That's the thing, though. If the foetus had rights in the US, then it would likely have the right to life. Manslaughter is accidentally killing another person. Therefore, if the woman accidentaly killed the foetus, then she could be charged with manslaughter, couldn't she?
I am a Catholic, and as such believe abortion is wrong. However, we live in a country that has seperation of Church and State. Thus, I do not think women should get them, but I think it is wrong for our country to force their opinion on women by telling them they cannot get them.
That is quite common, particularly here. Heck, I live with a few people who think that way. They will argue against abortion till the sun comes back up (and have), but in the end they willingly agree when you insist that it can never be illegal. They then are amazed that there are lobbies in the USA that actualy make things like this an election issue.
He holds the same opinion as me. I would do what I could to prevent my girlfriend/wife from getting an abortion, but in the end I understand that I have no right stop her or anyone else. What some people fail to understand is that pro choice doesn't mean the right to choose an abortion, but the right to let everyone make their indivdual choice. Be it life or otherwise.
I'm opposed to abotion as well, but I want others to have the choice. Just as doctors have the choice to perform the abortion.
But thats where I get pissed off, why is it, so many people are willing to allow what they might call baby killing, and let it be a choice. However at the same time, are against things like drugs, or prostitution.
::shakes head:::
Let me ask something...Is there any difference in the idea of prostitution and abortion? I mean really? I can't think of any...its a woman's body, there is potential harm to the family structure in both, both cost money to the general population, both are looked at as wrong to many people....any yet...one is legal, one is not...
It makes sense to me that if your going to allow things like abortion, which some would call "baby killing" then you mind as well allow something like sex for money, the two go together perfectly
As far as the law is concerned, there is a clear distinction. In abortion, there is one person whos rights need to be observed. The womans. In prostitution, the effects are far wider reaching. Unless it is carefuly regulated, it can easily make it legal to abuse someone elses rights.
The idea that 'there is potential harm to the family structure' is not a valid argument. The question is is there actual harm to society as a result of this behaviour. In prostitution, in many cases there is. Human trafficing, pimping, the spread of STD's, there are a dozen and one issues that directly spawn from prostitution that need to be considered. Any aproach would require massive amounts of legislation and huge reams of regulations to check the effects of legalisation.
As for abortion, there are no observed negative effects on the family or society. If you think otherwise, show me where they have been observed.
If you made prostitution legal you could control it, like a foods and service commission for sex. Not to mention you would get rid of most of the trafficing and pimping, since professionals would take their place.
Samething applies for drugs, they talk about "rat poison and bleach" and shit being added to drugs. If you made things like pot and coke legal, you'd have medical companies controling it, telling you appropriet dosage, and regulating consumption.
Like before abortion was legal, people were doing it anyway, hurting each other, leaving perminent damage.
Which is a good argument for legalisation. It would destroy a lot of the organised crime built around prostitution and drugs. However, the amount of control needed to stop abuses is amazingly high. Even in places with legal prostitution there are problems with human trafficing and pimping.
And there are some drugs that have such high negative effects that having them legaly out there and companies trying to encourage would be worse than the effects of a small illegal market.
but with legalization the customers would push the industry too. Since they would only want to patronize clean and licensed establishments. who would risk STDs or death when there are government licensed and tested prostitutes and drug dealers providing clean quality services?
That doesn't stop the problem of trafficing. People like the exotic, and often don't mind if she can't speak enough to tell you that she has been kidnapped and will not be fed if she doesn't bring in the cash.
All in all, it isn't an analogious sitution to abortion.
and once again, with the legit businesses not doing this so much more investigative force could be levied on the now 1 or 2 illegal houses where once all 500 were illegal.
With human trafficing, that is not true. This is an tangent, so I want to close it off quickly.
When you have legal prosititution, then it is far easier to disguise a human trafficing or pimping organisation as a legitimate business. Firstly, you can run women who have little choice out of a legal establishment, avoiding most attention. Secondly, it would be hard to tell the difference between a legal and illegal establishment for many, so fewer illegal organisations would be reported.
The idea of focusing efforts on the few works better with drugs, where the means of production and sale are very different in the illegal areas to the legal sphere. Prositution is harder to spot the illegitimate areas in the mirk.
how can you license a prostitute who is illegally trafficked here if you have no ID for this person or proof they are legal? it happens now anyways, this would give a system for even the 'johns' to protect themselves and industry.
you speak like the only choice for people would be selling themselves off to pimps or brothels. I kind of see things a little more personal than that. licenses would be necessary for houses for sure, but also the individual prostitute would need to be licensed as well. Look at nevada. I do not hear much of illegal trafficking coming from their... altho I hear tons about it from states like washington and california and even on into the east...
Just look at what happened when they made alcohal illegal, all of the sudden people started drinking moonshine which was not only flamable but could poison you. Not to mention the car crashes and crime that started because of it. After all, the mob started because of alcohal.
When I first starting watching the forums I thought it was about real debate and conversation. However watching the line of discussion lately barely take notice of, or deal witha large but reasoned stab at the issue (#1171) I am not sure that is the case. Perhaps this may be more the equivalent of intellectual one upmanship (sort of the mental version of your momma....), where style, zing and crowd (or cliche) response is the measure, or perhaps it is just semi-private intellectual masterbation. But maybe it just could have been that the post was too long. History certainly would be a lot different if intellectual debate was limited to 50 words and a couple of sentences.
Even in places with legal prostitution there are problems with human trafficing and pimping.
I have refered to what has happened in areas with legalised prositiution throughout the debate. The whole point of the side argument was to show any direct analogy between the legalisation of prositiution and the legaliation of abortion was flawed. I believe I managed this early, but some people wanted to take it further.
Rehashed the basic outline of the debate. Presented your views.
There was nothing particularly original, and nothing that hadn't been debated already in this thread. It was a good post, but not one likely to get much attention till you enter into an active debate.
However, I would recomend you save it somewhere (journal or on your harddrive) for use in other abortion threads at a later date. It would be very good on a first page or something of that nature.
I will throw up a couple of points though.
In our society we find the death of soldiers, police, firemen and other uniformed services protecting life heroic. We salute acts of bravery and heroism (jumping into icy water to save a child) universally and yet somehow we have come to see that a woman sacrificing her life, or earning potential and other less important things, as a mistake.
We honour bravery because it is a persons choice to be brave. I wouldn't call anyone a coward for not diving into a freezing river after someone. I would call them smart. Doesn't mean I wouldn't honour someone who did, just that I wouldn't think less of someone for not.
A woman who finds herself pregnant suddenly finds that her world is totaly different. Ignoring the health risks, the very act of having a child is often more brave than many people would be able to handle. Men and women. Being cowardly is not illegal, and not everyone would call having an abortion 'cowardly'.
However, in many of these cases the person in question is not by any legal sense an "American" citizen and so not strictly "protected" by the rights of citizenship.
I have to admit, I don't know enough about this area of the consitution, but I think you will find that they have been granted many of the rights of citizens. They still lack many (can be deported for virtualy no reason for example). Here is a discussion on illegal immigrants, non-citizens and detention. The rights to life and liberty are granted to all 'persons', not all citizens.
In reply to ShutUpCloud, #1226: Possibly but if she filed the report in my scenario then she would still have to prove that she was raped before the abortion would be allowed to happen. There will always be flaws in any system I just think this is a better system than we have now.
Why does almost everyone here think that abortion is wrong? there are many different situations where you may want to have an abortion. but i dont think any would-be-mother would want to get an abortion for no reason. If we didnt have abortion then our population would skyrocket and crime, poverty, prostitution and not to mention diesease would grow. I dont think it is right to say "you shouldnt have an abortion because it is wrong" to someone but rather tell them what they would need to do and the risks and the responsabilitys that the woman would have to take.
Perhaps this may be more the equivalent of intellectual one upmanship (sort of the mental version of your momma....), where style, zing and crowd (or cliche) response is the measure, or perhaps it is just semi-private intellectual masterbation.
I think you hit the nail on the head there.
In reply to that last post, can you elaborate on those potential effects of there being no abortion. Only, its an interesting point that I think needs more attention. (Unless of course somebody can point me to where its been brought up in finer detail before)
