slug.com slug.com

8 2

What do people think about Plan B within the context of the abortion debate?

A lot of the current debate around abortion tends to hover over late term abortions, 20 weeks, or heart-beat bills, but what are some of the conclusions y’all have come to on post-fertilization termination via medication/substances (i.e. Plan B) around the 1 or 2 day mark? As someone who tends to lean strongly pro-life, I personally struggle with any push to ban such substances even though the logical framework I operate in would see it as equally immoral. More broadly would any such push alienate too many people from the pro-life position, and what role should practical considerations like convincing the other side even play in the debate? (The poll is just to gauge the community, apologies if your exact position isn’t on there, mark ‘other’ and leave a comment though!)

  • 0 votes
  • 2 votes
  • 9 votes
  • 5 votes
  • 4 votes
jrs96 4 Apr 5
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

8 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

You really need to see the movie Unplanned. It truthfully shows abortion - including Plan B. This movie isn't about politics - it's about letting everyone with an open mind see the truth. Of course, many cannot handle the truth so they won't watch it. [imdb.com]

0

Murder is murder. Nuff said.

0

My position on abortion is simple. If the, let's call it, unborn specimen is a person(or at least has become one at the point it is being aborted), it is wrong to kill it. If It's not(or is not yet), then it is not wrong to abort. I think the standard for person should hinge on ability to feel pain and/or consciousness(whichever comes first), which can be established earlier than the 20 week viability date given by the majority of pro choice people. Viability is to me an entirely arbitrary moral standard.

Since a zygote or embryo doesn't fit my definition, I think the morning after pill is permissible.

1

The idea of pegging the "beginning" of life to the heartbeat starting sees to be the best pragmatic compromise in this debate. The availability of the Plan B drugs make the excuses for other abortion methods much weaker IMHO, in that it is another layer of personal responsibility tools that had to be ignored to reach the need for the later methods.

2

I am a pro life person. I think that a cavalier attitude towards killing the unborn (at any stage) is a very unhealthy way for an individual or a society to function. In spite of that, I would not make abortion illegal. There is something inhumane about making a criminal out of a desperate woman. More widely known and accessible options other than abortion would help. More inexpensive access to tubal ligation and vasectomy would help. Maybe planned parenthood could offer that instead of baby killing? I suspect that making abortion (at any stage) socially unacceptable is a better solution than passing laws.

@jrs96 yes, it does seem that making abortion illegal would be the moral answer to a horribly immoral act. I still favor the societal evolution route. Simply because it would be more effective in the long run.There does seem to be a trend starting in that direction. I think VOX ? had an article about just that. I will try and find it.

As a person who tends libertarian and is pro life as well I agree with not criminalizing it. I have been saying for years that the rhetoric of the industry should be challenged so that the person seeking the abortion MUST be fully informed of EXACTLY what is being contemplated. No "a clump of cells" BS, but 4d ultrasounds, observing of actual procedures, and precise models of a fetus at the stage the seeker is at. If the person can go through with it, so be it.

1

Bottom line is someone's got to come up with that 'when is life' answer. I've ridden the fence on the whole debate for decades. I'm on a slide toward being pretty pro-life. That's not a religious position, though I admit I have been influenced by religious thinkers on the topic. Another big influence has been the preposterous extreme pro-choice positions of late, AND considering the lack of men's rights in ALL cases. I guess I'm being pushed right by the extremism of the activist left, and this is just another example. Abortion as birth control is appalling. PERSONALLY, I don't consider extinguishing 'the spark of life' to be abortion, though I have no proof. It's my feeling that there is no sentience or uniqueness that suggests personage. It doesn't take very long until I think that personage is there, and I think it becomes 'abortion' rather than contraception. I still don't have all of the answers, or answer to special cases. This is where I'm sitting right now.

@jrs96, great response. Tends to be a logical/legal set of arguments when morality is possibly the right arena. You stake a claim and then defend it--seems to me, it's inescapably arbitrary at some level. 'Right and Wrong'--morality--whatever that stuff means and where in there you decide to put the lines. I wonder if we lost something when we struck down, 'I think this is wrong'. How does 'thinking or feeling' balance with some legal/intellectual/logical defense? We're in societies that favor the latter, but that doesn't mean there's no value in the former--maybe a lot of value. Anyway...is that sufficiently short to be one paragraph, Mortaqai?

1

Such a tough one to come up with a viable solution for.
It's like on one hand, there's pro choice idea which can be viewed like "how dare you suggest putting forward a law the prohibits my rights to make the decision to abort my unborn baby"
But then there's the counter to that which says "well it appears that the law already suggests that taking a life is illegal" (assuming that there is life as soon as new DNA is created) so abortion should be restricted fairly early in pregnancy according to THAT law.

So then it goes back to the pro choice arguement, and i feel this is where they kind of get trapped in their own idea, because if pro choice is your claim then leading up to pregnancy there were precautionary measures you could have put in place to avoid becoming pregnant (unless you're the minority that had been raped, which is it's own discussion)

It's a slippery topic of discussion, but luckily we have this space to discuss it openly. I believe that I side on the restriction in most cases, but plan B should be permitted. But enforcing that is a scary thought for the conditions that you're putting an unborn fetus in, or a newborn baby? But what's the alternative, death to unborn baby, wheres the rights for the new life in that?

1

Life of the mother, rape, or incest should be the only exceptions. But if I were a legislator and a bill came up with plan B plus my listed exceptions and everything else outlawed, I would vote for that bill because it limits the loss of life.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:27717
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.