How do pro-choicers get the permission of the fetus to abort them?

Question

Noone can take away the right to life of another human being without their permission. How can a fetus grant permission? Pro-choicers are murderers by definition: premeditated act which takes away someone's right to life without their consent. Why do you do this?

Good responses - I have a couple of comments: One, I am an atheist. Two, I am anti-death penalty and anti-war or any other killing where you take away another's right to life (including abortion). And if you think a fetus and a cyst are the same thing, just a bunch of cells you want to be removed, there isn't much anyone can say to you about the whole thing. The only hope is eventually in a few generations society's views will change and it would even have to be illegal, because noone would consider doing it anyway. People in Greece used to think throwing babies who appeared weaker off cliffs was fine. It changed.

Answer 1

I see in your Additional Details that you are at least more consistent than most who oppose abortion.

My suggestion for you, then, if your really want to eliminate abortion, would be to work as hard as you can for sex education and wide availability of birth control, and an end to rape.

If you eliminate unwanted pregnancy, you eliminate the motivation to abort.

Also, work to make the alternatives to abortion more livable (support for the resulting babies, more flexible systems for adoption, for example).

Answer 2

If done within the proper time frame the fetus is not yet a person, it has no ability to choose even if given the opportunity and therefore is exempt from choice.

So, if a young girl makes a big mistake, gets drunk at a party, has sex, and ends up preggers should the child be punished with a lifetime of inadequate parenting and poverty? In this scenario 2 lives are destroyed with one really bad decision... but it's something that can, has, and will happen.

Nobody is going to ever use abortion as birth control... but in the instance that the mistake is made, the option should be available.

If it's available it would be voluntary. If you are uneasy about the issue, just don't have one. Much like homosexual marriage... just because it's available doesn't mean you have to have one.

For quality of life to improve for all of society (currently living with a quality of life that can be affected unlike a 3 week old fetus [read cell ball]) there must be a few fail-safes in place.

Answer 3

I used to be completely against abortion. Now I'm not sure where my stance is if it's done before development, but I'm still against it when the body has been formed. The reason I'm not completely against it being done early anymore is because I learned a lot from anatomy class. When the egg is fertilized, cells inside it begin to divide many times while it travels up the fallopian tubes. When it implants, it is a fairly organized ball of cells with a yolk sac and eats it's way into the lining. At this point it is still just cells, no heart, brain, or body. If a pregnant woman took an abortion pill up to this point, she would shed the lining and the cells would be shed too. This actually happens naturally more often than people realize because they didn't know they were pregnant. I am against abortion when those cells have developed into a body, in my opinion that is a living organism and aborting then is murder and usually involves a lot more than taking a pill.

Answer 4

Here's the thing: the fetus has no consciousness, so it could neither understand the question nor provide an answer. If an organism is not yet born, that being is not yet a "someone," a person. Therefore, abortion is not, by definition, murder. It is the termination of a pregnancy. I say this as a mother of two who has never had an abortion. And, quite frankly, as a man, you really should mind your own business, unless you've never, ever had unprotected sex and unless you make it a habit of offering to adopt crack-addicted, mentally or physically disabled children.
And, the next time you order fried chicken in a restaurant, I hope they bring you scrambled eggs instead--same thing, right?
And, btw--who's selfish: the people who want to FORCE women to give birth or those who believe it's up to the woman to decide? Pro-choicers do not want to FORCE anyone to have abortions.

Answer 5

Before you judge anyone's decisions, maybe you should think about yourself. You are trying to take away another person's free will by belittling them, degrading them and overall, trying to make them feel as if they don't have any choices.

But let me guess, you are for capitol punishment, correct? Most Conservatives are pro life, and pro capitol punishment. How is this "right?" You're ok with taking away someone's life but it's "bad" to take away a fetuses life (that it hasn't even had yet, by the way).

Oh and I am both pro choice and pro capitol punishment because I know they are essentially the same thing. There are different reasons behind both acts, however.

And to the person who mentions that the fetus is part of the woman...yea it is, male or female, sex is not defined (as in, they all look/are the same in the beginning) until it's actually illegal for an abortion anyways.

Answer 6

They don't.
FYI, "pro-choice" does not = "pro-abortion."
Many who are pro-choice do NOT WANT to get an abortion.
If I am pregnant, and the birth of the baby might kill or otherwise harm me, and on top of that, the baby is not likely to survive, do you still think that I have no right to an abortion?
I would like to add that I am indeed a female who could NEVER kill my unborn baby. However, I am pro-choice because there are some situations in which I think abortion should be considered.
I do not , however, believe it is okay for people to just have unprotected sex as much as they want, then if the woman gets pregnant, abort the fetus -- that is, so to speak, "retroactive birth control." THAT, I believe is wrong.

Answer 7

Many creatures on our planet abort offspring for a variety of reasons. Because humans have the capability of deductive thought, a human mother has the ability to make a conscious choice whether to proceed with childbirth or not. The fetus is inconsequential since it has no decision making capacity in the womb - it is totally dependent on its mother's body and can't speak or write little messages on paper. The only question here resides with the mother who must deal with her decision on her own. It doesn't matter what you or I think - we're not the ones responsible for her child. She is. It would be one thing if you only got a single chance at childbirth - but that's not how it is. Fetuses are not humans. And a mother's womb is off limits to governments or opinions from the ignorant.

Answer 8

You know... not all pro-choice people believe in abortions. We just believe that women should have a choice of what to do with their bodies, and that it should not be an issue controlled by the government. (Keep the feds out of our beds!)
Pro-lifers are trying to take away the choice. New legislation has been passed recently in South Carolina that outlaws abortions. It does not take into account rapes or incest. If your sister/cousin/girlfriend was raped by their father, do you think it is right for her to have the child? Isn't that wrong too? Shouldn't she have the option to go to the hospital the very next day and have the offending sperm removed from her body? Would you WANT her to have a child by incest??
The most messed up person I have ever met in my town gave birth to her brother. No one ever helped her. The child has serious medical and mental problems. Was it fair to him?

Answer 9

Without permission. I'm sure all those people on Death Row gave their permission to fry them.

Being pro-choice automatically makes them a murderer? What if they had never had an abortion. Taking this to the extreme aren't you?

I can understand being against abortion, but to make such blanket statements will really get you nowhere.

Answer 10

The debate isn't about whether it is murder or not, it is about when is an embryo considered its own entity. Some say as soon as it is created, but others agrue, that since the embryo couldn't exist on its own, it isn't a viable organism. Once you get into the third trimester, most fetus can live on their own even while being premayure. That is why most states out-law third trimester abortions.

The question is, when can you legally define a fetus as a self-suficient viable organism that would be able to live on its own with out it s mother.

In my opinion, that's when it is murder.