm not the ruthless bastard I make myself out to be in this
entry. I'm so angry because this misinformation wrecks people's lives. Having a child
at fourteen is bad for everyone involved (and the baby wouldn't have that great a
time of it either). I have persuaded a fourteen year old friend of mine to have an
abortion, so I'm not talking based just on theory here.

If you disagree with me. Please, comment. I would like this page to refute as many of
the pro-life arguments as possible.

Unless you're going to mention god, that is. If you use your god as a stick to
propaganda/influence people to not-abort, you're the epitome of what's wrong with
religion. 

PS: I'm not usually this literally violent, promise.

Comments 
‹EvaHEROIN› says:   1 May 2007   936342  
I don't think abortion is a bad thing. I've had to have one, and yet
no one said it was a bad thing. No one should be forced to have a kid!
What if you couldn't handle it, or couldn't give it a good life? When
I found out I was pregnant with my rapists child, hell no was I gonna
keep it! This man had no heart. And to anyone out there who says that
it was a bad thing, think about this...
If I couldn't give it a good life, why should I keep it just to make
both our lives miserable.
Thats all I wanted to say.
 
x_dopeshow says:   1 May 2007   111111  
Wow, this just summed up eveything for those that favor it need to
get even the mere glances of those who don't.
Infact this may come in handy for me.
|prints|
neoeno says:   1 May 2007   461342  
*wimpers* x_dopeshow: I cannot understand what you are saying!
 
x_dopeshow says:   1 May 2007   288518  
Uh...let me rephrase?

Um...your words are good for arguments with the 'other side'. Yeah.
pyro_the_pirate whispers:   3 May 2007   398385  
wow 
niice! 
you make a good point, 
but to people that don't believe in it... 
idk you lost me!lol 
0_o 
xoxo 
 -cera
Cuteanddangerouse says:   4 May 2007   864253  
i agree parshaly with u, but at the same time i think that u should
wait till marriege, but f u don't u should at least use partection
cause i believe that once that sperm hits the egg an starts making a
baby, it is a living thing and u commet murder if u were doing fine
through your pregnancy and u just decide u don't want it! i think
that's rong! if u aren't ready for a baby, then don't have sex! or at
least use pertection!! But at the same time i understand why people
get abortions so i am both with it and against it. it just depends on
the situation.
abc_ says:   4 May 2007   141964  
I disagree with you
Cerberus says:   8 May 2007   787251  
I cannot conclude that abortion is a good/bad thing. I guess this
depends on the situation (for the female). My opinions on abortion
reasonings as follows:

Pleasure [of sexual intercourse]:
If the mother nor the father can take on the role of being parents,
use protection gears ...Or do not even bother doing so. Do NOT wait
until the last minute for the notice. (No such thing as an
"accident")
-Abortion for this is BELOW one's own insanity-

Rape/Molest:
The female was forced in taking actions, therefore abortion for this
cause is not bad AS the previous reason. 

Disagreement?
neoeno says:   8 May 2007   268174  
In an ideal world, people could control their fertility at will, and
are always sensible.

However, this often doesn't happen, especially where sex is involved.
Some people often say that people who get AIDS through sexual
promiscuity deserved it because they weren't careful. But that seems
flawed, should mistakes like that be punished with death? Should
mistakes with sex punish people? And of course, contraception can
never be perfect.

Personally, though you don't have to agree with me, I think abortion
is a whole lot more morally loaded than it needs to be (at least, in
the early times in pregnancy).
 
bubbles_girl_13 says:   9 May 2007   483961  
You are totally right. Abortion really isn't a bad thing.
Cerberus says:   11 May 2007   975472  
In ways I do agree with you. However, I believe that abortion can be
a bad /good thing, but to blame the person sexually involved depends.
For poorer countries, contraception does not apply, therefore abortion
may be helpful to the parents (expenses, etc.). To sum it up, abortion
has its good and bad points. (Not saying abortion is morally good)
Plus, it helps the child in the future, who has to be sent to foster
homes (due to their parents' fault).
neoeno says:   11 May 2007   794321  
I think you're ignoring the issue of whether abortion itself is a bad
thing. I don't see why it should be.
 
Cerberus says:   13 May 2007   473389  
Abortion is a bad thing then, though I am not 100% against it. I
believe that if you are engaging this activity, you are killing a
life. I also feel that abortion gives massive pressure to the mother
since the majority thinks it is wrong, when really it's not as bad as
it seems.
Square says:   13 May 2007   752391  
Abortion is neither good nor bad. I agree that this removal of
pregnancy gives intense pressure to the mother. Plus, it is not as bad
as the public makes it seems. Basically, re-wrote what Cerberus
commented.
greenbeetle1201 says:   14 May 2007   615446  
okay, i think that adoption is a much better choice, go ahead and
have the baby, there are thousands of parents who would love to have
children but cant, and my thing about abortion is that you prevented
someone from living, you took away their chance to be born and to
experience being able to think and choose and dicover the good and bad
things about the world
 
abc_ cries:   15 May 2007   196357  
Has anyone asked the baby for his or her thoughts?
neoeno says:   15 May 2007   167943  
Greenbeetle: Adoption is great, I agree. I plan to adopt/foster, and
I plan not to have kids. Not out of any sense of fear to commit
(because I know a lot of people think that), personally there are few
things I'd desire more than a long-term relationship. But kids?
Irresponsible in today's world.

That's where I leave you though. Did you even read my entry? I already
refuted what you're saying. To try and make this more direct: every
month you menstruate (presuming you do), an egg is destroyed and
you're denying a person the chance to be born and etc. What's the
difference between this and destroying a fertilised egg?

abc_: No! Nobody asked the baby because there isn't one! There is a
foetus. A foetus is not a baby. In the time-scales I am thinking of,
the foetus is not human, or even alive! At least READ the post before
you comment, please.
 
abc_ says:   15 May 2007   773222  
As your "experts" admit "It hasn't been
determined just how _far_ in it is, but estimates say not until the
third trimester" estimates are just that...... a guess. At week 4 the
embryo forms and week 5 eyes and ears form.
I agree that adoption should be the option of choice.
neoeno says:   15 May 2007   659481  
If I were to chop off my face, would it have rights? IT has eyes, and
if I do it right I can give it ears too. That doesn't mean it has
rights.

Estimates _are_ exactly that. However, those estimates mean that
conciousness does not develop hugely before then. In the first
trimester you can abort with a totally free conscience. After that, I
don't know the data, but your doctor should be able to inform you if
you're interested in getting facts from a neutral source.

The way you put experts in double quotes just screams ignorance. Do
you somehow believe that you know more than them?
 
abc_ says:   16 May 2007   267611  
Correction...... some people can abort In the first trimester you can
abort with a totally free conscience. 
Experts........ I was pointing out that they don't for sure how _far_
in it is. They are using estimates. 
Of course much of my beliefs and some facts are Bible based. With that
background, I am prejudiced.
neoeno says:   16 May 2007   818169  
You're right about that last bit, abc_.

They're not sure how far it is, but they can be reasonably sure. 

I'm not even sure what your first point is meant to say. It sounds
like you're agreeing with me.
 
abc_ says:   16 May 2007   681772  
Your statement "In the first trimester you can abort with a totally
free conscience" implied that it was okay to abort in first trimester.
I just wanted to clarify that not all people would agree with
that........ per our discussion now.

If you reworded your diary heading, I think you would show that you
are open to discussions instead of a closed mind.
neoeno says:   16 May 2007   899285  
Right... well you usually have to back things up when you disagree
with someone, care to?

Nah, I'm leaving it as it is. I am 100% sure in my pro-choice view,
for starters, because I really have considered everything you're
talking about (I'm not joking, this isn't some emotion driven whim
I've come up with). And, I really was quite annoyed at that
propaganda, it was nonsense and a straw man.
 
momo09 says:   16 May 2007   775313  
You make a very good argument and you have summed up how i feel about
abortion too great job! 
 
abc_ says:   16 May 2007   195521  
If your 100% sure in your view then you have a closed mind. It is not
a discussion at that point, but an argument. If BOTH parties are not
willing to accept that they  could be wrong....... then why talk about
it?
neoeno says:   16 May 2007   568177  
It is a debate. Actually, no, I take that back. You haven't actually
been doing much refuting of my points. You've just said "Yep, it's a
baby." and "No, actually I disagree". And no, using arguments I've
already refuted in my post does not count as debating.

Talking about it is necessary to understand the other view, so that
you can have a pre-formed refute in future. As I said up there, I want
this to be a place where the pro-choice arguments are refuted.
Pro-lifers are generally very forceful in shoving their ideas down
people's throats, which can be very intimidating (ever heard of
pro-choicers standing at hospitals telling people to get an abortion?
I didn't think so). By posting this in (MY) diary, I'm informing
people and giving them the opportunity to make the decisions. And
after all, that's what pro-choice is about, choice.

Now please. Before we start to talk about abortion again. Read my
post, then read all my comments. If you don't understand something,
work it out, don't ignore it.
 
abc_ says:   16 May 2007   468314  
As I said........ you have already determined your decision. You are
not open to the possibility of being wrong.
neoeno says:   16 May 2007   754273  
Yes, but the readers may have not made their minds up yet. Why don't
you make a convincing argument, which hasn't been refuted in my
post/comments already. To educate the people reading.

One rule: No links to external web-sites. Paraphrase them, if you
like, but no links.
 
abc_ wonders:   16 May 2007   291745  
How can you make a convincing argument to a closed mind? Refuted is
all in the believer/reader. When you start paraphrasing qualified
sources then you tend to incorporate your own views instead those of
the sources. Why not let the qualified sources speak for themselves?
Therein lies the problem.......who determines who's sources are
qualified? Are yours more qualified than mine? Until your ready to
study facts of both sides and keep an open mind to the fact you could
be wrong....... there is no reason to continue. I am. Are you?
neoeno says:   16 May 2007   114818  
I thought I already explained this... you're not trying to convince
me. Try to convince the readers. If you come up with a good, solid
refute, then they will be swayed.

And actually, refuted is not in the mind of the believer/reader. Let
me explain the current structure of debate to you:
Argument is presented.
Refute.
Counter-refute.
Etc...

Example:
Argument is presented: Believing in god is stupid, because it starts
wars.
Refute: Actually, wars are started by humans who use religion as an
excuse.
Counter-refute: Religion has been used as a sole basis for war. People
would not fight for no reason.
Etc..

Another example:
An argument is presented: The sky is blue.
Refute: No it's not, my gramma said it's yellow!
Counter-refute: Your gramma has been verified as colour-blind by many
reputable doctors.
Etc.

You notice that, even if the refute is not valid, it's still a refute.
And until you counter-refute the refute, you cannot claim that your
argument is proven.

Yet another example:
Argument is presented: Abortion is always wrong.
Refute: Abortion is only wrong if the foetus is alive. The foetus is
not alive until it is concious. Conciousness cannot occur until the
brain is developed enough. The brain is not developed enough, it is
estimated, until the third trimester. Regardless, there is a time in
which the brain is not developed, thus the foetus is not alive, thus
abortion is not wrong then. Therefore, abortion is not always wrong.
Counter-refute: ...?

That is how things have happened so far. Please, counter-refute. Or at
least come up with something I haven't refuted yet.

I can say that you will not convince me. You may, however, convince
people reading this. You will also sharpen your debating skills. Hell,
if I have my way, you will even learn something. There is nothing for
you to lose aside from time.

I won't continue wasting my time dancing around the matter either.
Unless you come up with something solid in your next comment, I will
not reply to you again.
 
abc_ says:   16 May 2007   246812  
I enjoyed our conversations.
Jahannam says:   17 June 2007   691522  
Yes! Thank you! Someone who has the exact same view as me! FINALLY.

Heh, a little life history, sorry if you don't want to read.
Abortion HELPED my family. When my sister was seventeen, she got
pregnant and was planning on running away and having the baby. She
would have been out on the streets! She knew who the father was, but
he wasn't taken responsibility. Her life, and most probably the
baby's, would have been ruined. She couldn't work (you have to be 18
here), and she had only completed her first semester of university! 

If she hadn't gotten an abortion, apart from living on the streets, my
dad would have disowned her and would have most probably blamed my
mother for what happened. Then they would have had most likely gotten
a divorce, and my father would cut off all ties with us (cause he
would have immediatedly assumed that if my oldest sister did it, my
other sister and I would be doing the same... he's like that) and we
would have been left fatherless and sisterless and pretty much
miserable!

For some reason, that doesn't sound as bad as it would have been. But,
yup, if it weren't for a friend convincing my sister to get an
abortion (she had hidden it from us... the friend told me cause he
said he thought I deserved to know) our family would have pretty much
fallen apart.
Luna987 says:   18 June 2007   189173  
I think you are abosolutly right. Abortion should be considered
murder. You are  basically killing the child before it properly
develops. Some people might think it is right but they should think
about the fact that abortions are banned in a number of states. It is
banned in more states then it is allowed.
neoeno says:   18 June 2007   821786  
Eh... what?

I'm pro-choice. Presuming you're speaking to me. I'd suggest you learn
about your own biology, and then think about it for a while.

And saying that something being outlawed in the majority of the world
(do you have a source for this, btw?) makes it wrong is stupid. You
know what else is banned in the majority of states? Homosexuality.
Does that make it wrong?

Actually, I have no source for the above statement. Treat it as a
hypothetical.
 
RaverAlchemist says:   30 June 2007   341314  
Well.. I'm only for abortion if the person was raped.

 Other then that, use a damn condom. Take birth control. Don't go
screwing random people.

 I'm just not.. Y'know.. Comfortable with the way they remove the
baby. They then discard them like they're nothing but garbage. 

 Makes me a bit sad.
neoeno says:   30 June 2007   447682  
'tAin't a baby. I already explained why it isn't alive... so that
doesn't really count as a rebuttal, if that was your intention.

Also: Contraception fails.

Aa~nd, if you're just uncomfortable with it, then there's no real
reason to stop other people doing it. I mean, people are uncomfortable
with homosexuality but can still be tolerant towards it. It's when you
think it's morally wrong, that you can start saying people aren't
allowed.
 
Purple_rose says:   1 July 2007   682662  
RaverAlchemist, i agree about abortion being 'ok' if the person was
raped. I also think if you feel responsible enough to have sex then
your responsible enough to live with the consiquences of your actions.
And yes i know people have there own opinion, i accept that, my
opinion is that abortion is 'wrong' and should only be considered in
extreme cases, like if the baby or mother was ill and that illness
threatened the life of the mother/baby or if you get raped.
kawaiininja says:   16 July 2007   642659  
-sigh- Watch all the little church-goers come and bash this just like
they bash gays. (Seriously, what's with that? Church-goers, love is
love. Leave homosexuals alone and do something more worthwhile than
passing laws to ban marriage. Help the homeless or something.)
Aborition IS good for the baby in the long run. If a girl gets
pregnant at 14 I bet you that the baby will have a hard life. I think
that if you get pregnant and you aren't ready, have an abortion. Wait
till you are sure you are financially stable enough to support a
child. That's what I think. (Btw, church-goers, no offense to you
personally. I'm just voicing my opinion. =3)
kattany2 says :   18 July 2007   272524  
lol hm ill take ur word for it and i can agree with u an well almost
every point a 14 year doesnt need that responsiblity of a child at
that age one reson is the body is not ready for that kind of prosses 2
is the emotional hit it will take on the family and every one involed
and the unborn child is very hard abortan is a way out of all the
emotional tormal theyll go thro and the unborn child will be a
reminder of that slip and the tramma during the time it was in the
ovarie and it might not be exapted in its family or enviroment. =

 
HTML Tips

 
Next entry: LOLOMG PERVERTS PEDOPHILES!?!?!!!??!!!111one in category (general)
.....
Related Entries
‹Danny;; ♥♪Never-Give-In♪♥›: My Life According To CINEMA BIZARRE Music ♪
tiggerlemon101: Beliefs
shawnman: RELIGION AND BELIEFS...
Emo_Gio: living an emo life
Traitololz: Diary 12 January


About Kupika    Contact    FAQs    Terms of Service    Privacy Policy    Online Safety
Copyright © 2005-2012