- Status
abortion is right!
people always say that it is murder, but it is not. the baby isn't capable of living yet. it's just an assembly of cells...
and thinking about the mother, she doesn't want to have the child. now the question arises: what kind of mother would she be, if she doesn't want to be one? well the answer is fairly simple...a bad onee. i can tell it from my own experiance...a mother not wanting to be one is a very bad one, bad enough to land me on this forum...
women wanting to abort are usually young, inexperianced,etc. how should their financial situation look like? well not too good...especially if because of moral reasons she is expelled from her family, etc.
so not existing can be in the interest of both the child and the mother...
and where as the child, or better the cellmass, is not able to decide for itself, the responsability lies with the mother...
abortion is not bad. it is an option.
people always say that it is murder, but it is not. the baby isn't capable of living yet. it's just an assembly of cells...
and thinking about the mother, she doesn't want to have the child. now the question arises: what kind of mother would she be, if she doesn't want to be one? well the answer is fairly simple...a bad onee. i can tell it from my own experiance...a mother not wanting to be one is a very bad one, bad enough to land me on this forum...
women wanting to abort are usually young, inexperianced,etc. how should their financial situation look like? well not too good...especially if because of moral reasons she is expelled from her family, etc.
so not existing can be in the interest of both the child and the mother...
and where as the child, or better the cellmass, is not able to decide for itself, the responsability lies with the mother...
abortion is not bad. it is an option.
I'm 100% in favour of it,I'm one of three kids and in later years it came out that my mother had an abortion while still with my dad but before they were ready to start a family. I only wish it had been me who got aborted and the other kid lived,she/he might have enjoyed this life coz it's wasted on me.
My Opinion is that it is the Woman's choice. Who gives a damn what those whackos think. They call a glob a primordial goop a human life.
So,,,, Wot do we do? Go back to the days of backalley abortions with coathangers? NO!!!!!!!!
Quit having sex? I dont think so.........
True, abortion is ugly........ But so is a single Mother struggling to raise kids in a society that does not give a damn.
You never hear the Right Wing douchebags talking about that.
So,,,, Wot do we do? Go back to the days of backalley abortions with coathangers? NO!!!!!!!!
Quit having sex? I dont think so.........
True, abortion is ugly........ But so is a single Mother struggling to raise kids in a society that does not give a damn.
You never hear the Right Wing douchebags talking about that.
I think that under certain circumstances there is nothing wrong with it, such as when carrying the child will kill the mother, when the woman was impregnated by rape or incest, or if there is no chance of the child surviving to term.
Now, if a woman is just having unprotected sex and doesn't want kids and gets knocked up, adoption is an answer, babies are adopted quickly and don't generally end up in the foster system. But then she needs to get on birth control once the baby is born, or stop having unprotected sex.
Now, if a woman is just having unprotected sex and doesn't want kids and gets knocked up, adoption is an answer, babies are adopted quickly and don't generally end up in the foster system. But then she needs to get on birth control once the baby is born, or stop having unprotected sex.
i think i agree with most here, abortion is a personal choice,,, a decision that is up to the mother as long as she is of sound mind and has the right advice from health professionals.
abortion is an advancement in medical science.
like many other advancements we have to decide as a society what the moral implications of using any medical advancements would be and wether we would be prepared to accept them and intigrate them into our lives.
Should someone have to pay for the rest of thier lives for a mistake? or the mistake of someone else? or the actions of someone else?
children unloved, unwanted, abused, neglected, given away, sold, abandoned,,,,,,,,,
abortion is an advancement in medical science.
like many other advancements we have to decide as a society what the moral implications of using any medical advancements would be and wether we would be prepared to accept them and intigrate them into our lives.
Should someone have to pay for the rest of thier lives for a mistake? or the mistake of someone else? or the actions of someone else?
children unloved, unwanted, abused, neglected, given away, sold, abandoned,,,,,,,,,
I used to be pro life then one day, I sat down and really, really thought about it and realized I was pro choice. When I was pro life, I was simply letting emotions control my judgement. (Not saying everyone who is pro life does, just that I did)
I think some people seem to think people who decide to have abortions use it as a form of birth control. And certain TV shows and movies (*cough Sex in the City cough*) don't really help this line of thought. I don't think it is. Abortion is a serious decision for a woman to make and I think that most women who consider it, don't go around flippantly making the decision every time they get pregnant. I don't imagine it is an easy decision for (most of) them to make.
Whether it is right or wrong, I cannot say. I don't see it as either. I do know how hard it can be for a single mother to raise her kid/s. My mom was a single mother (both father and step father passed and neither supported us much, anyway) and she raised four. Of course, adoption is an option... but there are so many kids in the system as it is that need homes and babies get adopted much faster. Older kids (even toddlers) don't usually stand a chance against a baby. Whether I think it's right or wrong is irrelevant, anyway. It's a personal decision for a woman to make and who am I to judge her for making it if she chooses it?
I think some people seem to think people who decide to have abortions use it as a form of birth control. And certain TV shows and movies (*cough Sex in the City cough*) don't really help this line of thought. I don't think it is. Abortion is a serious decision for a woman to make and I think that most women who consider it, don't go around flippantly making the decision every time they get pregnant. I don't imagine it is an easy decision for (most of) them to make.
Whether it is right or wrong, I cannot say. I don't see it as either. I do know how hard it can be for a single mother to raise her kid/s. My mom was a single mother (both father and step father passed and neither supported us much, anyway) and she raised four. Of course, adoption is an option... but there are so many kids in the system as it is that need homes and babies get adopted much faster. Older kids (even toddlers) don't usually stand a chance against a baby. Whether I think it's right or wrong is irrelevant, anyway. It's a personal decision for a woman to make and who am I to judge her for making it if she chooses it?
I have to disagree with this point. Here in the UK, adoption is slow and at it's all time low. I don't see how this process is fair on the child in anyway. The way I see it, if I gave my child up for adoption it would break my heart to think that one day they might think that they were unwanted.
I would have to say that I am definitely pro choice so my answer may be biased. I am 100% in favour of abortions when a woman has been raped or the baby or mother will develop health problems, such as a child being born with Down's syndrome. A mother may not be able to cope with looking after a disabled child and may not feel it is fair bringing a child into the world who may suffer because of it.
It must be remembered that having an abortion isn't a decision that is taken lightly. It is a very difficult decision and the mother will probably live with the guilt for the rest of her life. I have to look at the amount of children that are in the social care system, who are abused, neglected etc. I only have to look at the amount of people on this site who have been abused physically, emotionally and sexually. How is that fair on these poor children? Being brought into a life where the have to suffer merely because they were unwanted children?? So that is why I see a mother having an abortion because she does not want the baby as a bad thing because in the end it is the child who suffers.
Obviously I am not advocating abortion in anyway but it really does depend on the situation. I am also disgusted at the amount of women who use abortion as birth control. I do not condone that at all. You also have to remember that although technically the fetus does have a heartbeat at around 8 weeks, it would not be able to survive outside the mothers body so I do have a problem when people say "Oh it is a human that is living". That is true but out of utero it would take minutes to die. A baby can survive out of utero at 24 weeks and that is where I would class it as a living being.
I suppose it's different in the US, a pregnant woman will contact and agency and then receive a file of potential parents, and it's up to her to choose the parents of her child. She can meet with them, spend time getting to know them and make an informed decision on who will be raising her child. She can choose to be in the child's life or to have a closed adoption and have no contact, and the adoptive parents usually help pay for proper prenatal care. Everyone involved in the adoption is actually involved in the pregnancy.
I agree that abortion is not something taken lightly, as I have had one myself. The guilt from it is actually what brought me to SF. I was raped, by someone I know, someone I used to love and the thought that his child was growing inside me after what he had done to me was too much to take, so my husband and I spent a few weeks talking about it and decided the best thing to do would be to terminate. I thought that it would help me heal from all that had happened but it only added a new layer of pain and made me feel very guilty. However, when I think about it now, if I hadn't had the abortion I surly would have killed myself during the pregnancy. I was so depressed I couldn't get out of bed in the mornings, and when I did the first thought in my mind was my own death, how that was the only answer. I had fears that the child would be a boy and grow up to be like his father, that he would hurt someone. While I know this is an irrational thought, fear, pain and hormones can do horrible things to a woman's mind.
I have actually gotten past the guilt at this point because I know if I were to have gone through with the pregnancy I would harbor some sort of feelings of resentment towards the child and that's not fair. It didn't ask to be made, and especially by a horrible man who would force himself on a woman, but still, I know the feelings would be there, especially if the child looked like it's father and that's just not fair to the baby, growing up knowing something is different, that he/she is treated or looked at just a little differently from my other children, wondering all the time if he/she did something wrong because mommy can't look at him/her. I couldn't imagine putting a child through that.
I agree that abortion is not something taken lightly, as I have had one myself. The guilt from it is actually what brought me to SF. I was raped, by someone I know, someone I used to love and the thought that his child was growing inside me after what he had done to me was too much to take, so my husband and I spent a few weeks talking about it and decided the best thing to do would be to terminate. I thought that it would help me heal from all that had happened but it only added a new layer of pain and made me feel very guilty. However, when I think about it now, if I hadn't had the abortion I surly would have killed myself during the pregnancy. I was so depressed I couldn't get out of bed in the mornings, and when I did the first thought in my mind was my own death, how that was the only answer. I had fears that the child would be a boy and grow up to be like his father, that he would hurt someone. While I know this is an irrational thought, fear, pain and hormones can do horrible things to a woman's mind.
I have actually gotten past the guilt at this point because I know if I were to have gone through with the pregnancy I would harbor some sort of feelings of resentment towards the child and that's not fair. It didn't ask to be made, and especially by a horrible man who would force himself on a woman, but still, I know the feelings would be there, especially if the child looked like it's father and that's just not fair to the baby, growing up knowing something is different, that he/she is treated or looked at just a little differently from my other children, wondering all the time if he/she did something wrong because mommy can't look at him/her. I couldn't imagine putting a child through that.
A quick word of explanation first. I am not actually trying to annoy anyone, but sometimes we have to call stupidity as stupidity, and delusion as delusion. If I have annoyed anyone, I do apologise, but urge you to consider what I have written below more carefully. There are no opinions here at all, just observations, and questions for you to think about. That is all.
John.
OK, interesting so far.
First, I have seen a couple of replies here from posters who say they were 'Pro-Life', then became 'Pro-Choice'. Well, I went the other way! And no, I do not suffer from religion!
One thing that many bring up is this bizzare idea that the child is somehow not a child until it is born, or until cellular differentiation begins, or until its heart beats, or some other arbitrary point in the development cycle. Then they suggest it is OK to kill the child before that point because it is not really a person yet. What a load of rubbish. You are deluding yourselves people. You may not be able to release yourself from your delusion, you may not be strong enough, but at least have the good grace not to delude others!
Now that I have got you mad, think about this. A mother to be on a bed, waters have broken, contractions have been going for a while. There is a fair bit of anxiety now, I know, I have been there (only as the father though, unfortunately). But what is that anxiety about? It is about the health of the mother and child, we are anxious that they both come through this together, and are both healthy. So what is my point? Well, what are we not anxious about? Simple, we are not anxious about what the child will be. Think about it, we know that the child will be Human, right? We are not worried that mum might have an alligator, or an elephant, or a toaster, right? You may think this sounds ridiculous, but that is because it is so easy to demolish your delusion. We know that what is about to pop out, or be cut out, is going to be Human, with all that this state entails. Sure, the child might have serious health problems, might even be still born. But even with a still birth, we mourn the passing of a Human being. And it is pointless setting some arbitrary point in the development cycle to say that the child is not a Human before that point. For example, if they are only Human after their heart starts beating, then what were they before that point? A fish? Seriously? They were Human, and they were Human all along. From the moment that sperm dives into that ovum, you have a Human. And this is not a viewpoint, or a theory. It is an observation. For those who would try to negate this observation, the question stands, if that developing blob of cells that already contains all it needs to be a Human being is not Human, then what is it?
There are also many other points brought up by those arguing for 'choice'. I will just pick a couple to start with.
For example, the idea that 'it is the woman's body, therefore it is her choice.' How wrong is that? There are two bodies now. One is the child, and the other is the mother. I totally support the woman's choice for her own body, but not for the body of the child. This is a huge moral load on the woman's mind that men do not have. It is something that requires directed education so that the correct decisions can be made for the child. If you think the separation of the two bodies is an opinion of mine, or just a question of definition, think about this. If you support a woman making a choice to kill a child that is in her womb, do you also support a woman making a choice to kill the child after birth? Huh? Well? Why not? Obviously, there would not be many people who think it is OK for mum to just decide to kill her six year old daughter because she can't afford to bring her up anymore. No, all the excuses you hear about killing the unborn are based on the falacy of the unborn being not Human, which I discussed above.
Now we come to the tricky one. Rape. This one slowed me down a bit, because when I was 'Pro-Choice', I totally supported the idea that the woman who has been raped and finds herself pregnant must be given the ability to make this decision for herself, and I even felt that no one else had the right to interfere with her decision, or make a judgement about it. What an idiot I was! I claim temporary mental incompetence your honour! The solution of course, is to just apply the observation made above about the separation of the mother and the child, as two different Human beings. Well, the child is also a separate Human from their father. I ask the same question I asked above, those of you who support the killing of an unborn child because the child is the result of rape, would you want to kill a six year old because you just discovered that they are the result of rape? Unfortunately, I fear that many in the Pro-Choice camp will come uncomfortably close to answering Yes! I say this because one person I talked to about this recently actually answered Yes! For real, she said that she wished all the children of rapes could be killed, no matter how old they now are, that the world would be a better place. Seriously, she has a degree in social 'science' from a respected University. This is one of the things that happened to me recently to force me to think about this subject. Again, not my opinion, but if you make the observation that the person you are killing is a Human child, then it is never OK, as the child is never responsible for their parent's behaviour. Besides, what if the unborn child's mother was a murderer? (Instead of the male always being cast as the criminal). Would you still kill the child just because their parent was bad? Again, a question for you to think about, not an opinion.
So, what do we do in the case where a woman gives birth, unwillingly, to a child who is the result of a rape? Firstly, we hope that they both survive the birth process in good health. Then, we organise some major psychological help for the unfortunate woman. Also, if we cannot reconcile the mother with her child, who is at least half hers, think about it, then we also organise to have the child adopted. And the most important thing. We introduce some proper bloody laws into the country so that those susceptible to commit rape can be isolated early, and treated where possible, and incarcerated where not possible. Yes, we do the Human thing, we apply technology to the problem, and solve it at its cause. Dealing with a rape by killing a child is not a good option. We must use that rape as a way to introduce measures that will prevent future rapes, instead of the current laws that allow proven rapists to walk the streets stalking women. Solve the problem people, don't kill the result!
It should be easy enough to apply what I have said above to all other situations. One last example, the 'medical necessity' issue. First, I don't think that abortion is 'necessary' anywhere near as often as is being suggested. And when it is, apply the lesson from rape above. If the decision is necessary, let's make sure that it never happens again, ever. Yes, that means actually spending money on our health system, gee, what a novel concept! Let's use technology to improve our medical science to the point where the decision never needs to be made. And don't tell me it can't be done, it can, it is just a matter of wanting to. Killing a child because we could not be bothered to spend enough money to develop better medical science technology is unforgiveable.
Well, sorry to all the people I have pissed off, and I totally understand if this post gets removed. But seriously people, it is never OK to kill a person, not even when you try to justify it by pretending that they aren't Human.
Oh, I just read Butterfly's post above. What the hell? Am I reading this right? Have you made a major typo butterfly? Because what it seems to me you are saying is that because the foetus cannot survive outside the womb before twenty four weeks it is not Human? What? First, try telling that to a woman who has had a miscarriage before twenty four weeks. Try telling her that there is nothing to be distraught about, because after all, the miscarriage only involved a thing, not a real Human at all! And secondly, what about my mate who cannot survive without his heart pills? Is he now no longer Human because he cannot survive without external support? What the hell are you saying?
John.
John.
OK, interesting so far.
First, I have seen a couple of replies here from posters who say they were 'Pro-Life', then became 'Pro-Choice'. Well, I went the other way! And no, I do not suffer from religion!
One thing that many bring up is this bizzare idea that the child is somehow not a child until it is born, or until cellular differentiation begins, or until its heart beats, or some other arbitrary point in the development cycle. Then they suggest it is OK to kill the child before that point because it is not really a person yet. What a load of rubbish. You are deluding yourselves people. You may not be able to release yourself from your delusion, you may not be strong enough, but at least have the good grace not to delude others!
Now that I have got you mad, think about this. A mother to be on a bed, waters have broken, contractions have been going for a while. There is a fair bit of anxiety now, I know, I have been there (only as the father though, unfortunately). But what is that anxiety about? It is about the health of the mother and child, we are anxious that they both come through this together, and are both healthy. So what is my point? Well, what are we not anxious about? Simple, we are not anxious about what the child will be. Think about it, we know that the child will be Human, right? We are not worried that mum might have an alligator, or an elephant, or a toaster, right? You may think this sounds ridiculous, but that is because it is so easy to demolish your delusion. We know that what is about to pop out, or be cut out, is going to be Human, with all that this state entails. Sure, the child might have serious health problems, might even be still born. But even with a still birth, we mourn the passing of a Human being. And it is pointless setting some arbitrary point in the development cycle to say that the child is not a Human before that point. For example, if they are only Human after their heart starts beating, then what were they before that point? A fish? Seriously? They were Human, and they were Human all along. From the moment that sperm dives into that ovum, you have a Human. And this is not a viewpoint, or a theory. It is an observation. For those who would try to negate this observation, the question stands, if that developing blob of cells that already contains all it needs to be a Human being is not Human, then what is it?
There are also many other points brought up by those arguing for 'choice'. I will just pick a couple to start with.
For example, the idea that 'it is the woman's body, therefore it is her choice.' How wrong is that? There are two bodies now. One is the child, and the other is the mother. I totally support the woman's choice for her own body, but not for the body of the child. This is a huge moral load on the woman's mind that men do not have. It is something that requires directed education so that the correct decisions can be made for the child. If you think the separation of the two bodies is an opinion of mine, or just a question of definition, think about this. If you support a woman making a choice to kill a child that is in her womb, do you also support a woman making a choice to kill the child after birth? Huh? Well? Why not? Obviously, there would not be many people who think it is OK for mum to just decide to kill her six year old daughter because she can't afford to bring her up anymore. No, all the excuses you hear about killing the unborn are based on the falacy of the unborn being not Human, which I discussed above.
Now we come to the tricky one. Rape. This one slowed me down a bit, because when I was 'Pro-Choice', I totally supported the idea that the woman who has been raped and finds herself pregnant must be given the ability to make this decision for herself, and I even felt that no one else had the right to interfere with her decision, or make a judgement about it. What an idiot I was! I claim temporary mental incompetence your honour! The solution of course, is to just apply the observation made above about the separation of the mother and the child, as two different Human beings. Well, the child is also a separate Human from their father. I ask the same question I asked above, those of you who support the killing of an unborn child because the child is the result of rape, would you want to kill a six year old because you just discovered that they are the result of rape? Unfortunately, I fear that many in the Pro-Choice camp will come uncomfortably close to answering Yes! I say this because one person I talked to about this recently actually answered Yes! For real, she said that she wished all the children of rapes could be killed, no matter how old they now are, that the world would be a better place. Seriously, she has a degree in social 'science' from a respected University. This is one of the things that happened to me recently to force me to think about this subject. Again, not my opinion, but if you make the observation that the person you are killing is a Human child, then it is never OK, as the child is never responsible for their parent's behaviour. Besides, what if the unborn child's mother was a murderer? (Instead of the male always being cast as the criminal). Would you still kill the child just because their parent was bad? Again, a question for you to think about, not an opinion.
So, what do we do in the case where a woman gives birth, unwillingly, to a child who is the result of a rape? Firstly, we hope that they both survive the birth process in good health. Then, we organise some major psychological help for the unfortunate woman. Also, if we cannot reconcile the mother with her child, who is at least half hers, think about it, then we also organise to have the child adopted. And the most important thing. We introduce some proper bloody laws into the country so that those susceptible to commit rape can be isolated early, and treated where possible, and incarcerated where not possible. Yes, we do the Human thing, we apply technology to the problem, and solve it at its cause. Dealing with a rape by killing a child is not a good option. We must use that rape as a way to introduce measures that will prevent future rapes, instead of the current laws that allow proven rapists to walk the streets stalking women. Solve the problem people, don't kill the result!
It should be easy enough to apply what I have said above to all other situations. One last example, the 'medical necessity' issue. First, I don't think that abortion is 'necessary' anywhere near as often as is being suggested. And when it is, apply the lesson from rape above. If the decision is necessary, let's make sure that it never happens again, ever. Yes, that means actually spending money on our health system, gee, what a novel concept! Let's use technology to improve our medical science to the point where the decision never needs to be made. And don't tell me it can't be done, it can, it is just a matter of wanting to. Killing a child because we could not be bothered to spend enough money to develop better medical science technology is unforgiveable.
Well, sorry to all the people I have pissed off, and I totally understand if this post gets removed. But seriously people, it is never OK to kill a person, not even when you try to justify it by pretending that they aren't Human.
Oh, I just read Butterfly's post above. What the hell? Am I reading this right? Have you made a major typo butterfly? Because what it seems to me you are saying is that because the foetus cannot survive outside the womb before twenty four weeks it is not Human? What? First, try telling that to a woman who has had a miscarriage before twenty four weeks. Try telling her that there is nothing to be distraught about, because after all, the miscarriage only involved a thing, not a real Human at all! And secondly, what about my mate who cannot survive without his heart pills? Is he now no longer Human because he cannot survive without external support? What the hell are you saying?
John.
Big supporter of total women's rights. Not even going to get into what a fetus is or is not.
The world is vastly overpopulated. We can't support the population now. Poverty, crime and abuse sours. Our planet can't support the sick population we've created as is.
I think we should be giving away abortion vouchers like candy.
<3
The world is vastly overpopulated. We can't support the population now. Poverty, crime and abuse sours. Our planet can't support the sick population we've created as is.
I think we should be giving away abortion vouchers like candy.
<3
- Status