Abortion.

[Rebecca~]

I don't understand this argument.To me its pretty arrogant and selfish to abort a baby and deny it life because of your inability to care for him/her. An infant will most likely always be able to find an adoptive family but even if they're in an orphanage it's still better then being flushed without even a chance and it's not like a orphanage is the horrible place it's been made out to be.

Do you understand how difficult pregnancies can be? They permamantly change your body, leave you with scarring, can leave you with a tonne of different mental conditions (post partum depression, etc), physical conditons (hyper tension, hyper thyroidism, the ripping of genitals, etc) and they can kill you. Even in "first world" countries, with good health care, women still die from pregnancies that didn't have a lot of complications going along.

Being pregnant is not like carrying a backpack for nine months.

 

Bodily autonomy is a real thing, and it is important for women to have it. It is arrogant and selfish of you to want to deny women the right to decide what to do with their bodies. A potentiality is far less important than people who are actually living.

[LUNACHARM1037]

deleted

[Bubbleline]

Alrighty, 7 pages in and many opinions have been expressed, but I wanna give my 2 75 cents.

 

So far, I have completely agreed with scoptophobia. A woman should have a choice with what she does with her body. Our society is so biased when it comes to 'how a woman should be'. If a woman has an abortion for any reason other than 'death or death' she is viewed as an immoral harlot that can't keep her legs closed. I'm not sure how many of you saw the panel of people that decided whether or not women should have access to birth control through their employer, but every single one of those 5 people were male. It is said that the majority of anti-abortion leaders are male. Isn't that funny. They will never be pregnant. They will never truly understand what a woman goes through when she gets pregnant. A lot of them refuse to listen to reason. A woman told a story about her friend that was in one of those lose-lose situations with her pregnancy, anybody could understand a woman getting an abortion if keeping the baby would be the death of both of them. Yet not these people. They made hateful political cartoons about the woman, depicting her as an immoral harpy. How is that right?

I understand why some people are so against abortion being so easily accessible, because there would, unfortunately, be those select few women who go around getting them every few months because they couldn't be bothered to use protection. But why should those select few ruin it for the many other women who would only use abortion as a last resort? And besides, so many people both men and women, are so hypocritical when it comes to this specific topic. I had a pretty big argument with my friend a few years ago about abortion and why it should always be an option. She got all righteous and started going on about how no matter what, a baby should be kept because it could grow up to be wonderful. I argued that woman who are raped may end up resenting the child if it was born, and she insisted that the baby should be kept because it may be the next president. Cut to 8 or so months later, and she's asking me to pay for her plan B pill because she couldn't be bothered to use a condom. That happens once more and I give her so much flak for it. Cut to a few months later, and her mother is talking to me about how she went off and got an abortion. For no 'good reason' other than she doesn't want a baby. She gets another one. She is now 22 with 2 kids and a boyfriend who has a penny-ante job while she struggles trying to take care of them all. My point? What happened to that 'every child should have a chance' when it was her who was pregnant? What happened to 'it should be kept, even if it was rape' when she was in the clinic because of her own stupidity? And the kicker is, that that isn't even an uncommon occurrence. Many woman who have had abortions feel as if they can look down on other women who are considering it because their reason for aborting is "more valid". How is that alright?

 

One of the biggest problems, like many people stated, is a lack of education. Period. My sex-ed was a 3 day period in 7th grade where our teacher taught us about anatomy, how babies are born, and a brief mumbling about how we shouldn't rush into sex. Oh, I was sooo enlightened. To this day, I couldn't put a condom on a banana correctly if someone asked me to in a pinch. I only just recently found out that there was a right way and a wrong way to put them on. Apparently you can't just 'pick a side and slap it on'. I also only recently found out what a dental dam was and was just looking it up to figure out how it works and such. I am 18 years old, and I'm not the only one that doesn't have enough knowledge about that kind of stuff. That is unacceptable. We are getting the briefest and most basic information about sex and protection ("Class, don't have sex until you're married. Or if you don't wait, use protection. Class dismissed") and we aren't getting enough information about abortion. I'm sure if every girl knew what exactly happens when an abortion is performed, what long-term effects she can go through, the psychological and social trauma that may result, they'd be more careful. Same with if every girl knew exactly what she had in store for her if she had a baby. The costs, the changes, the expectations and responsibilities she'd have, the fact that it wouldn't all be adorable hairstyles and booties, maybe they'd think twice before telling their boyfriends that its okay to go at it without any protection. I was shocked and baffled when I moved down to Texas because, for the first time in my life, I actually encountered girls my age and even younger who were walking around the school pregnant. Just last year, I was talking to a freshman girl who had just had a baby and then had a 2 year old at home. Or my new friend who angers and annoys me when she talks about how she wishes she could get pregnant again so she could go out shopping for baby clothes and cribs and cute little socks. None of those girls could support themselves if they had children, but they don't realize just what they got themselves into yet. I'm sure the ridiculous amount of drop-outs down here would go down at least a little bit if these girls were educated more and if they had easy access to abortion. But alas, our society is too ashamed of sex and sexuality to give our children the education they need.

 

Tl:dr- Abortion should always be a choice. No matter how ugly or depressing it is, a woman's body should be hers to choice what she does to/with it. However, education may be a huge role in how many careless abortions take place. I don't necessarily approve of abortion itself, but I will always fight for a woman's right to have the choice to get one.

 

Edit: Holy cow, what a long and rambling post. Sorry if I kinda bounce around in my argument, I just have such a strong opinion and many points. Kinda hard to organize my thoughts. Here's a person who is way more eloquent than I am with her opinions on the subject. (you should also check out some of her other stuff, I adore her) http://lacigreen.tv/sexplus/gender/4668-prolifemovement http://lacigreen.tv/sexplus/sexuality/3338-susangkomen

[Rebecca~]

First of all you're bringing in something that's completely irrelevant to what I debating. Cornstar was saying abortion would be preferable over orphanage....I disagreed.

 

Second to debate you, of course pregnancy is hard but pregnancy doesn't occur out of the blue, if you don't want to get pregnant make sure you're using at least 2 forms of protection, whether it be condoms and birth control, condom and and a diaphragm, etc. And if in the heat of the moment maybe you chance it,take a plan-b bill with 72hrs I don't believe a fetus has the same rights but I do believe they should have SOME rights and simply having an abortion just because "its my body" isn't a relevant excuse IMHO. There are plenty of "choices" that were made that let to the pregnancy, choice to have intercourse, choice not to use protection, choice not to take a plan-b pill, I would even say abortion is OK as long as the fetus doesn't have a heart beat yet (usually 5months after conception). Valid reasons to have an abortion would be: pregnancy would cause harm above and beyond what would occur in a normal pregnancy, pregnancy preventing treatment, for example you find out you have cancer but can't treat when your pregnant, pregnancy from being raped. I don't really know how to classify my view on abortion, I'm not full pro choice(anything goes) and I'm not fully pro-life (life occurs at conception and shouldn't be aborted under any circumstances).

It is part of the same arguement. You're still saying that people should have to give up their bodily autonomy in order to give birth and then give their infants to an orphanage instead of aborting because they're "arrogant and selfish". That's horrible-- which is why I brought up how dangerous pregnancy is.

 

I don't care about the choices that went into someone getting pregnant-- to me, the only thing that matters if if they want to continue with the pregnancy or not. All reasons for getting an abortion are acceptable and valid.

 

Oh also? You basically have said that all abortions are okay in your books.

I would even say abortion is OK as long as the fetus doesn't have a heart beat yet (usually 5months after conception). Valid reasons to have an abortion would be: pregnancy would cause harm above and beyond what would occur in a normal pregnancy, pregnancy preventing treatment, for example you find out you have cancer but can't treat when your pregnant, pregnancy from being raped.

88% of all abortions are done in the first trimester. Only about 1.5% are done after the 5 month mark, and generally, those are done becuase something has gone drastically wrong with the pregancy- the foetus has a horrible disease, or continuing the pregnancy would endanger the life of the mother.

[Navy]

Personally, there are other ways to have intercourse, and achieve the same euphoric feeling than having cave chial sex. Agreeing with lunacharm I believe you had the choice of whether or not you wanted that baby when you had sex to begin with. Risks are involved with sex, and I don't think you should have if you're not willing to take that risk. It is not a need, it is nothing more than a want driven by hormones and social pressures. I don't think that little blob of cells is the same as the micro organisms on your hand as someone had stated because, unlike micro organisms on your hand, those blobs of cells, if given the chance could and probably will change into a baby. Infants get adopted like hot cakes and you can arrange the adoption before the baby is even born. Yeah there are risks with pregnancy, but you have more of a chance dying on your way to the abortion clinic than dying while giving birth. As for the physical changes, oh well, should have though about that before you had unprotected sex.

 

If you protected yourself and got pregnant, were raped, or your life is on the line, you have every right to not carry the baby. If not, my opinion is that you'll just have to suck it up for 9 months.

[Rebecca~]

Personally, there are other ways to have intercourse, and achieve the same euphoric feeling than having cave chial sex. Agreeing with lunacharm I believe you had the choice of whether or not you wanted that baby when you had sex to begin with. Risks are involved with sex, and I don't think you should have if you're not willing to take that risk. It is not a need, it is nothing more than a want driven by hormones and social pressures. I don't think that little blob of cells is the same as the micro organisms on your hand as someone had stated because, unlike micro organisms on your hand, those blobs of cells, if given the chance could and probably will change into a baby. Infants get adopted like hot cakes and you can arrange the adoption before the baby is even born. Yeah there are risks with pregnancy, but you have more of a chance dying on your way to the abortion clinic than dying while giving birth. As for the physical changes, oh well, should have though about that before you had unprotected sex.

 

If you protected yourself and got pregnant, were raped, or your life is on the line, you have every right to not carry the baby. If not, my opinion is that you'll just have to suck it up for 9 months.

Actually, pregnancy has a far higher death rate than legal abortion does.

So, you think that pregnancy should be the punishment for women who don't make the "right" decisions before having sex? That they should suck up diseases they could have for the rest of their lives because of the pregnancy? That they should suck up being uncomfortable for 9 months?

[Cassia]

One problem with banning abortions but leaving exceptions is that different people might want to draw the line of what is acceptable and what isn't at different places. For example, how much risk to the mother would be considered enough to abort? A chance of her dying? How much of a chance? What about if the pregnancy would cause irreversible harm to her health? Then how much harm would be accpetable?

Also, studies have shown that places with legal abortions, and places with illegal abortions have almost the same rates of abortion, except that in the latter case, more of these abortions are risky, back-alley abotions with coat-hangers, or risky chemicals that end up killing both the woman and the fetus.

[Rebecca~]

One problem with banning abortions but leaving exceptions is that different people might want to draw the line of what is acceptable and what isn't at different places. For example, how much risk to the mother would be considered enough to abort? A chance of her dying? How much of a chance? What about if the pregnancy would cause irreversible harm to her health? Then how much harm would be accpetable?

Also, studies have shown that places with legal abortions, and places with illegal abortions have almost the same rates of abortion, except that in the latter case, more of these abortions are risky, back-alley abotions with coat-hangers, or risky chemicals that end up killing both the woman and the fetus.

Exactly. And often, in countries where there are free and legal abortions available for all women, regardless of any circumstances, the rate of abortions tends to go down.

I imagine this is because these countries generally don't have any conditions applied to getting other forms of birth control, and they tend to have better sex education.

[LUNACHARM1037]

deleted

[Rebecca~]

I'm sorry but it is selfish and arrogant to think that just because you can't take care of a baby that it's better to abort then put the baby into an orphanage. You're essentially saying that without the birth mother the infant will never flourish and should be aborted, I don't accept this. Life is always better then not life. Also a newborn infant will have no trouble getting adopted. It's the kids that are orphaned at later in childhood that you need to worry about.

Wow, that's not even what I was saying. My arguement is about bodily autonomy and choice, nothing else. Lots of children do well without either of their birth parents, and if the mother wishes to give up the infant after birth, that's great, good for her. But no one should be forced to do that. No person should ever be forced to go through with a pregnancy they don't want. No one should have to deal with the illnesses that come with it, the attachement to an infant that many mothers get- even when they know they're going to give them up.

Life is only better than not-life if it doesn't ruin the life of the mother. The actual living person is always more important than the foetus. Always.

 

As I said in my last post, fetuses should have some rights. Your essentially saying that a fetus has no more rights the the half eaten burger I threw out yesterday. There needs to be personal responsibility involved here, you made the willful choice to get pregnant or made the willful choice not to use protection which let to pregnancy and even furthermore made the willful choice not to use plan-b or even abort before the fetus developed a heartbeat. Simply changing your mind shouldn't be a valid reason to abort imo.

 

The first trimester is 13 weeks, a heart beat develops around 5 weeks, if 88% were aborted within the first month after pregnancy then that's OK that's fine, although I would still rather people be responsible and not get pregnant at all if they don't a baby.

You talk as if people are having sex and then going, "Oh hey, I'm going to be pregnant. This kind of sucks. I'm going to wait for a couple of months and then abort the foetus, just because I can."

People don't choose to get pregnant if they don't want to have a baby. They don't. They get pregnant by accident. No matter how responsible a person is, accidents happen.

People make mistakes in all areas of their lives, but apparently just in this one (the one area that only affects women, funnily enough. Hey there, Patriarchy, I see you.) are women not allowed to say, "I made a mistake. I want to fix it. I don't want the next 9 months/18 years to be defined by this mistake."

 

And yeah, I don't think that foeti should have rights when they interfere with the rights of the women carrying them. I have said it before, and I will say it again. Actual people are more important than potential people. Living people should not be forced into carrying a foetus if they don't want to. They shouldn't lose their bodily autonomy.

[Navy]

Actually, pregnancy has a far higher death rate than legal abortion does.

So, you think that pregnancy should be the punishment for women who don't make the "right" decisions before having sex? That they should suck up diseases they could have for the rest of their lives because of the pregnancy? That they should suck up being uncomfortable for 9 months?

 

I didn't mean abortion was dangerous, I'm saying transportation is more dangerous. (car accidents and what not)

 

I should have been more specific.

 

And yes, I do. Because no one forced you to have sex, you did that all on your own, you knew the risks of having unprotected sex but decided to ignore them. Unprotected sex is not something to be taken lightly, and if you decide to risk your life and happiness for a little bit of pleasure which can be obtained by other means, you should have to be responsible for those actions.

Think it as something similar to DUI, you can get caught and go to jail, or you can go home without a problem.

You're risking your life and the life of others out of laziness or negligence.

[Rebecca~]

I didn't mean abortion was dangerous, I'm saying transportation is more dangerous. (car accidents and what not)

 

I should have been more specific.

 

And yes, I do. Because no one forced you to have sex, you did that all on your own, you knew the risks of having unprotected sex but decided to ignore them. Unprotected sex is not something to be taken lightly, and if you decide to risk your life and happiness for a little bit of pleasure which can be obtained by other means, you should have to be responsible for those actions.

Think it as something similar to DUI, you can get caught and go to jail, or you can go home without a problem.

You're risking your life and the life of others out of laziness or negligence.

Do you really hate women that much? How come the men don't get any sort of punishment for this? How come it's just the women that are stuck with the punishement that could lead to irreversable damage or death? Why is it just the women that have to put parts of their lives on hold for the durration of the pregnancy and deal with the social stigma?

Your body will never be free as long as you don't have full control over every aspect of your body.

[RazzlyFrazzly]

I think abortion should be legal. Yes, I understand it is, in a way, murder, but so is the death sentence - and a large portion of those given the death sentence are actually innocent, so don't say they deserve it. What if the woman was raped? Should a 15 year old that was raped be forced to give up or nearly give up their education to take care of a baby? Adoption wouldn't work in this case either - imagine the ridicule she would receive when people - immature high schoolers who love to taunt - see she's pregnant. That would make the trauma from being raped even worse. Also, suppose the victim wasn't a high schooler, but was a 25 year old. Maybe she's the kind of person who sees it like this: she's taking care of the baby of a rapist. She sees the rapist's face in her baby every day. Should she have to go through that?

Also, what about medical reasons? I'm no doctor, but I know there are medical difficulties that would put the woman's life in danger if she went through with having the baby. There also can always be death during childbirth.

And don't say this is "her fault." Nobody ever looks to the father to blame him, do they? They share equal responsibility, yet women are nearly always looked down on in our society. People make mistakes everyday. I know someone who got pregnant in middle school and had an abortion. She made a mistake, and she knows it. She's sorry for her actions. Should the rest of her life be dictated by one mistake?

"It was her fault for not using protection." Protection doesn't always work, so don't act like it does. The odds can catch up. It is also the father's fault as I already stated.

If the woman doesn't have enough money to take care of the baby, should she have to try? Especially if she's single for whatever reason, and the father doesn't have to pay child support. And imagine if she happened to get laid off! It took my mom 2 months to find a job through one of those (for lack of a better word) job-finding places for the summer since she works in a school and we barely had any money for the summer. Anyone would want my mom working at their place - she's been working so many jobs since she was 15, she got a place of her own at 17, and figured out how not to be eaten alive in the world, graduating high school with flying colors with no parents to help, then graduating from college. The point from this paragraph of the rant is this: if it took an intelligent woman with a great resume 2 months to find a job, how long could it take someone else?

 

/endrant

But that's just my view on things.

[sigfridur]

Completely for it. Making it illegal won't stop abortions from happening, it will just increase the mortality rate of those dying from unsafe abortions. "Pro-life" indeed.

[Peppermintc]

The thing about abortion being legal is that, the way I see it at least, if we start making allowances of cases in wich life is not guaranteed by the constitution or the law the entire juridic system may and will be subjected to a renovation every time a part big enough of the society feels in need to validate some action.

Although I think abortion is a spicky subject, being in law school has taught me that allowing such thing as abortion so broadly will be a problem. For example, abortion as a term is a veeeery big one. In case of rape I believe it can be excused, but that reason alone can be twisted and missused to validate a mere contraception procedure. As seen in the Clinton period the amount of cases in wich the abortion card can be played may be easily expanded until already born nine-month babies will see their right to live completely in the hands of their parents.

I know the examples and cases may seem extreme, but our laws , I think, should be able to withstand possible albeit extreme situations.

Also, when people say that it's the mom's right to choose upon their own body, I completely agree, but the baby's body is a completely different human being, with its own DNA, heartbeat, brainwaves and later its own consciousness.

Constitutionally, the right to live does and should take precedence over any other right.

[Welcome Back Apathy]

The thing about abortion being legal is that, the way I see it at least, if we start making allowances of cases in wich life is not guaranteed by the constitution or the law the entire juridic system may and will be subjected to a renovation every time a part big enough of the society feels in need to validate some action.

Although I think abortion is a spicky subject, being in law school has taught me that allowing such thing as abortion so broadly will be a problem. For example, abortion as a term is a veeeery big one. In case of rape I believe it can be excused, but that reason alone can be twisted and missused to validate a mere contraception procedure. As seen in the Clinton period the amount of cases in wich the abortion card can be played may be easily expanded until already born nine-month babies will see their right to live completely in the hands of their parents.

I know the examples and cases may seem extreme, but our laws , I think, should be able to withstand possible albeit extreme situations.

Also, when people say that it's the mom's right to choose upon their own body, I completely agree, but the baby's body is a completely different human being, with its own DNA, heartbeat, brainwaves and later its own consciousness.

Constitutionally, the right to live does and should take precedence over any other right.

 

 

I'm confused as to how you say that allowing abortion so broadly will be a problem and will lead to already born babies being killed. Law school taught you that? The slippery slope argument only works if you're sticking with the same logic. A woman has the right to choose what happens with her own body does not in any way equal "Hey, I'm going to go through this very dangerous process all for nothing!"

 

The slippery slope argument: if it goes one way, then it can definitely go the other. If we take away a woman's right to choose, why not take away her right to birth control? The interesting thing is, the slippery slope you say would happen has NOT happened...and the slippery slope I propose HAS happened from the same people trying to take away a woman's right to choose. Experimentally, the slippery slope has actually only gone in one direction.

 

Since the right to live does and should take precedence over any other right, then shouldn't that include the mother's right? Evolution has caused bigger heads with bigger brains, while bipedal movement has also happened. It helps us do amazing things. But it also makes it harder to give birth. It's much harder for a human to give birth than...any other animal I know of.

[Peppermintc]

Okay, so I was in a rush when I posted my last comment and maybe it didn't make nearly as much sense as it did in my head.

What I was trying to say (with very little succes it seems :) ) is that that's my law school opinion of the discussion, that's why I brought it up, not cause I wanted to show off or something.

Actually, when I think about all the cases in which carrying a baby can be a mistake,an unfortunate situation, or a threat to the mother I can relate and admit abortion IS an option; but even then I can't deny that killing an unborn baby is murder, and If our system can't even guarantee THAT right (wich is the first and most important one) completely and with no exceptions, I don't really see the point of having rights anyway.

In the specific case in wich the baby or its birth can be a threat to the mother, I don't think its the same as the other situations, because in that case every possible procedure will be done in order to save the mother's life and in the unfortunate case of the baby dying, it will be a SAD SAD collateral, but not the purpose of the procedure. A little bit like when cojoined twins are separated and one dies because they share organs/veins/limbs/etc.; my point is: the reason of the procedure in this particular case will no be the abortion, but to save the mother's life.

About your second paragraph, I don't understand it at all maybe because I'm not familiar with the expression "slippery slope" since english is not my first languaje. :)

[Welcome Back Apathy]

About your second paragraph, I don't understand it at all maybe because I'm not familiar with the expression "slippery slope" since english is not my first languaje. :)

 

Slippery slope means that if one thing happens, it will lead to other worse things happening--not as a consequence, but as a "if we do this, then we HAVE to do this!" In this case, you said "if we allow women to abort their fetuses, then soon we'll be killing real born babies!" It's also used for "If we allow gay marriage, soon people will want to marry their dogs and we'll have to let them!" It is called slippery slope because if you're at the peak of a mountain, and you slide down a little, you'll slide down the rest of the slope.

 

But if you're at the peak of a mountain, you can slide down either side. If we ban abortion, soon people will want to ban birth control. Oh, wait, that's already happening in America. If we ban gay marriage, people will want to ban interracial marriage. (Although, personally, I like "Men and women are COMPLETELY different and have different sexual organs! If we let them have sexual relations, soon people will want to go for even MORE different--they'll start doing that with dogs!")

[passiflora]

The thing about abortion being legal is that, the way I see it at least, if we start making allowances of cases in wich life is not guaranteed by the constitution or the law the entire juridic system may and will be subjected to a renovation every time a part big enough of the society feels in need to validate some action.

Laws should be subject to renovation. That doesn't mean that they'll be renovated every time they're discussed, but sometimes it's for the better. Keep in mind that making abortion illegal won't make it go away - it'll just make it more dangerous.

 

Although I think abortion is a spicky subject, being in law school has taught me that allowing such thing as abortion so broadly will be a problem. For example, abortion as a term is a veeeery big one. In case of rape I believe it can be excused, but that reason alone can be twisted and missused to validate a mere contraception procedure. As seen in the Clinton period the amount of cases in wich the abortion card can be played may be easily expanded until already born nine-month babies will see their right to live completely in the hands of their parents.

Why would we make that leap? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not as simple as "broadly allowing abortion." In many countries, there are laws that stipulate in what trimester one can get an abortion, how one obtains an abortion, parental consent for minors, etc. There is much to be considered when making or altering a law, and there's no reason to believe that we would suddenly make the jump to newborn infants just because abortion is legal.

 

Also, when people say that it's the mom's right to choose upon their own body, I completely agree, but the baby's body is a completely different human being, with its own DNA, heartbeat, brainwaves and later its own consciousness.

Constitutionally, the right to live does and should take precedence over any other right.

Then miscarriage could arguably be considered manslaughter?

 

Consider:

What if a mother miscarries due to drug or alcohol abuse, an uncontrolled illness, or an infection?

What if she didn't know she was pregnant at the time?

What about contraceptive devices that may act by preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg?

What about in-vitro fertilization, when multiple embryos are created but only one survives?

 

 

 

Like Karina said, if you're worried about abortion leading to infanticide, then you should also worry about it sliding too far in the other direction and limiting other reproductive rights.

 

 

If our system can't even guarantee THAT right (wich is the first and most important one) completely and with no exceptions, I don't really see the point of having rights anyway.

I find that to be a pretty radical view - legalizing abortion doesn't suddenly make all our other rights pointless, especially when a hot topic of debate is whether a fetus/embryo should be considered a person at all, or at what point it could be considered a person.

[Rebecca~]

The thing about abortion being legal is that, the way I see it at least, if we start making allowances of cases in wich life is not guaranteed by the constitution or the law the entire juridic system may and will be subjected to a renovation every time a part big enough of the society feels in need to validate some action.

Although I think abortion is a spicky subject, being in law school has taught me that allowing such thing as abortion so broadly will be a problem. For example, abortion as a term is a veeeery big one. In case of rape I believe it can be excused, but that reason alone can be twisted and missused to validate a mere contraception procedure. As seen in the Clinton period the amount of cases in wich the abortion card can be played may be easily expanded until already born nine-month babies will see their right to live completely in the hands of their parents.

I know the examples and cases may seem extreme, but our laws , I think, should be able to withstand possible albeit extreme situations.

Also, when people say that it's the mom's right to choose upon their own body, I completely agree, but the baby's body is a completely different human being, with its own DNA, heartbeat, brainwaves and later its own consciousness.

Constitutionally, the right to live does and should take precedence over any other right.

I'm sorry, perhaps I misunderstand, but are you saying that a woman should be forced to carry a foetus to term even though it could kill her, even though it could lead to permanent bodily damage, even though it could lead to depression, even though it could RUIN THE REST OF HER LIFE because you think a foetus that has no concept of being alive or conciousness should be able to live?

 

And just saying, practically all the people that have abortions late into the pregnancy wanted the foetus very much. They are almost exclusively foeti that would not have been viable, that had birth defects or diseases that the parents would not have been able to deal with. They make the decision to have an abortion because they have no other choice, and it usually breaks their heart to do so. People that don't want to have a child have abortions far earlier into the pregnancy- long before they have a heart beat, or any other pro-life nonsense.

[star_kisu]

Personally I think it should be legal, as with birth control and all that good stuff. I myself am pro-choice. But I DO NOT BELIEVE IN ABORTION FOR BIRTH CONTROL. Wanted to state that. My Mother is old enough to remember when abortion was illegal and she had a friend who got a botched back alley abortion done by a "doctor" and ended up getting an awful infection as a teenager and could never have children ever. Just imagine if it was illegal again how many times that would happen, and how many women would end up dying and hurting themselves or trying to do it themselves. There are already too many fake abortion clinics in this country. What if a women was raped or could die if she carried to term? There are also some birth defects that are completly un-treatable and most likely the child would die or be born brain dead forever. There is no reason why anyone should have to deal with those things if they absolutly cannot. I have so much to say on this issue, but I think that about sums it up <3

[psychology]

i am mostly for abortion but, and this is a huge but, even though i know it can't be monitored in any way, i think that someone who is being completely negligent and putting no effort into preventing pregnancy (i.e. using birth control, condoms, etc) should not be viable to use abortion as a sort of 'birth control method.' i completely understand that condoms and birth control do not work 100% of the time, if someone is using these prevention methods and they somehow end up getting pregnant, abortion is a perfectly acceptable solution. however, if someone is having unprotected sex because they don't want to take birth control or do not want to engage in condom usage, abortion should not be administered. it is a sad reflection on our society that there are people who could be 100% negligent and still have the option to get an abortion.

[frescort]

I am pro-choice. Personally, I believe that abortion should only occur in cases of incest, rape, or where it would danger the mother. I also think that even I don't think a woman should get an abortion, it's her personal choice, not mine.

Also, if abortions are made illegal, people will still get them, just not as safe. I think since people are going to get abortions anyways, you might as well have proper clean facilities to make sure that they're done safely.

[khaos]

I think abortion should only be an answer if it was incest, rape, and if the child is under 18 weeks old, because that is when the fetus starts to feel pain.

k

[lindorie]

I think abortion should only be an answer if it was incest, rape, and if the child is under 18 weeks old, because that is when the fetus starts to feel pain.

k

 

I agree, that's the exact way I feel about abortion, I'm not against it for other people at all, it's totally their decision, but for me those the are only reasons I would have an abortion. I don't believe in it in general but if was incest or rape I believe that that is an understandable and good reason to have one.