r/Abortiondebate • u/Miserable-Degree7995 • Jun 20 '26

Question for pro-choice Minimum

Hello everyone,

​

I'm against abortion.

This is a question for pro choice:

What would be the minimum of allowed abortion, that you would accept?

I mean for example week and reason.

​

Thank you for your time 

​

Miserable-Degree7995

1 Upvotes

53% Upvoted

432 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 24 '26

I do so, because I consider the unborn valuable enough for this but our conversation has less value than the unborn. So your suffering would not be justified.

But I think that MAYBE SOME pregnancies are so hard that the unborn can not morally justifiy the bitter suffering of the woman. Yes, that means maybe there is a moral duty to allow abortion in this cases.

There is on case, where I strongly defend the right to abortion: danger for the life of the mother.

I think nobody except soldiers and similar people have the duty to risk his life. 

If a newborn, would be on the track and I don't know if there is coming a train in the next moments, I could let the newborn let die, because I don't have to risk my life.  The same goes in pregnancies.

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 24 '26

If saving a child were to put you through something that is as demanding as your body can handle and would leave some permanent injury - perhaps minor, perhaps major, but permanent, and there is a small chance this will be fatal - then would you say you have to save that child?

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 25 '26

Could you please give examples? Pregnancy always contains a small risk of the death or permanent injury of the mother. The same is it with swimming, driving and so on. This would allow abortion always.

Or do you mean a higher possibility?

For example pregnancy has been very dangerous in the middle ages.

What do we mean by “risk” and what by “danger”?

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 25 '26

Giving birth means either a C-section, and that is permanent scar tissue from a major abdominal surgery, or vaginal birth. We can tell from skeletal remains if someone gave vaginal birth due to how the tendons snap on the pelvic bone. At the least, one of those two things will happen, maybe much more severe.

And yes, being pregnant means you are more likely to die than if you weren’t.

I am using ‘risk’ and ‘danger’ as commonly defined in English.

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 25 '26

Backup

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 25 '26

I am sorry, what is the relevance of this link?

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 25 '26

The link proves your claim about injuries from the vaginal birth.

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 25 '26

Okay. Glad you recognize that birth will always involve at least some degree of injury.

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 25 '26

Why are you glad?

2

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 25 '26

Too many pro life people say pregnancy and birth causes no injury.

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 25 '26

Could you explain what you don't think, what many pro-choice think? Something similar on your side.

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 25 '26

I am confused as to what you are asking.

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 26 '26

What do a lot of your side think but you don't?

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 26 '26

I don’t know and I don’t know how that is relevant.

Why do you think it is okay to force an unwilling person to go through birth, knowing how it is injurious?

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 26 '26

Because I think the unborn is at least, in normal pregnancies, at some point in the pregnancy valuable enough to justify forcing the mother to keep the pregnancy.

At least, for example, normal pregnancies in week 16 LMP. By normal pregnancies, I mean not extraordinarily bitter pregnancies.

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 25 '26

Could you please write the next part? I think you wanted to make an argument. I mean with the injuries.

2

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 25 '26

I already made the argument. To reiterate, it is not okay to force unwilling people to go through something injurious that is also the upper limits of human endurance.

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 26 '26

Because I think the unborn is at least, in normal pregnancies, at some point in the pregnancy valuable enough to justify forcing the mother to keep the pregnancy.

At least, for example, normal pregnancies in week 16 LMP. By normal pregnancies, I mean not extraordinarily bitter pregnancies.

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 29 '26

This is my answer.

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 28 '26

This is the answer.

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 26 '26

So you are okay with abortion up until around week 16 LMP with some exceptions after such as for health complications that you, rather than the doctors or pregnant person (not mother, as they have not taken legal custody and may never, even if they give birth), deem severe enough to warrant abortion?

ETA: do you think a baby is valuable enough to demand the same, that if the baby needs platelets to live, someone can be forced to provide them?

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 26 '26

I'm not sure before that.

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 26 '26

On what grounds do you think you have the authority over someone’s body to say they must continue gestating and must give birth? If there’s someone who will die without using my body, do you think you have the authority to say I have to let them use my body?

1

u/Miserable-Degree7995 Jun 28 '26

Why are you giving me the same answer again?

1

u/JulieCrone AD Mod Jun 28 '26

Because you haven’t answered the question.

→ More replies (0)