Abortions. . saying women shouldnt be allowed to get abortions because they were the ones who had unprotected sex is like saying smokers shouldnt receive treatm facebook abortions
x
Click to expand

Abortions

saying women shouldnt be allowed to get abortions because they were
the ones who had unprotected sex is like saying smokers shouldnt
receive treatment for lung cancer or drivers shouldnt receive treatment
in a car crash because they knew the risks when they got a driving
license.
...
  • Recommend tagsx
+30
Views: 3094
Favorited: 0
Submitted: 02/28/2014
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to meegal submit to reddit
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#11 - AnonymousDonor (02/28/2014) [-]
that...actually is a good point and an excellent argument against abortion
User avatar #13 to #11 - lavitts (03/01/2014) [-]
It's also a good argument for abortion.
#15 to #13 - AnonymousDonor (03/01/2014) [-]
umm how?

people who smoke, drive, and have sex are doing something extremely risky and are entirely at fault for not understanding/anticipating the consequences

i'm not saying that that's a reason for getting rid of VD drugs or condoms or airbags or safety belts
but you can't deny that the consequences of all those actions ought to have been anticipated by the idiots who performed them
User avatar #16 to #15 - lavitts (03/01/2014) [-]
A doctor's job is not to pass judgement on people for those risks. That is the law's jurisdiction. No matter the circumstances for someone's condition, they deserve treatment. Everyone, everytime. They are idiots for doing it, yes. But to deny them the right to treatment and a chance at health is amoral.
The same goes for abortions. Arguing against it is all well and good, but it's the subject of legislation. If a woman decides that she does not want to have a baby and there is no legal barrier between her and the abortion she desires, then it should not be the doctor's place to refuse the procedure.
#17 to #16 - AnonymousDonor (03/01/2014) [-]
i never said anything against that in fact thats exactly the point i implied at the end

another part of the gray area you have to consider is the doctors themselves - despite the stigma of healers most are in fact businessmen
and i've always thought that if there is ever a solid argument against abortion, it would be centered around the people who willingly charge these "in need of treatment" young mothers who have a good chance of being in debt for years because of it thousands of dollars to reach in, grind up, and methodically pull out several pounds of bloody twisted flesh - whether you believe that's murder or not, it's still pretty ****** up and i think says a lot about the type of person performing the operation
--another con i might add to that argument is (and personally I'm not a girl nor have i ever been pregnant so sue me for saying it so condescendingly) why does it have to abortion? why not have the child anyway and give it up for adoption? there are hundreds of new gay couples that are finally being publicly honest about their orientation that would be more than happy to adopt such an unwanted treasure, and maybe - just maybe - if all the irresponsible children out having abortions and easy fixes were instead to endure the pain of childbirth and subsequent loss of their child, they might just learn from their actions and be more responsible in the future

that being said - like all other actions - there are plenty of good arguments for the existence of abortion and plenty of situations in which it could easily be the only correct moral choice
for everything else, i refer to my personal opinions above
User avatar #18 to #17 - lavitts (03/01/2014) [-]
I do for the most part agree with that actually. Save for the money and debt from the operations as that varies dependent on what country it's done in. My argument for it being a potential argument for abortion relates to the mentality I expressed above about not refusing treatment. With that train of thought in mind I took the content as quite sarcastic and as a jab at selective treatment. I guess this is one of the problems with text only communication. Inflection makes that comment mean different things to different people.
#19 to #18 - AnonymousDonor (03/01/2014) [-]
oh no lol i definitely caught that from what she said (although you're right in other cases it can be difficult)

my first comment was only meant to point out that she made her argument so terribly it came out sounding like it was for the opposing viewpoint

User avatar #20 to #19 - lavitts (03/01/2014) [-]
Ha ha, doesn't it though?
You're a cool guy, don't let 'em tell you otherwise.
#21 to #20 - AnonymousDonor (03/01/2014) [-]
right back at ya!

i am so glad this thread didnt turn into the ********* i half expected
#7 - teranin (02/28/2014) [-]
I'm finding so many uses for this picture
#22 - Maroon ONLINE (03/01/2014) [-]
I used to be for abortion but then it occurred to me: there are so 			*******		 many contraceptives and ways of preventing pregnancy that if you are retarded enough to still manage to get pregnant, you should deal with the consequences of your stupidity like an adult. And you sure as 			****		 shouldn't get government subsidized abortions. Unless you need the abortion to not die or you were raped you really don't deserve an abortion.
I used to be for abortion but then it occurred to me: there are so ******* many contraceptives and ways of preventing pregnancy that if you are retarded enough to still manage to get pregnant, you should deal with the consequences of your stupidity like an adult. And you sure as **** shouldn't get government subsidized abortions. Unless you need the abortion to not die or you were raped you really don't deserve an abortion.
User avatar #27 to #22 - stegosaurusrah (03/01/2014) [-]
you may be right to some degree, but i still think you're an asshole

P.S. what if you did use a contraceptive and the thing malfunctioned?
#24 - anon (03/01/2014) [-]
Right right, because a car accident is a choice. this argument is 100% retarded. A child is not a disease, and likening the child to a disease is just another way to deny the fact that the kid is human, it's easy to kill something if you don't think it's human after all.
#26 to #24 - anon (03/01/2014) [-]
A broken neck isn't a disease.
We have no problems slaughtering animals around the world. But a few fetus' here and there, and everyone freaks out. Seriously. We are already 6 billion people. Where the majority is unneccessary for further development, or progress for mankind.

Not a veggie. I love bacon.
#1 - anon (02/28/2014) [-]
User avatar #2 to #1 - economic (02/28/2014) [-]
Better than i could say it.
User avatar #3 to #1 - astraea (02/28/2014) [-]
Who cares
just kill the ******* kid
its not hard
User avatar #25 to #3 - economic (03/01/2014) [-]
Stop cutting everyone.
User avatar #14 to #3 - lavitts (03/01/2014) [-]
Were's that picture of the guy talking about using unwanted children for the military?
That would be perfect for this.
User avatar #4 to #1 - gux ONLINE (02/28/2014) [-]
*Your Kid
*Your Choice
User avatar #8 to #1 - thewisedane (02/28/2014) [-]
You are connected by flesh and hide until the child is born and separated, however - And as the women is the original human being here, I would believe that the child is a part of her body until birth.
#10 - anon (02/28/2014) [-]
Lung transplants dont take lives. abortions do.
User avatar #6 - siksiksikki (02/28/2014) [-]
I was a pretty heavy smoker, but only for a few years, but if I had somehow gotten lung cancer in that short amount of time and the doctor told me no because it was my choice to do so... I'd be sad as **** , but I'd accept it.
User avatar #5 - darthmowgli (02/28/2014) [-]
Drivers shouldn't receive treatment in a car crash because they knew the risks when they got a driving license.
#9 to #5 - Penn (02/28/2014) [-]
Is that what it says?
 Friends (0)