Abortion from societies stand point

T

too-open-minded

Registered Member
Personally I think abortion should be legal under extreme circumstances like rape or if the mother is at a risk of death giving birth. I do not believe it should be open publicly to anyone ( although the way our society in America is right now i don't think most people should be raising children ). To me the problem of abortion isn't whether to allow it or not, but abortion itself. It is a social problem, there is a reason teenagers are having kids. I know its a vague correlation to make but with shows like Teen Mom and Jersey Shore on TV, it doesn't seem to be influencing our generation well. We should concentrate on why people want abortions, not whether they are justified.

Abortion is not a problem only a reflection of the problems in our society and has yet to be recognized as such.

If we continue to argue about the morality of abortion from our society as a whole rather than argue about the individual problems in society causing abortions, we will never stop arguing about it.
 
too-open-minded said:
Personally I think abortion should be legal under extreme circumstances like rape or if the mother is at a risk of death giving birth. I do not believe it should be open publicly to anyone ( although the way our society in America is right now i don't think most people should be raising children ). To me the problem of abortion isn't whether to allow it or not, but abortion itself. It is a social problem, there is a reason teenagers are having kids. I know its a vague correlation to make but with shows like Teen Mom and Jersey Shore on TV, it doesn't seem to be influencing our generation well. We should concentrate on why people want abortions, not whether they are justified.

Abortion is not a problem only a reflection of the problems in our society and has yet to be recognized as such.

If we continue to argue about the morality of abortion from our society as a whole rather than argue about the individual problems in society causing abortions, we will never stop arguing about it.
Click to expand...

If, as you say, we're a nation of people who in many cases SHOULDN'T be having kids, the abortion is a social boon, not a problem. Unless you think it's disproportionately the stable people who'd be good parents who get abortions (and it seems likely to me that potentially bad parents would be having a disproportionately high percentage of the abortions), unfit parents who abort are saving society from their maladjusted kids, they are reducing the welfare rolls (because the poor have a relatively higher number of abortions, and for those that have kids, assistance is often vital to making ends meet) and they are reducing medicaid payments.

So if I accept your premise, I'm not sure where your conclusion comes from. Society should encourage more unfit parents to abort.
 
Break it down.
What is the purpose of abortion?
When and why is it necessary?
When and why is it desirable?
When and why is it undesirable?
Is it a real problem or a political football?
What negative effects does it have on 1. the patient 2. the health care provider/ system 3. the community 4. the society at large?
What is the role/ responsibility of medical personnel?
What is the role/ responsibility of legislators?
What is the role/ responsibility of the pregnant female? Of the impregnating male?
Is the above judgment a function of age/ class/ income/ ethnicity/ occupation/ faith?
In terms of overpopulation, is there a better alternative?
In terms of national economy, is there a better alternative?
In terms of social welfare, is there a better alternative?
In terms of the unwilling mother, is there a better alternative?
 
Woah guys please don;t jump to conclusions. I'm not saying we don't need abortion because god knows this country does. I'm saying we need to recognize why we need abortion and stop those problems
 
Abortion is something the mother should be able to decide because it is her own body that she is doing something to. The age is another problem and anyone under 18 should have their parents consent if they only want to abort because they don't want the child and not for medical problems.

Abortions should not be performed with the states or Federal money because, in most cases, it is an elected surgery not something that is a medical emergency. Again it is the womans right not ours to decide as to what they should do. I would think that an abortion should not take place after the second trimester because by then they should keep the baby full term unless the life of parent or baby is at risk.
 
Abortions should not be performed with the states or Federal money because, in most cases, it is an elected surgery not something that is a medical emergency.
Click to expand...
All pregnancy is a medical risk to the mother's life, health, and physical wellbeing.

A few years ago I ran into a stat analysis showing the physical risks of pregnancy compared with those of military service - pregnancy appeared to be somewhat riskier, in the US at least.
 
iceaura said:
All pregnancy is a medical risk to the mother's life, health, and physical wellbeing.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry that I must disagree because most abortions are performed today in clinics and the number of instances where the mother has any severe complications is rare. They also can call 911 at those clinics to recieve help from a hospital nearby in case of any complication they cannot handle at the clinics.
 
Buddha12 said:
I'm sorry that I must disagree because most abortions are performed today in clinics and the number of instances where the mother has any severe complications is rare. They also can call 911 at those clinics to recieve help from a hospital nearby in case of any complication they cannot handle at the clinics.
Click to expand...

He didn't say abortion was a medical risk, he said pregnancy was a medical risk.
 
JDawg said:
He didn't say abortion was a medical risk, he said pregnancy was a medical risk.
Click to expand...

But we were discussing abortions not overall health care weren't we? My point was only to say that public monies to perform abortions shouldn't be allowed unless voters are given the opportunity to say it should be. As for overall health care of the mother that is an entirly different subject.
 
buddha said:
But we were discussing abortions not overall health care weren't we?
Click to expand...
You were claiming pregnancy was not a medical "emergency", as a justification for refusing to pay for abortions with public monies.

I pointed out that pregnancy overall carries risks to life and health more or less equivalent to those of military service overall. Another available comparison is with driving - public monies provide EMT and ambulance services to cover the medical risks of driving. That seems to me to qualify medical responses to pregnancy as worthy of public monies.

Voters of course have final say in any public expenditure, for anything. They don't have to pay for any medical services, if they don't want to. But to hide behind a description of pregnancy as not involving significant medical hardship, damage, and risk, is not reasonable.
 
Last edited:
too-open-minded said:
Personally I think abortion should be legal under extreme circumstances like rape or if the mother is at a risk of death giving birth. I do not believe it should be open publicly to anyone. To me the problem of abortion isn't whether to allow it or not, but abortion itself. We should concentrate on why people want abortions, not whether they are justified.

Abortion is not a problem only a reflection of the problems in our society and has yet to be recognized as such.
Click to expand...

Why they want an abortion?

Because the responsibility of raising a child is huge.
Because the cost of raising a child is huge.

I think all abortions should be publicly funded when other options are not available.

The taxpayer savings per abortion on schooling cost alone:

Public school systems spent an average of $10,499 per pupil in fiscal year 2009, a 2.3 percent increase over 2008, according to data released today by the U.S. Census Bureau.

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/governments/cb11-94.html

Heck we could offer a $500 per abortion bonus and save taxpayer money long term.
 
Didja ever notice that when somebody starts a thread about abortion on SciForums, it's usually only men who participate?

A very wise woman once said to me, "I'll give a flying fuck what men think about abortion, the first time one of you assholes gets pregnant."
 
Well how about we get rid of rapist, and sexually provocative material portrayed in the media first.
 
Bells said:
Because the contents of a woman's uterus and what a woman does with her body should be a public electoral issue for men to vote on?
Click to expand...
commonly what a person does with their body is a societal concern regardless whether one is a woman or not (and particularly if what one does with one's body affects the body and property of others)
 
lightgigantic said:
commonly what a person does with their body is a societal concern regardless whether one is a woman or not (and particularly if what one does with one's body affects the body and property of others)
Click to expand...

Trying to assign property rights over a woman's uterus to another person, LG?
 
lightgigantic said:
Just try and pass through airport customs with 200 grams of heroin in there if you think its legally a no-go area.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

You are comparing a woman's right to her pregnancy or an abortion with inserting heroin up one's vagina?

Interesting...

Do you think a woman's reproductive organs are owned by the State or by "society"?

How many wombs do you claim proprerty rights to, personally, LG?

How about the contents of your gonads? Do we all own them collectively as well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top