Abortion, or no abortion?

[First Crusader]

THIS IS A VERY SENSITIVE SUBJECT, LETS ALL REMAIN CALM, COOLHEADED, AND CIVIL, PLEASE!

I have decided it would be fun to play with dynamite. I am going to open a thread discussing the legitimacy of abortion. Please post explaining why/why not we should keep it.

If you support it, explain exactly why it is useful to a society with a host of contraceptives and the like, and why it is not harming society, like pro-life groups say.

If you are against it, explain why you would think it is harmful to society. Explain how it does not harm the rights of women, like pro-choice groups say.

MY OPINION:
Since I am not God, I do not know if killing fetuses is wrong. But "last chance" birth control is not worth the potential moral consequences. If a woman isn't smart enough to use proper birth control and/or avoid casual sex, she deserves to get pregnant - me thinks. If she doesn't want the child, I say give the little guy a chance and hold him up for adoption!

AGAIN, THIS IS AN EXTREMELY SENSITIVE TOPIC. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT WE ALL KEEP COOL HEADS AND REMAIN CIVIL!

[Leviathan]

I believe that Abortion is wrong not only because of religious beliefs but also on many moral grounds as well.

1. Abortion can get out of control and turn into a form of conterceptive. Many people who can't afford to visit a doctor to get the pill could just use abortion, because it doesn't cost that much, instead of a more responsible form.

2. By not allowing a living human to live is deining him the right to prove himself in the world. It is like saying that well because your mother didn't want you, you can't live even if you want to and could become the next Einstein or Beethoven.


****** side note*********

you should read an article called "where have all the criminals gone" which talks about how higher abortion rates causes lower crime rates because there are less poor, desperate people to perpratrate them. This explains the suddne drop in crime rates durring the 90s.

[The spartan]

It is like saying that well because your mother didn't want you, you can't live even if you want to and could become the next Einstein or Beethoven.

Or they could be the next hitler or stalin.

I am pro-choice because i could care less about what people do with their fetuses. There are too many people in the world anyways. Let the family decide what to do about abortions and don't force people to do your belifes.

It is like saying that well because your mother didn't want you

Do you think the fetus cares that it wasn't born? No, it's a fetus. Abortions destroy the potential of life. If you are against destroying the potential for life, you might as well be against condoms and murdering a person should count thousands of times as bad as you could be destroying the potential for thousands of lives.

[Sétanta]

Ok. I get the feeling that most of us are males and I really don't think that men should have a vote on this matter. Opinion yes but women and only women should be able to vote for, or against abortion. I am personally pro-choice but that doesn't really matter.

[First Crusader]

Ok. I get the feeling that most of us are males and I really don't think that men should have a vote on this matter. Opinion yes but women and only women should be able to vote for, or against abortion. I am personally pro-choice but that doesn't really matter.

Let me understand your reasoning: only a woman can vote on this, because only she knows what it is like to be pregnant, and is the only person affected by legislation on it.

I HAVE A BETTER IDEA!

Proposition FVR: Only voters who were aborted fetuses have the right to vote on abortion. Only a person who has had his or her head caved in by a scapel knows how it feels

[PacSubCom]

The only thing that matters, and the ONE and ONLY one, is the freedom of women. What many of you here propose is to force women into something they might not want. Something life-altering and potentially even deadly.

Like they say, it's their body. And the body is sacrosanct. To force women to have a child, whether the risk is great or small, or whether they keep the child or not, is unacceptable. You may call it egoist, but it's none of your business!

There is no difference between the woman and the child in her womb as long as the child cannot sustain itself independently of the mother. Take it out, and it dies. If the woman is lost, the child is lost. The grey area begins when it is developed enough to sustain itself, then it is a human being that happens to be inside of another. But before that? It's just a blob of matter, created by the woman's body with the very material she is composed of. Like I said, no difference. It's hers, because it is her!

Miscarriages happen all the time, how about having a funeral with all honors for the miscarriage? I mean, it's a potential human being after all?

And to say that she could have used contraceptives or remained abstinent is not the smartest of comments. Contraceptives fail, and women have sex. There is no way around that.

Therefore, abortion all the way is the only moral way to go. And another wise word: Women love to have children, oh yes. Actually, they are totally mad all about it. There is no need to force them having unwanted children, they have wanted children en masse any way, and all the time.

It would be better to enhance the societal circumstances so that women don't even get the idea of choosing between child and work. It has to be made possible to have both without disadvantages. This is a very important step on the cilvilizational ladder.

[danzig]

Ok. I get the feeling that most of us are males and I really don't think that men should have a vote on this matter. Opinion yes but women and only women should be able to vote for, or against abortion. I am personally pro-choice but that doesn't really matter.

Why not? Depending on the decision a male is impacted greatly by it as well. A woman is given a choice to opt out of a life changing event after the 'deed', a male isnt. To be entirely fair a male should be given the right to give up all obligation and parental rights to a child if a woman decides to have a baby that he doesnt. You can say well he should have thought about that before having sex but Ill use the same argument prochoice people make, sometimes birth control fails and sometimes accidents, misjudgements do as well.

[the_mango55]

Why not? Depending on the decision a male is impacted greatly by it as well. A woman is given a choice to opt out of a life changing event after the 'deed', a male isnt. To be entirely fair a male should be given the right to give up all obligation and parental rights to a child if a woman decides to have a baby that he doesnt. You can say well he should have thought about that before having sex but Ill use the same argument prochoice people make, sometimes birth control fails and sometimes accidents, misjudgements do as well.

This is the way I think as well, I have a political cartoon on this, it basically says "A man has sex and decides not to become a father, and he is a no-good, law breaking, deadbeat dad. A woman has sex and decides not to become a mother, and she is Pro-choice."

I personally am Pro-life, but am still debating with myself when exaclty life begins. I think Morning After pills are probabaly good alternatives, and if you dont want a child, that should be your last chance.

[Atheist Peace]

Do you think the fetus cares that it wasn't born? No, it's a fetus. Abortions destroy the potential of life. If you are against destroying the potential for life, you might as well be against condoms and murdering a person should count thousands of times as bad as you could be destroying the potential for thousands of lives.

Right. Furthermore, if destroying a fetus is wrong because it destroys the potential of life, then every egg and sperm cell that goes unused is also wrong, because it has the potential to become life somewhere in the future.

[First Crusader]

Thanks for backing me up, Leviathon!

[imb39]

Hmmm..... Tricky one. Whilst I agree with Mudd The Crazy's sentiments, we are being asked to voice our opinion and our vote doesn't, I presume, carry any weight.

I think abortions should be restricted very heavily, under certain guidelines:

1) Before a certain period of time (say 16 weeks)
2) If the woman's life is in danger
3) If the woman was pregnant as a result of rape/incest.
4) The foetus has a life threatening/painful defect (oh, how I hate that word).

The cut off date should be such that the foetus cannot be expected to survive if born. Current thinking in this country is to move the deadline to 24 weeks - I think this is too late.

I do think that abortions are far too common, effective contraception is available and should be used. If you think you are responsible enough to have sex, then you are responsible enough to use a condom/pill. Fairly simple.

[Bwaho]

Ok. I get the feeling that most of us are males and I really don't think that men should have a vote on this matter. Opinion yes but women and only women should be able to vote for, or against abortion. I am personally pro-choice but that doesn't really matter.

Well you can't totally count out men. They have a part in it too, it's their child too.

[Boudicca]

In germany the period is currently twelve weeks. The supreme court of germany has permitted abortion during that time stating twice

(1) That the nasciturus (the embryo or foetus) is a human being after settled within the womb (11th day) and does not "become" a human being within 9 months

(2) That aborting the nasciturus ranks among the highest level interference with human rights, that being along a line with murder, homicide, and homicide on request

(3) That it does have to be permitted in cases where the mothers life or health is in severe danger, thus at a point, where one human being might even kill another human being in real life.

(4) That it does have to be permited in cases, where the birth of the child would cause the mother not to be able to live a self - responsible life, that is if severe psychic damage was to be expected following the birth (in all cases of rape), thus creating a situation equal to the one mentioned under (2).

(5) That within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy the child does not have a right to be born without the consent of the mother. That was argued as being due to the fact, that a situation as described under (4) might eventually happen to any mother if not wanting the child (which seems to be a rather weak argument to me, if you follow their argumenatiton under (1)).

I can inculde the link if somebody is interested in the text (I think it is available in english language)

[God-Emperor of Mankind]

I'm pro-choice.
Abortion is a nice way to make sure that people that aren't ready to be parents don't have kids until they are.
It is a nice way of reducing children that will turn out bad.
Besides you can't stop it anyway.
Atleast now women can do it safely.

[Titus Andronicus]

My personal opinion is that abortion is the worst thing that may happen to a woman. It's not some minor "medical treatment" like the pro-abortion lobby describes it. It wounds a woman for her entire life.

There was such a book written, I'm counting on someone to help me here since I can't remember it's author nor the title. It was written by a doctor who used to be an abortion activist during his youth years, then he had been working as a doctor in an abortion clinic and eventually ended up as a person who spent his entire wealth to fight against abortion. The book tells a lot and I personally doubt if there was anything better created on this matter since it provides a view from all possible sides - an abortion activist who intentionally tells lies on TV and a medic who witnessed the destuctive influence of abortion on people. The author also participated in the creation of a film, showing abortion from it's purely technical side. I think it had a title of "Mute scream" or something similar. Doctors and other people who were shown this film were fainting or vomiting as they couldn't stand the view. If someone knows the title of the book and the name of the author, I'd be grateful. I'll try finding it by myself, but I'm not sure if I can make it.

I'm pro-choice.
Abortion is a nice way to make sure that people that aren't ready to be parents don't have kids until they are.
It is a nice way of reducing children that will turn out bad.
Besides you can't stop it anyway.
Atleast now women can do it safely.

Oh, well. Mass executions have the same effect. I think they're even better since we know which children turned out bad.

In germany the period is currently twelve weeks. The supreme court of germany has permitted abortion during that time stating twice

(1) That the nasciturus (the embryo or foetus) is a human being after settled within the womb (11th day) and does not "become" a human being within 9 months

(2) That aborting the nasciturus ranks among the highest level interference with human rights, that being along a line with murder, homicide, and homicide on request

(3) That it does have to be permitted in cases where the mothers life or health is in severe danger, thus at a point, where one human being might even kill another human being in real life.

(4) That it does have to be permited in cases, where the birth of the child would cause the mother not to be able to live a self - responsible life, that is if severe psychic damage was to be expected following the birth (in all cases of rape), thus creating a situation equal to the one mentioned under (2).

(5) That within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy the child does not have a right to be born without the consent of the mother. That was argued as being due to the fact, that a situation as described under (4) might eventually happen to any mother if not wanting the child (which seems to be a rather weak argument to me, if you follow their argumenatiton under (1)).

Polish Constitutionary Tribunal ruled that unless science provides us with some different knowledge, human life takes it's beginning in the moment of insemination and stated that an act granting the right to abortion was discordant to the constitution which guarantees the right to live. That was in 1993, as far as I remember. In Poland abortion can only take place whaen the pragnancy results from a crime (rape, incest), the fetus is severly and irreversibly damaged or the pregnancy brings danger to the mother's life or health.

Oh, and someone wrote that only women should have the right to decide on the matter of abortion. Well, if I was to become a father, I'd sure like to have some influence on whether my child lives or not.

[imb39]

In Britain (and possibly all other countries that allow abortion) the father has no say, legally speaking. That is my understanding.

[visigothe]

i voted other

why because it should be the man and the womans choice

the reason we have abortion is because adoptions are low so we dont need/want a flux of unwanted babies however responsiblity needs to be taught before we resort to abortion

[MaximiIian]

I believe that, since it is the mother's child, it should be the mother's choice. It should always be an avaliable option.

[bdh]

Abortion is merely a wrong covering up another wrong: sexual irresponsibility. In that sense, it is not justifiable. People must always be responsible for their mistakes. Accountability is the penultimate prerequisite for freedom.

[PacSubCom]

Abortion is merely a wrong covering up another wrong: sexual irresponsibility. In that sense, it is not justifiable. People must always be responsible for their mistakes. Accountability is the penultimate prerequisite for freedom.

Aha, so if I read this correctly, the less freedoms people enjoy, the more freedom they have. Freedom is slavery.

That what you mean?