A Message From PI Founder, Nicole:

I want to remind you that God created you for a huge purpose, and He WILL use you to build His kingdom! You are meant to shine!

How to know God.

 

Anti-Abortion=forced organ donation?

Home Forums Life, Love & Girlfriends Random Thoughts and Questions Anti-Abortion=forced organ donation?

This topic contains 20 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by  AdventureGirl 4 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 21 total)
Author Posts
AdventureGirl

AdventureGirl

@Rainbowuni, in case you didn’t get a chance to read my last comment on #100hardthings, I asked you to explain what you meant when you said that people who are anti-abortion support forced organ donation. But I didn’t want that thread to get overwhelmed with different topics so I asked you to post it here 🙂 Thank you!

All other lovely PI’ers, we’re having a pretty good conversation about Trump and Clinton on the #100hard things thread (it starts on pg 6). Head over and check it out if you want! I’d love to hear other people’s opinions.

August 31, 2016 at 20:11
rainbowuni

rainbowuni

I completely understand wanting to move to a new topic, that one already moved off topic, no sense changing the discussion twice 😀

By forced organ donation, I meant that not allowing a woman the right to an abortion, she is being forced to donate her uterus (as well as the rest of her body) to the fetus. My pro-choice stance is simply that women should not be required to become human incubators against their will.

August 31, 2016 at 20:47
Juanita11

Juanita11

(This is excludes rape victims and women who had no choice In their their intamacy.)
If it really required when you made a choice to have sex, knowing the chances that they will get pregnant? Sex is a choice. People shouldn’t be able to not deal with their actions if it means removing life from another. All lives matter, even those of the unborn.
A lot of people argue that what about the mothers life. Well, a mother doesn’t die when she gives birth to a baby. It isn’t the end of her world. It can be a whole new world, or it can be anothers world. A child is a beautiful, blessing and we shouldn’t let someone end it because it’s an inconvenience to them.
That being said I believe many abortions wouldn’t take place if we stopped judging single mothers, teen mothers, promiscuous women ect. There isn’t shame in a child being born.

August 31, 2016 at 21:38
AdventureGirl

AdventureGirl

Ah, I see. I disagree, but I think we discussed this last summer so I won’t go into my views on it again.

@Juanita I agree! I also think providing better access to contraception (insisting on abstinence doesn’t really work, since a lot of people aren’t Christian and don’t agree) and more support for pregnant and new mothers would help prevent abortions as well.

August 31, 2016 at 21:46
rainbowuni

rainbowuni

@Juanita Driving is also a choice, and death can be a result of that. But if someone hits another car and kills the driver, they’re still charged with manslaughter–because driving isn’t consenting to death, right? Or, if you’re in a car accident and are in need of medical attention, you expect to receive that medical attention, correct? Because being in a car is not consenting to dying without medical attention. Similarly, having sex is not consenting to pregnancy.
I agree that many abortions occur because society judges single mothers harshly–but it also tends to judge those that get abortions harshly. Ultimately, it’s the woman’s decision what she does with her body. She wouldn’t die from donating a kidney, either, but we don’t force anyone to do that–not even to their newborn child who would die without it. Why should a mother be forced to donate her body to her unborn child if she’s not forced to donate it to her newborn child?
And another question: would you support abortion in the case of the woman not consenting to have sex? And would you support abortion if the mother was going to die from the pregnancy/giving birth?


I very much agree with providing better access to contraception and more support for pregnant and new mothers to prevent abortion. But I support doing this while allowing women to make the choice about what to do with their bodies.

August 31, 2016 at 22:10
theteenfashionista

theteenfashionista

Yes it IS agreement to children. Children are a NATURAL result of sex, but death isn’t a natural result of driving. I TOTALLY agree with Juanta. If anybody is against the murder of innocent children, they should be pro life. The child matters just as much as the mother.
If the woman did not consent, I think she should have a choice. And if the mom was going to die from giving birth, I think it should be her choice too.

September 1, 2016 at 03:24
Nino99

Nino99

If your kidney is donated, you aren’t going to get that kidney back. If you’re pregnant, you’re going to “get your uterus back” after around 9 months. You really can’t compare the two, imho.

Plus, as Juanita said, you already made the choice (of course with the exception of rape victims). You had the choice to have sex. In my opinion, your *choice* has already been made. If you’re going to have sex, you need to realize that pregnancy is always a possible outcome, and you need to be ready for that (emotionally, financially, etc)!

Something about this thread really bothers me. With pregnancy, (as long as you have access to medical care) you have doctors and other medical professionals who have your and your baby’s health and overall well being as priorities. If your organs are being taken from you against your will, I can pretty much guarantee you that those organ traffickers wouldn’t care in the slightest if you were in excruciating pain, if you got a terrible infection, or if you died. Sure, pregnancy isn’t the easiest thing in the world, but at least you have people who care.

And a bit of a side note–I think a woman should have the right to an abortion if her life is at risk; we need to consider what’s best for both mom and baby in the long term…but obviously that’s a very personal decision that should be made by the mother.

September 1, 2016 at 09:05
rainbowuni

rainbowuni

@theteenfashionista I simply disagree with that. People have sex for many reasons, children aren’t the only one. It’s human nature, and happens with many animal species as well. If the intent was not to get pregnant, and especially if precautions were taken to avoid this, having sex is not consenting to being pregnant for 9 months. It’s also not consent to any number of STDs, which is why we have treatments for so many of them.

“The child matters just as much as the mother.”
“If the woman did not consent, I think she should have a choice.”
How are these two statements not in direct contradiction? If the child matters as much as the mother, the fact that the mother did not consent shouldn’t matter. Because you’re still KILLING an INNOCENT CHILD, right? How do you justify KILLING A CHILD just because the mother doesn’t *want* it?

@Nino okay, replace “kidney” with “blood,” if that makes you feel better. Why is a mother not EVER required to give blood to her child *after* it’s born? Blood and platelets regenerate after a few weeks–just a fraction of the 40 weeks of pregnancy. And we’ve already established she made the decision to have sex, therefore consenting to both pregnancy and the resulting children. So, if her biological child would die without her blood, why is she allowed to stand back and say, “I don’t want to give up my body for this child,” when she’s not allowed to do the same for a child in utero?
In fact, women aren’t even required to breastfeed their children. The choice is completely theirs–regardless of “what’s best for the child.” Because the woman has a right to her body and the even a newborn child has no right to her breastmilk. Why is that true if 5 minutes earlier that child had every right to her uterus, her blood, her kidneys, her entire body?

If you’re pregnant against your will, however, you still get medical care despite your organs being taken from you against your will. It’s sort of a weird overlap. Besides, not all pregnant women have access to (or can afford) such great healthcare.

How much “at risk” must her life be in order to get to make the choice, though? All pregnancies carry *some* risk. Is that enough? Or must pregnancy mean certain death for a woman–as deemed by…one doctor? Two? 500?–in order for the right to make this choice to open up to her? Just a thought.

September 1, 2016 at 10:04
theteenfashionista

theteenfashionista

@nino99 I TOTALLY AGREE.
@rainbowuni: I’m just saying that if the woman did not consent, she should have a choice, but I am NOT advocating that she kill the child. Plus, what do YOU know about childbirth? My mom has had 4 kids and she’s *perfectly* healthy. I know another one who’s had 9, another who’s had 7, another who’s had 5. They’re all FINE. It is extremely rare that something so bad happens that the child has to be put down to save the mother’s life and it’s a personal descision.

September 1, 2016 at 10:25
rainbowuni

rainbowuni

But that’s ultimately what happens, correct? The child gets killed if she makes that choice. Why should anyone get to decide to kill an innocent child? (Unless, of course, they’re the government and a relative of a terrorist. Then it’s okay.)
Anyway: your stance on this and mine are pretty similar. I’m not advocating for child murder, I’m simply advocating for a woman’s right to choose what to do with her body. I simply extend that right to all women, not just ones who’ve suffered a tragedy such as rape…if only because the logistics of this would be near impossible to work out (e.g., how much “at risk” must her life be?) And because when safe, clean abortions aren’t available, women are going to look to unsafe options that often have devastating consequences.

I know plenty about it–my sister nearly died carrying her second child, as a direct result of the pregnancy. I know people who have been in similar situations, some hospitalized for weeks… Some pregnancies are simply more dangerous. Don’t act as if your mother represents ALL women. I’m glad her pregnancies worked out well for her. That’s unfortunately not the case for everyone.

But why must the child pay for the mother’s inability to carry the child? The mother made the decision to become pregnant when she had sex. She consented to it, correct? So why is she able to remove that consent just to save her own life?

September 1, 2016 at 10:49
theteenfashionista

theteenfashionista

@rainbowuni You seem very bitter.

September 1, 2016 at 11:14
rainbowuni

rainbowuni

@theteenfashionista I could say the same about you.

September 1, 2016 at 11:26
theteenfashionista

theteenfashionista

Well I’m not, though you must think I have a twisted worldview, that’s what I see in you.

September 1, 2016 at 11:51
rainbowuni

rainbowuni

I don’t think you have a “twisted” worldview, but I honestly do not understand it and I’m trying to. Do you think I have twisted worldview?

September 1, 2016 at 12:07
Nino99

Nino99

rainbowuni- I wonder (I mean I genuinely wonder–I’m not being sarcastic or anything), would your views on this be different if there was more support (medically, but also psychological/emotional) offered to mothers (regardless of how much they can or cannot pay) after the child is born? I’ve thought about that quite often–that it seems like the pro-life movement is focused only on preventing abortion but doesn’t necessarily stand up for those lives once their out of the womb…and it seems like you’re getting at that here too.
And yes, not everybody has access to adequate health care, and that absolutely needs to change.
I’m sorry that your sister had such a difficult pregnancy–there are risks no matter what, risks that can’t be completely eliminated, but we do have to take into mind the fact that every day people are giving birth. And the vast majority, including those that take place in less than ideal conditions, end up just fine. I mean, there are risks involved with everything–do you see what I’m getting at here?

September 1, 2016 at 14:13
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 21 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.