Ohio bans abortion after 1 month and a half

[uo111 5,282]

21 minutes ago, PaperIz said:

But it WILL become one. You can't deny that. That is what I'm talking about. You can call it whatever you want, but it WILL BECOME A BABY. And it deserves to become that baby.

That's true assuming nothing goes wrong.

Where we disagree is that it deserves to become a baby. There is no easy way to tell when a fetus "deserves" to be born, but it doesn't even become defined as a fetus until about 10 weeks in.

Beyond that, the fetus doesn't have proper sensory neurons until around 24 weeks, meaning any "pain" is purely reflexive and not actually processed/felt. Which makes sense, a fetus has no reason to process pain since it will likely be spontaneously aborted anyways, even as this point.

If we take the viewpoint that preventing life from taking hold is similar to murder or even just bad, then we must look down on anyone who interrupts fertilization during sex acts between a fertile man and a fertile woman? Surely if we do nothing, there is a good chance that a baby will come out of it. This is the argument the Catholic church has held for hundreds of years when it comes to birth control, it's not a ridiculous scenario at all.

 

[PaperIz 7,354]

1 hour ago, Lona Delery said:

that's stupid. According to this logic, you were no longer allowed to masturbate since all of the wasted sperm had the opportunity to become a baby.

We're obviously just going to disagree. If a woman is pregnant, she's going to have a baby. That's a fact. 

44 minutes ago, Lona Delery said:

human sperm is also gonna guarantee you that i'd grow into a human and not into a dog or a plant.
And as I already stated, an embryo is as much aware of its existence as is all the sperm in my balls right now. It wouldn't lose anything.

It does matter if it's aware it will become a child, it still will become one. 

[Rifek 51,753]

41 minutes ago, Lona Delery said:

human sperm is also gonna guarantee you that i'd grow into a human and not into a dog or a plant.
And as I already stated, an embryo is as much aware of its existence as is all the sperm in my balls right now. It wouldn't lose anything.

It's not really the same because not every dose of sperm guarentees getting pregnant. Not every spermatozoid is strong enough to bore a hole in the shell of the egg so just those stronger ones ''win the battle'' and you never know which one is it.

[PaperIz 7,354]

43 minutes ago, uo111 said:

That's true assuming nothing goes wrong.

Where we disagree is that it deserves to become a baby. There is no easy way to tell when a fetus "deserves" to be born, but it doesn't even become defined as a fetus until about 10 weeks in.

Beyond that, the fetus doesn't have proper sensory neurons until around 24 weeks, meaning any "pain" is purely reflexive and not actually processed/felt. Which makes sense, a fetus has no reason to process pain since it will likely be spontaneously aborted anyways, even as this point.

If we take the viewpoint that preventing life from taking hold is similar to murder or even just bad, then we must look down on anyone who interrupts fertilization during sex acts between a fertile man and a fertile woman? Surely if we do nothing, there is a good chance that a baby will come out of it. This is the argument the Catholic church has held for hundreds of years when it comes to birth control, it's not a ridiculous scenario at all.

 

If something goes wrong, something goes wrong. I'm pro-choice as I've stated. What I'm saying is you cannot deny a pregnant woman is going to have a baby. That's what pregnancy is. I don't know how something so basic can be argued? When the bundle of cells is created that will become a baby, it deserves to become that baby. Nitpicking before that I agree is dumb, but once the pregnancy is started, I would hope it could continue. The baby deserves that much. But it's the mothers choice and I'm okay with that. But I wish more people would chose life.

[Lona Delery 7,227]

1 minute ago, Kefir said:

It's not really the same because not every dose of sperm guarentees getting pregnant. Not every spermatozoid is strong enough to bore a hole in the shell of the egg so just those stronger ones ''win the battle'' and you never know which one is it.

I don't get what you are trying to tell me though. Yes, not every spermatozoid can fertilize an egg. That does not change anything.

[Juvi 1,639]

13 hours ago, PaperIz said:

 Pretty against abortion unless it's rape, incest, or some dangerous situation for the baby or mother. I mean I'm pro-choice though because I can't imagine getting pregnant and being forced to have a kid, but also you should make the choice to practice safe sex, not to end a life.

ohh, F U!

like safe sex never ends up in pregnancies? condoms can rip.

[uo111 5,282]

8 minutes ago, PaperIz said:

If something goes wrong, something goes wrong. I'm pro-choice as I've stated. What I'm saying is you cannot deny a pregnant woman is going to have a baby. That's what pregnancy is. I don't know how something so basic can be argued? When the bundle of cells is created that will become a baby, it deserves to become that baby. Nitpicking before that I agree is dumb, but once the pregnancy is started, I would hope it could continue. The baby deserves that much. But it's the mothers choice and I'm okay with that. But I wish more people would chose life.

Why?

Is the potential to become a person your only reason? It's fine if it is, but then it's not fine to say "something so basic," because not everyone thinks the potential to become a person should afford full human rights.

[PaperIz 7,354]

24 minutes ago, uo111 said:

Why?

Is the potential to become a person your only reason? It's fine if it is, but then it's not fine to say "something so basic," because not everyone thinks the potential to become a person should afford full human rights.

That's a pretty damn good reason imo  it is fine to say it's something so basic, because it is. If you're pregnant you're going to have a baby. It's going to become a baby and it deserves at the very least to be able to LIVE. 

30 minutes ago, Juvi said:

ohh, F U!

like safe sex never ends up in pregnancies? condoms can rip.

Please look at all my posts to get what I'm trying to say please. I am pro-choice, I understand things happen and in a case like that I get when people chose to have abortions, same for cases of rape and incest and if having the baby is gonna kill the baby or mother. That doesn't have anything to do with the fact that I think the baby's still deserve a chance at life. I'm not up for forcing anyone to have a baby they don't think they can have, that's why I'm pro-choice. I just wish more people chose life. No need for personal insults.

Edit: Also I'm talking about people being irresponsible. So many people know the risks of having un-safe sex and I just wish the baby wouldn't have to pay the price. That's why I don't like the your body, your choice thing. It's not just your body that's affected. 

[DrewStevens 5,249]

1 hour ago, Kefir said:

 

But if there is an embryo it is clear it's going to become a human child. Not a dog, not a plant. HUMAN!

So you can't deny that embryo = future human being...

 

2 hours ago, PaperIz said:

But it WILL become one. You can't deny that. That is what I'm talking about. You can call it whatever you want, but it WILL BECOME A BABY. And it deserves to become that baby.

But it's not a human yet and no, it is not clear that it's going to become a human being. A miscarriage can happen so there's no guarantee an embryo is going to become a fetus.

It's ok if you are against abortion but the facts are that an embryo is not a baby and an embryo has no feelings like a developed fetus. No murder and no cruelty here. Morally wrong? Maybe, depends of who you are, but that is not up to you unless it is your own embryo.

[GagaMyBlood95 9,915]

I'm sorry, but this is a MESS. To deny a woman who has been raped the right to have an abortion? But to force her to go through 9 months feeling something that has been a concequence of a horrible trauma?

Only the woman who is carrying that baby (not really a baby until some point but whatever) should make the final decision and no law should tell this or that. 

[Benji 20,113]

I support banning abortion once you hit the 24 week mark (as long as the Mother's life is not in danger) since the fetus becomes sentient but anything before is ridiculous. You can't kill something that doesn't even know it's a thing

[Juvi 1,639]

4 hours ago, PaperIz said:

That's a pretty damn good reason imo  it is fine to say it's something so basic, because it is. If you're pregnant you're going to have a baby. It's going to become a baby and it deserves at the very least to be able to LIVE. 

Please look at all my posts to get what I'm trying to say please. I am pro-choice, I understand things happen and in a case like that I get when people chose to have abortions, same for cases of rape and incest and if having the baby is gonna kill the baby or mother. That doesn't have anything to do with the fact that I think the baby's still deserve a chance at life. I'm not up for forcing anyone to have a baby they don't think they can have, that's why I'm pro-choice. I just wish more people chose life. No need for personal insults.

Edit: Also I'm talking about people being irresponsible. So many people know the risks of having un-safe sex and I just wish the baby wouldn't have to pay the price. That's why I don't like the your body, your choice thing. It's not just your body that's affected. 

well, the "baby" doesn't reallz have a body of it's own/ not a self-functional body.....

but yeah I get your point about people not thinking enough about unsafe-sex, there are some who really block out the reality of things. 

But none the less, you sound to me like you want restrictions, but there are no "needed" because each women individuelly should be allowed to make that decision for herself!!! not at any point having to ask the doc. the only point were laws should investigate is, when it comes to the date when a abortion is reasonable & when not. 

The law that is the topic here is exectly about that. They put a time span on women that is unreasonable! Not for the mother or the baby (which is most likely NOT LOVED because the mother never wanted to give birth to it in the first place, for whatever reasons we don't have to care about!)

This law will help create women risking their lifes for abortions, which should be the BIGGEST MATTER in this dicussion. Because the truth of the matter is, the women is LIVING (having family, loved ones, a job, etc. etc.) and she is supposed to give all that up for something she never wanted. SHE would also be LEFT BEHIND with when it comes to finances and all that kind of stuff, because single mother/women in general still get less of "the cake" in out society.

Sorry but a fetus which couldn't survive on it's own isn't as "immportant" as a part of our EXISTING society. The society we live in has to develop in the right direction for the LIVING before it's a place for the coming.

[Saint Laurent 4,862]

Pro-choice.

Abortion is not murder.

[Oivind 287]

1 hour ago, Saint Laurent said:

Pro-choice.

Abortion is not murder.

I agree. But I'm also with those who think it should not be allowed after week 24. At that point, I consider the fetus a human being, and for me abortion feels like murder at that point.

But then I'm an atheist, and don't believe there is such a thing as a soul, so it's easy for me. Some of those people who believe humans have a soul are bound to think that this soul is there from day one. For those people, abortion in any form is murder, and I can understand why they are against it. People can talk all they want about pro-choice, but that is a moot point when the question is whether or not abortion is murder. If I thought an embryo was a human being with a soul, I would be against abortion too.

[disneyhigh 43]

im in california, thank god. praying for the rest of you states though