Abortion: "it Is My Body, I Don't Have To Use It For The Baby

[Hilde]

I've read in some forums, like CAF, the rebuttal of "It's my body". And they answer, like, "it's not your body it's a separate human being with a separate DNA" etc. But this isn't what the pro-choisers actually mean, at least not in my experience.

How do you refute this?

[Didacus]

It is your body to do so as you please - granted.
Having sexual intercourse is the decision you have taken and the consequences of those decisions are YOURS to bare; it is not to the child to suffer for YOUR decision.

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1769796' date='Feb 2 2009, 01:02 PM']It is your body to do so as you please - granted.
Having sexual intercourse is the decision you have taken and the consequences of those decisions are YOURS to bare; it is not to the child to suffer for YOUR decision.[/quote]


"But I was raped. It was incess. I was drunk. How will I finish school? How will I pay for this 'burden.' I have a promising career and didn't ask for this interruption of my life and freedom in this democracy which offers the 'American Dream' to men without reservation."

Just playing Advocatus Diaboli to your statement with the typical responses it would garner in discussion....

[cmotherofpirl]

Its your body until you share it with a distinct other person.

[Didacus]

[quote name='Veridicus' post='1769799' date='Feb 2 2009, 02:06 PM']"But I was raped. It was incess. I was drunk. How will I finish school? How will I pay for this 'burden.' I have a promising career and didn't ask for this interruption of my life and freedom in this democracy which offers the 'American Dream' to men without reservation."

Just playing Advocatus Diaboli to your statement with the typical responses it would garner in discussion....[/quote]

At that point the emphasis of the argument changes entirely.

raped: Ok, lets say we make an exceoption for rape-that removes 99.5% of all abortions that should be illegal. (once that i conceded, the details of rape can be addressed thereafter)

incess: Still a choice made, still not to the child to bare the consequences.

finish school: with great difficulty. You can pull the adoption card, or claim support for the life of a child supercedes support to kill a child.

promising career: I would quote Mother Theresa: "It is poverty to kill a child so that you may live as you wish." And the loss of a career, IF it were so, belongs to the consequences to bare yourself, NOT the child.

[Veridicus]

Thats ironic. I just posted that M. Theresa quote in another thread!

[CatherineM]

I have the absolute right to swing my arm through the air. That right ends where someone else's nose begins.

[Didymus]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1769808' date='Feb 2 2009, 01:18 PM']raped: Ok, lets say we make an exceoption for rape-that removes 99.5% of all abortions that should be illegal. (once that i conceded, the details of rape can be addressed thereafter)[/quote]

I can't express how annoying this argument is.. Too many pro-lifers make this argument as a method of side-stepping the issue.

If 4000 abortions are procured each day, your stat would leave 20 babies every day that are slaughtered with no real argument from our side in their defense.

My argument is this, and please critique it if you will:

Whenever consent is given to an act, consent is given also to the possible result of that act. So if both the man and the woman consent to the sexual act, they are in effect consenting to the responsibility of the consequences of that act.

The act of rape not only robs the woman (assuming it is a man raping a woman) of her consent to the act in and of itself, but it thereby robs her of the ability to consent to the consequences of that act. The rapist is responsible for the consequences of his actions, and must be made to pay the penalty for his actions. As a society, we punish the offender and assist the victims, both the mother and the child.

The only counter-argument I have ever received for this was that my argument is disgusting, and that it punishes the woman for something she didn't do. My response is that yes, it is disgusting; we're not discussing something pleasant here - it's rape. The punishment is not being forced upon her by the society, it is being forced upon her by the individual who robbed her of her consent to the act and consent to the consequences.

If I am stabbed in the back while I am walking down the street, and lose the function of one of my kidneys, I cannot turn to society and demand that they give me back the use of the kidney if it is impossible. Nothing will make me the same as I was. I ought to be able to, however, expect some sort of assistance from the community around me, from society, to help me cope with any sort of tragedies that have come as a result of this crime committed against me, especially if the criminal lacks the right mind to know what he is doing. But of that assistance, I cannot expect the problem to just go away.

Edited February 2, 2009 by Didymus

[Didacus]

Didymus;

I agree with your logic, but it is a particular point of note to defend. jumping to this line early in a conversation often invalidates the conversation as a whole hence why I opt for a 'step by step' approach.

When I arrive to the point of specifically discussing the 'rape' then my position is that the method of conception is irrelevant to the rights of the child. And although admittedly being pregnant adds to the consequences of the mother (as difficult the situation may be), abortion cannot be justified to alleviate the ills.

I sometimes add that furthermore, getting an abortion may actually add to the permanent damage to the mother (regrets, sorrows, ect...) when the child may actually help alleviate the pains for the woman (knowing she did the right thing, if she raises the child and the child graduates to become a doctor or president?). The arguemnt of sympathy for the mother (even though sympathy is amply due) is misguided when abortion is considered.

[Didymus]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1769932' date='Feb 2 2009, 03:34 PM']I sometimes add that furthermore, getting an abortion may actually add to the permanent damage to the mother (regrets, sorrows, ect...) when the child may actually help alleviate the pains for the woman (knowing she did the right thing, if she raises the child and the child graduates to become a doctor or president?).[/quote]

Great point!

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1769920' date='Feb 2 2009, 01:11 PM']The only counter-argument I have ever received for this was that my argument is disgusting, and that it punishes the woman for something she didn't do. My response is that yes, it is disgusting; we're not discussing something pleasant here - it's rape. The punishment is not being forced upon her by the society, it is being forced upon her by the individual who robbed her of her consent to the act and consent to the consequences.

If I am stabbed in the back while I am walking down the street, and lose the function of one of my kidneys, I cannot turn to society and demand that they give me back the use of the kidney if it is impossible. Nothing will make me the same as I was. I ought to be able to, however, expect some sort of assistance from the community around me, from society, to help me cope with any sort of tragedies that have come as a result of this crime committed against me, especially if the criminal lacks the right mind to know what he is doing. But of that assistance, I cannot expect the problem to just go away.[/quote]
+J.M.J.+
so, something that came to mind in reading your post, is that could a woman who is raped and thereby impregnated by her rapist: if she keeps the child, could her or the child sue a 'wrongful life' suit much like the 'wrongful death' suits? i don't know much about law or anything, just wondering aloud.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Lil Red' post='1770042' date='Feb 2 2009, 04:51 PM']+J.M.J.+
so, something that came to mind in reading your post, is that could a woman who is raped and thereby impregnated by her rapist: if she keeps the child, could her or the child sue a 'wrongful life' suit much like the 'wrongful death' suits? i don't know much about law or anything, just wondering aloud.[/quote]

There have been some wrongful life suits, but they have been against doctors for not performing sterilization procedures properly. It's usually for the cost of raising and educating a child. They have not been very successful.

[alixr]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1769796' date='Feb 2 2009, 02:02 PM']It is your body to do so as you please - granted.
Having sexual intercourse is the decision you have taken and the consequences of those decisions are YOURS to bare; it is not to the child to suffer for YOUR decision.[/quote]

The child will likely suffer more if it is born into a situation where it is unwanted?

[Didacus]

[quote name='alixr' post='1773808' date='Feb 6 2009, 11:53 AM']The child will likely suffer more if it is born into a situation where it is unwanted?[/quote]

Augustine says to the effect: I have met all sorts of people, from all parts of the world, and everyone regretted their miseries, but NONE have ever regretted having lived.


It is categorically impossible to claim the child gains a benefit from abortion. Life may be ahrd, life may be painful, but life is always worth living.


You cannot equate the value of life itself with the quality of life. Doing so opens the door to too many attrosities: If I was to kill a few homeless people to relive their miseries, would I be charged with murder?

[alixr]

[quote name='Didymus' post='1769920' date='Feb 2 2009, 04:11 PM']I can't express how annoying this argument is.. Too many pro-lifers make this argument as a method of side-stepping the issue.

If 4000 abortions are procured each day, your stat would leave 20 babies every day that are slaughtered with no real argument from our side in their defense.

My argument is this, and please critique it if you will:

Whenever consent is given to an act, consent is given also to the possible result of that act. So if both the man and the woman consent to the sexual act, they are in effect consenting to the responsibility of the consequences of that act.

The act of rape not only robs the woman (assuming it is a man raping a woman) of her consent to the act in and of itself, but it thereby robs her of the ability to consent to the consequences of that act. The rapist is responsible for the consequences of his actions, and must be made to pay the penalty for his actions. As a society, we punish the offender and assist the victims, both the mother and the child.

The only counter-argument I have ever received for this was that my argument is disgusting, and that it punishes the woman for something she didn't do. My response is that yes, it is disgusting; we're not discussing something pleasant here - it's rape. The punishment is not being forced upon her by the society, it is being forced upon her by the individual who robbed her of her consent to the act and consent to the consequences.

If I am stabbed in the back while I am walking down the street, and lose the function of one of my kidneys, I cannot turn to society and demand that they give me back the use of the kidney if it is impossible. Nothing will make me the same as I was. I ought to be able to, however, expect some sort of assistance from the community around me, from society, to help me cope with any sort of tragedies that have come as a result of this crime committed against me, especially if the criminal lacks the right mind to know what he is doing. But of that assistance, I cannot expect the problem to just go away.[/quote]


The victim that is an unborn child is nothing like the victim that is an unloved/unwanted/neglected child. Also, if you lost the function of one kidney from being stabbed, society does not try to tell you how you need to handle the situation and what you need to do with your own body. You can do whatever you want; try for a transplant, do without, etc. And your choice does not affect another living being brought into this world possibly without sufficient means of support.