Let's talk POLITICS ( NO FIGHTS)

[Christine]

I am American and I am pro-choice. Most of the Americans I know are pro-choice also. I say this because it bothered me what people were assuming about Americans on this thread, not because it is an argument for what is right or wrong.

 

I don't make assumptions about all Americans. I talk to a group of Americans on a daily basis and their views are very similar to yours.

 

But when you're on a large open board like MFC discussing contentious moral issues, it is almost inevitable that you will hear opinions from Americans that are rarely voiced by Canadians and western Europeans.

 

I remember a thread months ago and everyone was talking about abstaining from sex until marriage and how they disapproved of drinking, etc. If I recall correctly most of the participants in the thread were Americans and this doesn't surprise me because I almost never come across Canadians or Europeans who are against pre-marital sex or drinking.

 

There's nothing wrong with these opinions and I'm sure for many young people here it's interesting to hear differing viewpoints and perspectives. But I've been talking to Americans for decades and I think I've got a pretty good understanding why some of their values are different from mine and it's not something I want to debate with them anymore.

 

Even in the case of legalizing abortion I can only be so vocal about it. It's not my values system, it's not my legal system and it's not my country, so it's not my place to tell Americans whether they should allow abortions or not.

[lovempls]

But when you're on a large open board like MFC discussing contentious moral issues, it is almost inevitable that you will hear opinions from Americans that are rarely voiced by Canadians and western Europeans.

 

No joke, that's really interesting to me. I love learning about like differences in culture and ideology. Nerd? Yes.

[lilmot]

I don't make assumptions about all Americans. I talk to a group of Americans on a daily basis and their views are very similar to yours.

 

But when you're on a large open board like MFC discussing contentious moral issues, it is almost inevitable that you will hear opinions from Americans that are rarely voiced by Canadians and western Europeans.

 

I remember a thread months ago and everyone was talking about abstaining from sex until marriage and how they disapproved of drinking, etc. If I recall correctly most of the participants in the thread were Americans and this doesn't surprise me because I almost never come across Canadians or Europeans who are against pre-marital sex or drinking.

 

There's nothing wrong with these opinions and I'm sure for many young people here it's interesting to hear differing viewpoints and perspectives. But I've been talking to Americans for decades and I think I've got a pretty good understanding why some of their values are different from mine and it's not something I want to debate with them anymore.

 

Even in the case of legalizing abortion I can only be so vocal about it. It's not my values system, it's not my legal system and it's not my country, so it's not my place to tell Americans whether they should allow abortions or not.

 

Christine, I hadn't even read your post when I was posting. Scut Monkey's was the last post that I was going off of, I guess I was just a bit slow in my typing or thinking or something because you snuck a post in there before I hit reply. I think I have read enough of your posts in this forum that I never would have thought that you make broad assumptions about anything....so I was not thinking at all about any of your posts. In fact, I happen to agree with what you have to say (mostly) about Americans. Although, I will have to add that the only person I knew that was really against pre-marital sex was a Canadian friend of mine. She is happily married now, and I am very happy for her. Her strong opinions have coloured my world a bit about how I view Canadians and how much I love the "U" in certain words, which is actually accepted here in the US as an okay alternative spelling. But now I joke and go downhill with my off-the-wall humour....sorry.

[JackViolet]

I just want to say one thing: I think saying that you can see how someone could be anti-abortion but not how they can try to make that choice for others is very misguided.

 

For a lot of people who are against abortion, it's not that they simply feel they'd be too attached to the fetus to terminate it, but that they feel it's MURDER. We can argue as to whether it is or is not, and we can even agree that people have different views on whether it is or is not, but that won't change the fact that those who think it's murder really believe in it. And how can you ask them to NOT try and make murder illegal? Or to allow others the "choice" of whether or not to do something that they consider equal to killing another person?

 

People also have different viewpoints on female genital mutilation. Some people consider it a fine old tradition and necessary. You can argue with those people, and you can never convince them that your view of it is right. And yet in most European countries, we do not allow them the "choice" of performing FGM on their daughters--even if the daughter agrees that it's "necessary," which a lot of the little girls who go through the procedure do. The fact that there is no one objective right and wrong does not enter into it here--we prohibit this because the majority considers FGM criminal and harmful. Imagine if someone told you that you shouldn't make beating one's wife or setting her on fire if she is an adultress illegal because not everyone considers that "bad" and you shouldn't make that choice for others.

 

This is why the abortion debate is so screwed up. The two sides can simply not see eye to eye, and their arguments miss each other. Saying "you can be against abortion, but you can't impose that view on others" is absolute nonsense to anyone who is strictly against it.

 

--Jack

[pinkunicorn123]

Uh oh - Jack's in the political thread and there are so huge essays of posts going on - *runs for the hills*

[BonjourMika1990]

I just want to say one thing: I think saying that you can see how someone could be anti-abortion but not how they can try to make that choice for others is very misguided.

 

For a lot of people who are against abortion, it's not that they simply feel they'd be too attached to the fetus to terminate it, but that they feel it's MURDER. We can argue as to whether it is or is not, and we can even agree that people have different views on whether it is or is not, but that won't change the fact that those who think it's murder really believe in it. And how can you ask them to NOT try and make murder illegal? Or to allow others the "choice" of whether or not to do something that they consider equal to killing another person?

 

People also have different viewpoints on female genital mutilation. Some people consider it a fine old tradition and necessary. You can argue with those people, and you can never convince them that your view of it is right. And yet in most European countries, we do not allow them the "choice" of performing FGM on their daughters--even if the daughter agrees that it's "necessary," which a lot of the little girls who go through the procedure do. The fact that there is no one objective right and wrong does not enter into it here--we prohibit this because the majority considers FGM criminal and harmful. Imagine if someone told you that you shouldn't make beating one's wife or setting her on fire if she is an adultress illegal because not everyone considers that "bad" and you shouldn't make that choice for others.

This is why the abortion debate is so screwed up. The two sides can simply not see eye to eye, and their arguments miss each other. Saying "you can be against abortion, but you can't impose that view on others" is absolute nonsense to anyone who is strictly against it.

 

--Jack

 

I agree, there's no way of stating your opinion if your against it without seeming to others like your imposing or pushing yout views on them...

[JackViolet]

I agree, there's no way of stating your opinion if your against it without seeming to others like your imposing or pushing yout views on them...

 

That's not what I meant, Melanie.

 

Pink, I'm staying out of the politics per se, just clarifying some issues in debating this stuff.

 

--Jack

[pinkunicorn123]

That's not what I meant, Melanie.

 

Pink, I'm staying out of the politics per se, just clarifying some issues in debating this stuff.

 

--Jack

 

Politics and settling debates are just the same, except one wears suits.

[greta]

I just want to say one thing: I think saying that you can see how someone could be anti-abortion but not how they can try to make that choice for others is very misguided.

 

For a lot of people who are against abortion, it's not that they simply feel they'd be too attached to the fetus to terminate it, but that they feel it's MURDER. We can argue as to whether it is or is not, and we can even agree that people have different views on whether it is or is not, but that won't change the fact that those who think it's murder really believe in it. And how can you ask them to NOT try and make murder illegal? Or to allow others the "choice" of whether or not to do something that they consider equal to killing another person?

 

People also have different viewpoints on female genital mutilation. Some people consider it a fine old tradition and necessary. You can argue with those people, and you can never convince them that your view of it is right. And yet in most European countries, we do not allow them the "choice" of performing FGM on their daughters--even if the daughter agrees that it's "necessary," which a lot of the little girls who go through the procedure do. The fact that there is no one objective right and wrong does not enter into it here--we prohibit this because the majority considers FGM criminal and harmful. Imagine if someone told you that you shouldn't make beating one's wife or setting her on fire if she is an adultress illegal because not everyone considers that "bad" and you shouldn't make that choice for others.

 

This is why the abortion debate is so screwed up. The two sides can simply not see eye to eye, and their arguments miss each other. Saying "you can be against abortion, but you can't impose that view on others" is absolute nonsense to anyone who is strictly against it.

 

--Jack

I've to partially disagree with you JV

I think you shouldn't compare those 3 very different issues for your quite sophysticate reasoning. I mean{simplified a bit my thoughts too} i'm in favour of legalized aborts if they can save mother's health; I deem genital mutilations, a matter of culture, totally useless for not saying dangerous and finally I cannot stand violence on persons, worst thing ever if that happens between domestic walls. But now I see the common point: women's {and children} position of weakness in most societies:cool:

[Christine]

I never would have thought that you make broad assumptions about anything....so I was not thinking at all about any of your posts. In fact, I happen to agree with what you have to say (mostly) about Americans.

 

I wasn't being personally defensive, just speaking up for a few people who also seem to think as I do that it's not the most productive use of your time to argue certain topics with a group of Americans you don't know very well.

 

There are other topics that I won't argue with parents or South Africans or union representatives...you just know they are not going to be receptive to your opinions and you're not going to agree with theirs and no one is going to change their minds so you don't bother.

 

Although, I will have to add that the only person I knew that was really against pre-marital sex was a Canadian friend of mine. She is happily married now, and I am very happy for her. Her strong opinions have coloured my world a bit about how I view Canadians and how much I love the "U" in certain words

 

Oh the irony.

[JackViolet]

I've to partially disagree with you JV

I think you shouldn't compare those 3 very different issues for your quite sophysticate reasoning. I mean{simplified a bit my thoughts too} i'm in favour of legalized aborts if they can save mother's health; I deem genital mutilations, a matter of culture, totally useless for not saying dangerous and finally I cannot stand violence on persons, worst thing ever if that happens between domestic walls. But now I see the common point: women's {and children} position of weakness in most societies:cool:

 

I'm pro-choice too, Greta, I just used those other examples as issues which different groups would disagree on in terms of whether they are "right" or "wrong," and why it doesn't work to say "you can think it's wrong but don't force us to follow it" in such cases. When we think something is truly wrong, not just morally but in the sense that we believe it hurts others, we do in fact force others to follow it.

 

(P.S. If one considers a fetus a person, as some people DO, then abortion is seen as "violence.")

 

But you are exactly right, all these issues have to do with women's position in society and how much control they are or are not allowed to have over their bodies.

 

--Jack

[Christine]

When we think something is truly wrong, not just morally but in the sense that we believe it hurts others, we do in fact force others to follow it.

 

This is why I can't understand the consideration of certain factors like the mental capacity of the mother or whether she was raped or not when determining if abortion is acceptable.

 

If abortion constitutes murder then these factors are totally irrelevant and shouldn't be taken into consideration at all.

 

I think some people are a lot less committed to the idea that abortion is murder than they like to believe.

[BonjourMika1990]

That's not what I meant, Melanie.

 

Pink, I'm staying out of the politics per se, just clarifying some issues in debating this stuff.

 

--Jack

 

OY, I never get anything right... I need to learn how to speak your language lol

 

I really do have alot of respect for everyone's opinions...but for some reason, when you say something I just have to consider it...I dunno, there's power in your words.

 

So, I think I know now what you meant:naughty:

[lovempls]

This is why I can't understand the consideration of certain factors like the mental capacity of the mother or whether she was raped or not when determining if abortion is acceptable.

 

If abortion constitutes murder then these factors are totally irrelevant and shouldn't be taken into consideration at all.

 

Yes. This is what I believe.

[greta]

Gay marriage?

Euthanasia?

War?

Healthcare systems?

 

stop with abortion and start waffling on that:cool:

[pinkunicorn123]

This is why I can't understand the consideration of certain factors like the mental capacity of the mother or whether she was raped or not when determining if abortion is acceptable.

 

If abortion constitutes murder then these factors are totally irrelevant and shouldn't be taken into consideration at all.

 

I think some people are a lot less committed to the idea that abortion is murder than they like to believe.

 

Abortion constitutes as murder dependant on where you believe life begins. Some think it comes with the first beat of the heart, the developement of the brain, etc. For some, abortion is not such an issue if their boundaries are longer.

 

With regard to mental capacity, there was a case in the Uk a few years ago F v West Berkshire Health Authority in which a judgement was sought from the High Court by the mother of an adult woman whose mental age was assessed to be that of a small child due to her Downs Syndrome. While in voluntary hospital confinement, she had formed a relationsip with a male patient in the same institution with the same condition. The mother felt that it would be in the interests of her daughter to be sterilized, no other form of contraception being likely to be efficacious given the responsibilty that needed to be handed to the woman to use it. It was held that it was within jurisdiction for a judge to make a declaration that an action would not be an assault, if it was in the interests of the victim, where the victim was unable to consent by reason of incapacity.

People have seen the outcome of people born with an extra chromosome (aka Downs Syndrome), combining two people of the same condition in order to create an offspring is not something science has dared to do.

Would you allow this woman to have a child?

[lovempls]

With regard to mental capacity, there was a case in the Uk a few years ago F v West Berkshire Health Authority in which a judgement was sought from the High Court by the mother of an adult woman whose mental age was assessed to be that of a small child due to her Downs Syndrome. While in voluntary hospital confinement, she had formed a relationsip with a male patient in the same institution with the same condition. The mother felt that it would be in the interests of her daughter to be sterilized, no other form of contraception being likely to be efficacious given the responsibilty that needed to be handed to the woman to use it. It was held that it was within jurisdiction for a judge to make a declaration that an action would not be an assault, if it was in the interests of the victim, where the victim was unable to consent by reason of incapacity.

People have seen the outcome of people born with an extra chromosome (aka Downs Syndrome), combining two people of the same condition in order to create an offspring is not something science has dared to do.

Would you allow this woman to have a child?

 

I think the idea of a government controlling who does and doesn't get to procreate is terrifying and extremely Orwellian.

[Lollipop Leftie]

Abortion constitutes as murder dependant on where you believe life begins. Some think it comes with the first beat of the heart, the developement of the brain, etc. For some, abortion is not such an issue if their boundaries are longer.

 

With regard to mental capacity, there was a case in the Uk a few years ago F v West Berkshire Health Authority in which a judgement was sought from the High Court by the mother of an adult woman whose mental age was assessed to be that of a small child due to her Downs Syndrome. While in voluntary hospital confinement, she had formed a relationsip with a male patient in the same institution with the same condition. The mother felt that it would be in the interests of her daughter to be sterilized, no other form of contraception being likely to be efficacious given the responsibilty that needed to be handed to the woman to use it. It was held that it was within jurisdiction for a judge to make a declaration that an action would not be an assault, if it was in the interests of the victim, where the victim was unable to consent by reason of incapacity.

People have seen the outcome of people born with an extra chromosome (aka Downs Syndrome), combining two people of the same condition in order to create an offspring is not something science has dared to do.

Would you allow this woman to have a child?

I don't quite get what you are saying..(the last paragraph is confusing)

[pinkunicorn123]

I don't quite get what you are saying..(the last paragraph is confusing)

 

Down Syndrome is a genetic condition effecting people born with an extra chromosome. The condition is characterized by a combination of major and minor differences in structure and often results in some impairment of cognitive ability and physical growth as well as facial appearance.

If two people with Down Syndrome have intercourse and a pregnancy results, there is no way in telling how mentally and physically deformed the child would be - and sciene refuses to even consider it.

[JackViolet]

This is why I can't understand the consideration of certain factors like the mental capacity of the mother or whether she was raped or not when determining if abortion is acceptable.

 

If abortion constitutes murder then these factors are totally irrelevant and shouldn't be taken into consideration at all.

 

I think some people are a lot less committed to the idea that abortion is murder than they like to believe.

 

 

Yup. In cases where having the baby would threaten the mother's life, someone who thinks abortion is murder could agree to it under the same idea as killing in self-defense.

 

But if you allow abortion in cases of rape or when the mother is mentally incapacitated, etc, then I agree. In that case, it would appear that it's not so much that abortion is truly murder as that having the child is a way of forcing a woman to be "punished" for her choice to have sex for pleasure.

 

(Ie, she was fully mentally capable--abortion is wrong! She was forced/is incapaciated--oh, then it's not "her fault" so we can allow abortion. If it's murder, it's murder.)

 

--Jack

[Christine]

Would you allow this woman to have a child?

 

No. I am all for sterilization and abortions in many circumstances.

 

I happen to disagree that abortion is murder but I think it is perfectly rational to say that abortion should not be permitted because it is murder.

 

But it is not logical to say abortion is murder therefore dumb promiscuous girls who get themselves knocked up need to live with the consequences of their actions but abortion should be considered if the mother has been raped or she's mentally retarded.

 

When people start moving into all these grey areas they can no longer use abortion-is-murder as a premise for their argument. Either you think it's murder and therefore it is not permissable in any case or it's not murder and it is up to the mother or her legal guardians to decide whether to terminate the pregnancy or not. You can't have it both ways.

 

No one here would entertain hypothetical scenarios where it's permissable to murder a 4-year-old child, so if you're going to invent cases where abortion is permissable, then the life of the fetus obviously doesn't hold the same value as the life of a child that's already been born.

 

If you're going to insist that the value of the life of the fetus is the same as any other human life and that abortion is murder, then you can't excuse abortion under any circumstances without contradicting yourself.

[pinkunicorn123]

No. I am all for sterilization and abortions in many circumstances.

 

I happen to disagree that abortion is murder but I think it is perfectly rational to say that abortion should not be permitted because it is murder.

 

But it is not logical to say abortion is murder therefore dumb promiscuous girls who get themselves knocked up need to live with the consequences of their actions but abortion should be considered if the mother has been raped or she's mentally retarded.

 

When people start moving into all these grey areas they can no longer use abortion-is-murder as a premise for their argument. Either you think it's murder and therefore it is not permissable in any case or it's not murder and it is up to the mother or her legal guardians to decide whether to terminate the pregnancy or not. You can't have it both ways.

 

No one here would entertain hypothetical scenarios where it's permissable to murder a 4-year-old child, so if you're going to invent cases where abortion is permissable, then the life of the fetus obviously doesn't hold the same value as the life of a child that's already been born.

 

If you're going to insist that the value of the life of the fetus is the same as any other human life and that abortion is murder, then you can't excuse abortion under any circumstances without contradicting yourself.

 

I am not inventing cases at all.

I am a law student and therefore happen to have an extensive knowledge about cases and tend to slip them into conversation where they seem appropriate, in this case i was to see your opinion with regard to your previous comments about mental handicap.

I think that there is alot of stereotyping going on here (including some unfair terminology). Mental handicap can come in a variety of degrees so it isnt right to tar everyone with the same brush.

[Christine]

I am not inventing cases at all.

I am a law student and therefore happen to have an extensive knowledge about cases and tend to slip them into conversation where they seem appropriate, in this case i was to see your opinion with regard to your previous comments about mental handicap.

I think that there is alot of stereotyping going on here (including some unfair terminology). Mental handicap can come in a variety of degrees so it isnt right to tar everyone with the same brush.

 

I wasn't referring to you inventing cases. I was talking about all the hypothetical discussion that went on previously by people who claim that abortion is murder.

 

I wasn't sure why you responded to my initial post with this case of the woman with Down's Syndrome, so I reiterated my point that I think it's only rational to claim that abortion is murder if you follow through and apply it in exactly the same way you would if you were talking about murdering a person who has already been born.

 

What I think should happen in the case of a mentally handicapped woman is irrelevant because I'm not making any claims about abortion being tantamount to murder or that it's even morally questionable.

 

And I'm not sure what tarring everyone who is mentally incapacitated with the same brush has to do with this? Abortion is either murder or it's not. It doesn't matter whether the mother is a genius or mildly retarded or clinically brain dead. We're talking about the life of the fetus.

[Romis]

aha people, I want to tell my opinion...

I must admit that Deb's position kinda shocked me, that I think differently. I'm against abortions, because I really aprreciate other ones's life and perhaps 'cause I've seen those dead fetus with my own eyes...

12 years old is too early for me to have sex. Not only for the pshychological aspect that Mika defends so well regarding to his sister (I think he's right). but because, indeed, they couldn't raise a baby. Here in the third world, it always happens, so we're used to see that, but it's ignorant people. If you have the education to know, you're aware that could happen and it's your entire responsibility.

 

Note: that's why mental handicap can be exception to the law, even if abortion it's not the nicest thing...

And I add a confession: in my family, they're not worried about me having sex because of all that the thing means, but ONLY for the fact that I could get pregnant. Now that I take pills they're not worried at all. And I've been told, if it happens, automatically I have to look for a place to live or live in the streets. That idea helps me to be more careful...

 

 

PS: I edit...babies can be given in adoption...LOTS of families here are expecting for a baby to adopt!!!

[Lollipop Leftie]

But there are more children to be adopted than parents to adopt... and adoption can get so complicated and expensive.