Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

Poll Abortion: Pro Life or Pro Choice

To kill or not to kill

  • Total voters
    90
Loneshot said:
Consider just these few things if we are to favor the pro life argument. You are essentially forcing people into poverty if they cannot afford the child. You could make a whole mixtape on how parenting can lead to poverty and crime; starting a family is almost like starting a business. Now, should everyone be forced to start a business if their credit is good and they have a good idea?

Next, school shootings.

Lastly, is the individual fit to parent? When we force people to become parents, we ignore if they are even qualified for the role. We only blame the parents after the fact, but take no accountability as a community when we ignore that some people should have never been parents. I know a lot of people who grew up in foster homes; those success stories are as common as Black Disney princesses.

This is not a left/right issue. I'm pro choice and I want the government out of most if not all of our business. It's HER body. If as a man I want her to keep that baby, then there is a mixtape for that too.
Click to expand...

The business comparison is a big big stretch. I'll ignore that.

I don't know if you recognize the slippery slope you're on. You're coming very close to making an argument that only people that meet certain qualifications should be allowed to have kids.

"You are essentially forcing people into poverty if they cannot afford the child. You could make a whole mixtape on how parenting can lead to poverty and crime...

Lastly, is the individual fit to parent? When we force people to become parents, we ignore if they are even qualified for the role. We only blame the parents after the fact, but take no accountability as a community when we ignore that some people should have never been parents."

OK... that's your words. Now why should we let people in poverty have kids? It's going to lead to increased poverty and crime right (your words)? Why do we let someone who's had their child taken away have another child? The community needs to take accountability and recognize that the woman should not have a baby again (your words).
 
AP3.0 said:
That it's not considered a life cause it was an abortion.

Cause again, we need to stop referring to abortion as one definition to fit biased povs.

I tell you one thing, if I'm so glad of the ability to do genetic marking testing or whatever it's called. If I know my kid is going to have Downs syndrome, I'm not going to put myself or my kid through that. I would be in the abort camp
Click to expand...

You're acting like I made the point up. It's a very very common pro-choice stance that during a large part of the pregnancy (or even for the entire pregnancy) that it's not a life/baby. But that same group will recognize a miscarriage as losing a baby.

I'm not putting myself through that is a wild statement, haha.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
The business comparison is a big big stretch. I'll ignore that.

I don't know if you recognize the slippery slope you're on. You're coming very close to making an argument that only people that meet certain qualifications should be allowed to have kids.

"You are essentially forcing people into poverty if they cannot afford the child. You could make a whole mixtape on how parenting can lead to poverty and crime...

Lastly, is the individual fit to parent? When we force people to become parents, we ignore if they are even qualified for the role. We only blame the parents after the fact, but take no accountability as a community when we ignore that some people should have never been parents."

OK... that's your words. Now why should we let people in poverty have kids? It's going to lead to increased poverty and crime right (your words)? Why do we let someone who's had their child taken away have another child? The community needs to take accountability and recognize that the woman should not have a baby again (your words).
Click to expand...
Yes. I'm 100% for a parental license. Though that does not change that raising a child is a great financial burden; if you can prove otherwise, please do. Me believing only certain people are qualified to be parents does not change that forcing this role on a person ignores whether the child will actually have the necessities to continue living long after being born.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
You're acting like I made the point up. It's a very very common pro-choice stance that during a large part of the pregnancy (or even for the entire pregnancy) that it's not a life/baby. But that same group will recognize a miscarriage as losing a baby.

I'm not putting myself through that is a wild statement, haha.
Click to expand...
No

I'm agreeing with you
 
Loneshot said:
Yes. I'm 100% for a parental license. Though that does not change that raising a child is a great financial burden; if you can prove otherwise, please do. Me believing only certain people are qualified to be parents does not change that forcing this role on a person ignores whether the child will actually have the necessities to continue living long after being born.
Click to expand...

Just so I'm not misunderstanding you, what do you mean you're 100% for a parental license?
 
Bow to Royalty said:
I said from jump it comes down to if people see the baby as a person or not.

You call it my POV but I think it's the most objective definition. Scientifically speaking I think the stages of life for humans start during pregnancy before the fetus can survive outside the mother.

Outside of a random extremists and weirdos, because nothing is 100%, I pretty much never hear people downplay a woman's miscarriage as just losing a clump of cells.
Click to expand...

Again your word choice is informing your pov. You rarely hear that because most often when you hear a person talk about having a miscarriage it's from someone who wanted to have the baby so in their mind it's already a child not just a clump of cells. You also have to consider when the miscarriage happened because as said before, and part of the reason this debate even exists, is because many women have had a miscarriage before even knowing they were pregnant. If a person doesn't want a baby you're probably more likely to hear them refer to it as a miscarriage vs "i lost a child".
 
Bow to Royalty said:
You're acting like I made the point up. It's a very very common pro-choice stance that during a large part of the pregnancy (or even for the entire pregnancy) that it's not a life/baby. But that same group will recognize a miscarriage as losing a baby.

I'm not putting myself through that is a wild statement, haha.
Click to expand...

That is not a huge part of the pro choice stance. Pro choice is just that...pro people making their own choice. But pro choice people recognize that after a certain point it is a baby and a life that is viable and can survive on its own. Saying a pro choice person doesn't consider an 8 or 9 month pregnant woman to not be carrying a life/baby is how you got people dumb enough to be promoting this "they're aborting babies after birth" nonsense
 
BlackRain said:
Again your word choice is informing your pov. You rarely hear that because most often when you hear a person talk about having a miscarriage it's from someone who wanted to have the baby so in their mind it's already a child not just a clump of cells. You also have to consider when the miscarriage happened because as said before, and part of the reason this debate even exists, is because many women have had a miscarriage before even knowing they were pregnant. If a person doesn't want a baby you're probably more likely to hear them refer to it as a miscarriage vs "i lost a child".
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about from the mother's POV. I mean people talking about what happened to her. When a woman has a miscarriage most pro-choice people will say she lost her baby or something along those lines. They acknowledge it as a baby regardless of where she is in her pregnancy. They won't say something like it's just a clump of cells or it wasn't viable yet. But when discussing abortions, they usually won't acknowledge it in the same way. A lot of the time they point out where it is in its development and dehumanize it.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
I'm not talking about from the mother's POV. I mean people talking about what happened to her. When a woman has a miscarriage most pro-choice people will say she lost her baby or something along those lines. They acknowledge it as a baby regardless of where she is in her pregnancy. They won't say something like it's just a clump of cells or it wasn't viable yet. But when discussing abortions, they usually won't acknowledge it in the same way. A lot of the time they point out where it is in its development and dehumanize it.
Click to expand...
I think you're getting too caught in the weeds with your semantics
 
BlackRain said:
That is not a huge part of the pro choice stance. Pro choice is just that...pro people making their own choice. But pro choice people recognize that after a certain point it is a baby and a life that is viable and can survive on its own. Saying a pro choice person doesn't consider an 8 or 9 month pregnant woman to not be carrying a life/baby is how you got people dumb enough to be promoting this "they're aborting babies after birth" nonsense
Click to expand...

If that's the case then pro choice is pro choice, and the mother always gets to make the decision. You can't say "her body, her choice" just because you take that choice away from her later than other people. It's not still her body and her choice at 8 months?

There are pro choice people that think life begins at birth, and think late term abortions are okay. I'm not saying that's everyone on that side's stance, but it's not just 1 or 2 extremists on that side saying it.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
I'm not. My point is it's a life or it isn't. And that shouldn't be decided by if the mother wants it.


Considering it a life vs a clump of cells is more than semantics.
Click to expand...
The discussion is should a woman be able to terminate a pregnancy for whatever reason vs someone telling her that the only reason you can abort is if xyz happen

That's not a choice at all

This isn't applied to most applications in life

There is a reason to can go to any dealership you want to go. It's YOUR choice. No one is telling you that you can only get a Ford or a Chevy
 
Bow to Royalty said:
I'm not. My point is it's a life or it isn't. And that shouldn't be decided by if the mother wants it.


Considering it a life vs a clump of cells is more than semantics.
Click to expand...

The very easy, obvious answer here is that people want to be kind and conciliatory when a person has a miscarriage. It’s called tact. No one is gonna be like ‘Toughen up, ma. It was just a clump of cells!’…even if it was 6 weeks into the process and it was just a clump of cells.

I’m very much pro choice and view early terms pregnancies as a clump of cells. When talking about a woman who had a miscarriage, even if that woman isn’t present, I’m not gonna refer to it as a clump of cells because regardless of my own viewpoint, a woman just lost her offspring and it’s likely very meaningful to her.

It’s WILD that so many pages have been dedicated to this part of the discussion that is, for all intents and purpose, meaningless.
 
Bow to Royalty said:
Just so I'm not misunderstanding you, what do you mean you're 100% for a parental license?
Click to expand...
That people should need a to earn a license to prove they are fit to attempt parenting. Too many people have children but do little to nothing to guide that child into adulthood. Too many people are born, but not raised.
 
Loneshot said:
That people should need a to earn a license to prove they are fit to attempt parenting. Too many people have children but do little to nothing to guide that child into adulthood. Too many people are born, but not raised.
Click to expand...

You want the government to be in charge of whether or not people can reproduce?
 
AP3.0 said:
The discussion is should a woman be able to terminate a pregnancy for whatever reason vs someone telling her that the only reason you can abort is if xyz happen

That's not a choice at all

This isn't applied to most applications in life

There is a reason to can go to any dealership you want to go. It's YOUR choice. No one is telling you that you can only get a Ford or a Chevy
Click to expand...

Do you think there should be any limits on abortion?

This still goes back to how you view the child. Who's the victim in your car dealership scenario? Who are you harming?

If the child is viewed as a person, then you're killing a person.
 
Loneshot said:
That people should need a to earn a license to prove they are fit to attempt parenting. Too many people have children but do little to nothing to guide that child into adulthood. Too many people are born, but not raised.
Click to expand...

That's what i thought, but figured that can't be right because you said this
Loneshot said:
I'm pro choice and I want the government out of most if not all of our business. It's HER body. If as a man I want her to keep that baby, then there is a mixtape for that too.
Click to expand...

You want the government out of people's business, but want the government to decide who's allowed to have children?

Isn't telling a woman she can't get pregnant just as much controlling her body as telling her she has to carry out her pregnancy?
 
Bow to Royalty said:
Do you think there should be any limits on abortion?

This still goes back to how you view the child. Who's the victim in your car dealership scenario? Who are you harming?

If the child is viewed as a person, then you're killing a person.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't know

I view the child as a dependent who is going to be as successful as the people they are depending on

I'm not sure if that answers your question but again, this is a very nuanced conversation
 
Last edited:
Bow to Royalty said:
That's what i thought, but figured that can't be right because you said this


You want the government out of people's business, but want the government to decide who's allowed to have children?

Isn't telling a woman she can't get pregnant just as much controlling her body as telling her she has to carry out her pregnancy?
Click to expand...
This is situational. It becomes the government's responsibility as a representation of the people's will and better interest. The government can both stay away and guide through policy. Once the child is born, there is always the potential for the responsibility to fall onto the community, so the government has to have some say in who can potentially create a burden on their community.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top