Abortion Solution Possibilities

Hatuey · Post by **Hatuey** » Fri Apr 04, 2014 12:04 pm

The purpose of this thread is NOT to discuss whether abortion is right or wrong or whether women should have the ability to abort at what stage of pregnancy or whatever. (Of course, the thread might BECOME about one or more of those topics, since thread-hijacking is completely encouraged, here, but it's not the intended focus). The purpose of this thread, hopefully, is to discuss more democratic methods of solving the issue with a more popular outcome that in many cases preserves life and/or uses it instead of destroying it.

Assumed:

Most people find abortion to be unpleasant in its methods and outcome in that evolution demands that we hold life in higher regard than nonlife. Certainly we'd prefer to prevent unwanted life from occurring than to destroy it once it has occurred. (I intend this "universally." In other words, generally speaking, we would rather prevent a virus from making us sick than to catch the virus and allows its life to flourish inside us and THEN kill it with medicine). Use whatever example you wish: tumors, parasites, etc..

Solutions:

There has to be other possible ways to deal with the concern. I'm hoping this thread will generate at least three or four. One "fair" way might be to allow society to determine the best way to deal with the fetus as the majority feels is appropriate. (Hopefully, many of them constructive ways that do not destroy the life, if it can be called that at the particular stage in question). So, a person wanting to be rid of a fetus would simply turn it over to the state. The state then uses that fetus in the way it has been democratically decided that a fetus at that stage and with that viability should be utilized. That way it's the responsibility of the whole society and nobody needs to point fingers at anybody else. (It'd be interesting to allow the "donors" of the fetuses to perhaps have an extra vote on what happens to ALL fetuses, but maybe that idea muddies the water a bit too much...)

I'm sure there's much better ideas out there (what this thread is for), and my idea could certainly be made much better by sensible suggestions, but it would make sense to "spread the blame/guilt" on such a heavy issue as this one.

Very interested in any other ideas or augmentations to the one I've offered that would improve upon it. (Please remember this thread is not about whether abortion is right or wrong or any of the silly semantics that surround the "abortion debate.")

Kuan · Post by **Kuan** » Sat Apr 05, 2014 2:05 pm

A major problem with this approach is that you solely rely on democracy. That's not the case when someone's rights are in question. So those semantics actually have everything to do with this issue. Is it alive? If so it has rights, even the fact that it WILL be alive might render the fetus rights. If it does have a right to life, then it won't matter if the 99% voted to kill it. So the first question to ask is, does a fetus have rights?

Hatuey · Post by **Hatuey** » Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:13 pm

Kuan wrote: A major problem with this approach is that you solely rely on democracy. That's not the case when someone's rights are in question. So those semantics actually have everything to do with this issue. Is it alive? If so it has rights, even the fact that it WILL be alive might render the fetus rights. If it does have a right to life, then it won't matter if the 99% voted to kill it. So the first question to ask is, does a fetus have rights?

Not the way I've framed the issue, here. We're assuming the current views and laws. The way it currently stands, the law has been decided democratically. WE decide what does and does not have rights. WE decide that a fetus does not have rights because its rights are bound up in the rights of the person who supports it biologically in the exact way that a person has a choice to allow a goiter to grown and flourish or be removed and discarded.

Again, I'm concerned that this thread could hijacked for a purpose not outlined in the OP. Please attempt to engage the topic as it is expressed in the OP. Let's assume that since the case now stands as so it doth...the democratic option (or others) might be discussed as I have outlined it might be.

Kuan · Post by **Kuan** » Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:37 pm

[Replying to post 3 by Hatuey]
Do you have a source that shows a fetus has no rights? From my understanding, current rulings in the US give the state a responsibility to protect the fetus when it is viable, or the point at which the fetus is capable of living outside the womb. They cannot however stop an abortion in the first or second trimester.

A fetus has some rights, it's unclear however which ones. For example, when a pregnant mother is murdered, the offender can be charged with double homicide.

To stay on topic with your OP, it's a useless discussion. What other options are available for a democratic solution? None because a completely democratic solution would be a simple vote and the majority wins. Even if the majority wins, they will not be allowed to avow a citizen of his rights.

As I pointed out earlier, we need to answer the question, does a fetus have rights? If so, what rights? A clear and concise decision cannot be found until the courts answer those 2 questions.

Hatuey · Post by **Hatuey** » Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:57 pm

Kuan wrote:To stay on topic with your OP, it's a useless discussion.

Then don't reply to it?

Kuan wrote:As I pointed out earlier, we need to answer the question, does a fetus have rights? If so, what rights? A clear and concise decision cannot be found until the courts answer those 2 questions.

Assume the current rights continue. If you can't talk about abortion because you can't get over one particular facet that hangs you up each time, then don't discuss abortion. Simple.

Kuan · Post by **Kuan** » Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:38 pm

[Replying to post 5 by Hatuey]
I am not getting hung up on a simple facet, it's a major issue. Your trying to discuss a solution to a problem without addressing any of the issues. It's kinda like attempting to find the solution of a mathmatical equation without looking at the problem.

I am willing to engage in a conversation and/or debate, but can you clarify what it is you want to discuss?

Nickman · Post by **Nickman** » Sun Apr 06, 2014 2:01 am

Contraception will solve most abortion problems.

Hatuey · Post by **Hatuey** » Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:30 am

Kuan wrote: I am willing to engage in a conversation and/or debate, but can you clarify what it is you want to discuss?

You called it a useless discussion.
I invited you to leave it (I can't imagine why you'd want to discus something you find useless).
You continue posting about how you find the topic useless.

How about this? Continue to post about how this topic is useless and inject into it any idea that interests you that has nothing to do with the OP. Sound good?

Hatuey · Post by **Hatuey** » Sun Apr 06, 2014 10:33 am

Nickman wrote: Contraception will solve most abortion problems.

Yes. The issue is how we deal with fetuses that have begun to develop. I suggest that society be tasked with the problem so that we aren't forcing women to deal with a situation that is so polarizing.

Kuan · Post by **Kuan** » Sun Apr 06, 2014 11:44 am

[Replying to post 8 by Hatuey]
Your OP is confusing, I'm just trying to clarify.

[Replying to post 9 by Hatuey]

It would help if the education system was overhauled too. For example, my sex education classes where nothing but confusing. The school wasn't clear about anything and my conservative, religious parents tried to explain it in a way that wouldn't "expose" me. I wasn't even taught about contraceptives or condoms at all, I was probably 18 or 19 before I learned what those were.