• SheeEttin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sure. I think that cutoff should be at birth. Because why should we have any baby born that will not be cared for?

    • june@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      my opinion is that the cutoff is viability. until the fetus can survive on it’s own without significant intervention, it’s not a living person. if the baby can be delivered and survive/thrive with minimal intervention, you’re past the cutoff.

      but, it’s worth noting that i am not someone who can carry/deliver, so grain of salt and all. and, additionally, this is a compromise mentality. i ultimately think that the issue of abortion should 100% be between a person and their doctor with zero influence or regulation by government agencies.

      • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, I respect that. If that’s where you want to draw the line for your own (theoretical) abortion, I’m fine with you being able to make that choice for yourself.

      • DrPop@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I cannot carry a child either, but I feel if there should be a cutoff it would be when the baby would be truly aware. Brain activity isn’t even enough to qualify. The fetus knows what’s going on whether or not it can understand is different. Minimize pain.

      • DrPop@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I cannot carry a child either, but I feel if there should be a cutoff it would be when the baby would be truly aware. Brain activity isn’t even enough to qualify. The fetus knows what’s going on whether or not it can understand is different. Minimize pain.

    • islandofcaucasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      So in that case, if a baby is fully viable with confidence that it would live if born today, you still think they should be allowed to be aborted?

        • islandofcaucasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          You were, I was just verifying because I’ve never seen anyone with this extreme of a view. Christians like to say we want to murder babies, this is just the first time I’ve ever seen anyone who kind of fits the bill.

          • Sconrad122@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not a baby until it’s born. It’s still a fetus even if it would have been viable if born. Any other deadline is going to be either arbitrary and not a good fit for some subset of cases. Also, wanting something to be legal is not equitable with wanting something to happen, and you should avoid falling prey to that false logic. I don’t think the person you are replying to is saying they would celebrate a last minute abortion, just that they think it shouldn’t be something that the blind hand of the legal system is applied to

          • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s not extreme. It’s bodily autonomy. My right to my body should be as absolute as the right you believe you have to your own body. No one can take from your body without your permission (unless you have a uterus and are pregnant in the US) . Setting term-based limits makes a complete mockery of bodily autonomy and of pro-life. It can’t be reasonable to think abortion is murder after a certain number of weeks, but permissible before. Surely, it’s murder before. But pro-lifers pretend they’re rational and manipulate the populace into agreeing their being reasonable and rational by setting these limits. Nowhere do they address the argument of bodily autonomy, because they can’t, and so the next thing to do is lie, cheat, and steal the American populace, who has been trained to accept this kind of stupidity culture.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nothing extreme about it, people just don’t realize how early a fetus can be viable with today’s medical expertise, so using that as a standard makes no sense.

      • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Abortion is a termination of a pregnancy. 20 minutes before birth, the proper abortive procedure is a caeserean section. Regardless, no one should have the right to use someone’s body without their consent, which means there should be no term-based limits. If someone doesn’t want to give from their body to support another person, they should not be compelled (but are). Anyone agreeing to term-based limits has made a joke of their own position. It’s not murder if it’s before some arbitrary line you set, then it’s murder until the baby is born, then back to not being murder. You flip flop back and forth pretending you have justification and everything you’re doing is reasonable. There is no justification. If it’s murder than the whole thing should be banned, but it’s not murder, so the whole thing should be permissible. Compromising is playing into anti-choice’manipulative hands.

        • islandofcaucasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re actually making a really good point that I never thought of, I just wish you weren’t so antagonistic about it. I think you know that when the general public is talking about abortion, they’re referring to the destruction of the fetus/unborn baby. Further, having a discussion about when the cut off is isn’t being flip floppy or being manipulated, it’s a complex problem despite how black and white you describe it.

          That said, I’d never considered the idea that after a certain point, the abortion should consist of an early induced labor as opposed to the destruction of the fetus.

          • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s because they’ve been brainblasted with the slogan that abortion is murder. The only response is counter-slogan. Abortion is healthcare.

            You say it’s a complex problem. I assert you’ve been conditioned to believe it’s a complex problem. The right to bodily autonomy gives a right to end the condition of pregnancy at any stage, whatever happens to the baby. What’s complex is convincing a population that isn’t even listening and has themselves been conditioned to not even realize the value of argument and so, they forgoe it.