OK to abort?

What do you exactly mean by the first choice given?

I have a different proposition for a question. At what point does it transition from contraception to abortion to murder? Is it ok to "terminate the pregnancy" up to the point of birth? At what point does this become a human being, and be treated as such?

What disposition should a person have who intentionally and involuntarilly "terminates a pregnancy" against the will of the mother? For example, shooting a pregnant woman with intent to kill the baby, not the mother.

What rights and responsibilities should the father have in all of this, if any?

Before you respond, take a deep breath and consider your response and avoid an ad-hominem attack on anyone. Think critically before answering and don't just spew the party line of your position.

It is sad to see that most of the polled preferred some kind of abortion of a living being withing the womb.

That is so sad to me.

thanks

I'm still a bit confused on the first option: Aren't those two completely competing ideas?

I guess you could consider menstruation as voluntary in today's day and age, but really it's not. Menstruation is natural whereas Masturbation requires human action.

Comically speaking: I've heard many a woman say before, "damnit, I hate ___! (enter word: menstruation, aunt flow, PMS, etc.)"

I've never heard a man exclaim, "gosh, gee, willy, I hate rubbing one out!"

From Vnutt's bedroom "Bad Monkey, don't make me spank you again, five times is enough for one day you big bad boy".

whatever our social decision, it ought to not to be based on religion. too often abortion is tied in to a belief in a specific deity or a specific book written by some dude a thousand years ago (or read from fake gold plates in utah). as a diverse society that was founded on reason, we should make the decision under the same principles.

Many comments in this poll have been similarly posted in the past in response to a different discussion. For this reason, I’m rather surprised at the content, as many of these ideas have been countered before. I’ll quote myself here as my past comments relate to the following:

In response to the idea that abortion is analogous to appendectomy or tumor removal:

“An organ is made up of cells that are genetically identical to all other cells in the organism. For example, cardiac myocytes and nephrons share the exact same DNA, but are limited in the expression of that DNA. This is what makes them different in function. The ability to assign function is very easy in organ cells, as they are fully differentiated and specifically limited to certain molecular processes.

The ball of cells that makes up an embryo is different in every way. The embryo has its own DNA, unique from the DNA of both parents. And although the different cells of the embryo are alike, they are unlimited in the expression of the DNA and therefore identical in function - to keep dividing for future differentiation into cells like myocytes, nephrons, neurons, etc. The unlimited potential of embryonic cells is what makes them totipotent, meaning that each cell has the capability of becoming a mature human, as that is their function. Cells of mature organs, like the appendix for example, just do not have these characteristics.”

In response to the idea that masturbation or menstruation is analogous to abortion:

“I don't consider sperm and egg to be more than just a collection of cells simply because they are haploid and being thus, are not human as defined by the basic 45-47 chromosome characteristic.”

Wasting sperm or oocytes is not the same as an abortion.

The first two poll choices should not have been listed as they do not pertain to the subject in any way.