Abortion

Dude.
You've just discredited everything you said with that post. I know the fur industry is a cruel, terrible practice. But if one is to outlaw the fur industry, it is only right that we then outlaw abortions on the grounds of simple carelessness.

 

Of course, but this difference does not exist in babies and even less in feotus'. Because they cannot reason, communicate, colaberate or interact.

Killing in self-interest does not make killing right, either. Surely, if you we're to eat another person when he was already dead, to sustain yourself, that would be considered wrong, simply because you're eating another human being. But yet, the person is dead (we must assume you did not kill him/her), so is it then wrong or right?

 

Of course, of course. Yet can a foetus (we all know that legally, there is a cut off point for abortion), truly be classified as human? They do not do anything humans do, bar exist and grow (but all living things do that). Yes, it will be a human one day, but does the potential of what may happen in the future dictate what is right or wrong in the present?

Fair enough, but surely we as humans are just incredibly smart animals ourselves?

It was more off topic and longer than I'd hoped, but I was applying that we as humans are only animals ourselves, and thus would it be wrong to eat one of us? Cannabilism is frowned up so heavily (and no, before you even think about it, i do not agree with it) but surely, the ethics of eating shouldn't discriminate between how intelligent the animals are?

 

I don't agree with you here. The fur industry strips living animals of their coat, leaving them to suffer until death. The point to note here is that the animal is alive on the outside. They think for themselves, feel the extreme pain. While abolishing the fur industry would be an excellent outcome, it cannot be compared with the issue of abortions. Certainly not if it's because of 'simple carelessness' with beings that are not fully aware of their surroundings.

evizaer, you said this:

"Just because it is not murder does not mean that it is not wrong."

Now I may be misinterpreting this sentence but to me it seems as if you're telling me it doesn't have to be murder to be wrong, thus abortion is 'wrong' to you. Reading back, I think this may be a generalisation, so I apologise if this is the case.

Theoretically, that is what I believe is the main ethical issue.

I imply it heavily in regards to certain areas, and for good reason.

See now you're attempting to contradict what I've been saying. I think I wrote something about genetically modified food in my last post. In that example we've gained something, but I clearly stated that it is not definitely beneficial to the human race.

Our advancements are important, no one can deny that. But they are only truly valid, in my opinion, if they are able to provide the following: sustainability, proper ethics, and a reduced amount of detrimental effects on our environment and organisms.

Now we're talking the capabilities of modern and future science. Altering gene sequences is certainly possible to create 'perfect humans', but this is in no way what I'm trying to say.

I'm just making a point that if a mother does not want to give birth to a child for an 'appropriate' reason, then she should be given the option to have an adoption. However, I am more inclined to back a mother in this situation if the gestation period has been very short.

In response to Lp, I keep getting conflicting reports on this fetus-pain issue. Some sources say 25 weeks, others ... well I can't remember.

 

Forgive me if I'm wrong but don't other primates have these concepts of morality, or advanced cognitive/emotional capabilities. I'll use the example of gorillas. Other than that your point is pretty much correct.

Now I'm probably about to say something stupid and controversial.

To stay consistent with my previous arguments I don't have a problem because the fetus is unaware of its existence. Fine, I've made that point. My beliefs start to conflict when there's talk of the fetus feeling pain and, more importantly to me, its size. I will back abortion up until a fetus is large enough to represent the form of developing human baby. At which point, I feel the abortion is 'too real' and quite vulgar. I know in a way I'm contradicting myself but up until a certain point in development, abortion should be halted. And it is, so I'm basically just agreeing with the current system ...

If they feel pain are they human? Well, that's very vague, but they're certainly developing humans. As I said, they're not aware of their surroundings and cannot think for themselves, so how can pain really affect them?

 

I disagree with this, but you're entitled to your own opinion.

In my opinion, I think abortion should be permitted under strict standards, such as rape, or should the mother's health be in danger. But what if the parents can't provide for the child? Maybe the live in poverty or already have to many kids, would it be fair for the child to be born in such an environment?

Or what if the mother is drug addict? What if the baby is born with a co-dependency? Or a malformation? Would it be fair for the baby? Should the parents be condemned for choosing abortion?

I also believe that there are too many people in the world already too have millions born every years, some of which don't even grow up to be useful human beings. (Useful is not the right word, let me think of something else.)

 

Speaking as a woman, a mom and a grandmother.
I am not against abortion. I am against abortion used as a form of birthcontrol. 1 acceptable after that it is wrong and lazy on the part of the woman.
I have never had an abortion and I doubt I ever would voluntarily. Being the age I am that is almost a moot point.
I have had about 20 spontanious abortions. Explanation I was pregnant for a week or two and miscarried.
I am a certified Mental Retardation Counsellor and as such I have seen many children and adults who would have been better off never to have been born. I do not mean the downs syndrome children. I mean the micro cephalic and the hydro cephalic children who either have too small a head to contain their brain or have a head that is 6 times the normal size and cannot lift it off a pillow and it is so full of water there is no place for the brain to develop. These children are not loved and never were. They are in an institution where there needs are met minimally in other words they are fed, diapers changed and washed. No hugs No bed time stories and no mother to just be there for them.
Now they do not have a life. Their hearts beat their body functions at a new born age and they are cared for. To my way of thinking this is not living it is existing. I would not let a child of mine live like that. If I knew before he or she was born that would be the outcome I would not hesitate to have an abortion. I would probably if a child of mine was born like that he would not live for long.
Does that make me a bad person or a loving mother? I don't know the answer to that question in the eyes of others but to me I would be the most loving mother on the face of the earth.
You said it was her parents who were making her keep the baby. That is such a stupid thing to do to a poor child. She will have to grow up before her time and raise a child with her parents looking over her shoulder the entire time just waiting for her to make a misstep so they can rub her nose in it.
Children's aid should step in at the hospital and take the baby into their care and give the girl her chance at a normal life. Nobody at 15 is ready to be a mother.
So yes abortion is perfectly all right in my books if it is done in a safe and informed manner.
If someone wants an abortion badly enough there are enough butchers to do it in the back rooms where both could die. Let her have it done in the drs. office where conditions are sterile and safe as can be possible.
I also hate it when I see men saying no abortions for anyone.
Let men have to put up with 9 months of a watermelon inside them, the swelling feet listening to the wife say, "isn't it great what I did, have another beer to celebrate."

 

My view is that I feel uncomfortable about abortion. If there were sever medical problems with the child and I could not afford to raise that child and give the child sufficiant medical attention or be able to raise and educate the child, I would probably go thorugh with an abortion. I am Maternal by instinct. It would break my heart to have an abortion. But yes, medical reasons and serious discussions with my partner and several medical proffesionals, I would carry out an abortion.


If a friend decided to go through with one, I may not actually agree with it unless there are specific reasonings behind her decision, But I would support her. Why? Because she is my friend. I'm not supporting a murderer, U am supporting a friend which is what I am supposed to do.


I agree with Lessa about abortions as birth control. The 'Oops, I'm pregnant! I better go book myself in and get an abortion!' That pisses me off.

 

I pretty much agree with what LP has already said on most parts of this issue. Therefore, I don't personally think that'd i'd ever be able to go through with an abortion, it would be tpo psychologically harmful for me.

As for the talk of using abortion as a form of contraception, sadly I know too many people who think in that way. A friend of my mum's has a daughter my age. She's 17 now, and has had 4 already - one a year since the age of 14, and one at 12! It says it all there really.

Even if i wasn't planning to have a child, I don't think I could abort it.

At the end of the day, I guess it is down to the individual but i'd only really understand if somebody had an abortion following a rape or knowing that the child would suffer severely from some type of medical condition.

 

We need to make emergency contraception more widely available... then put it in the food dishes of these animals. Sincerely, there is no reason to have an abortion every year.

 

So, what about people who use conventional, recommended forms of contraception, but become pregnant anyway? Before you answer, keep in mind that not everyone or every religion agrees upon when a fertilized egg becomes human.

Now we aren't talking about anyone being irresponsible, but we are talking about a situation in which the person is not in a position to provide for a child adequately and has exercised due diligence to prevent it?

Should that woman be required to put her life on hold, even put her health at risk, because someone else asserts that life begins at conception?

 

it's only 'murder' once the child is born... after it exists outside the womb... till then, it's the stopping of a pregnancy and the ending of prenatal life, which should only be the right of the mother to do or not... no one should be able to tell anyone what to do with his or her own body... if you started telling men they can't masturbate, because it's murdering thousands of would-be children, or legislate in whom and when/where they can eject their 'seed' how far do you think you'd get?...

females alone can create life within their own bodies and each of us should be the only ones allowed to decide whether to do so to the point of birth, or not!... to do anything else is immoral and should be illegal... no parent should be allowed to force a child to carry a baby to term... it amounts to child abuse, imo...

 

No she should not be forced to do this. If she is forced it can cause mental distress and she could suffer depression and suicide. This takes out not only the foetus but the young woman.
Being pregnant is not just 9 months of being sick, moody and fat.
It is 9 months of changing your life. You can't drink, smoke, eat spicy foods, stay up late or even dressing up and going out with friends.
Some women are not cut out to do this. They are not bad or irresponsible people. They are just human.
Even women who desperately want a child are not really ready for the changes because all they are thinking of is holding that wonderful little bundle at the end of 9 months. After the 9 months there is anxiety, many women suffer post partum depression. Some even kill the baby not because they want to but because they can't figure out what to do with it.
Pregnancy or abortion is not as simple as people think. I figure 200 years from now this argument will still be going on.
There really is no answer.

 

the tribal people of america have a saying about not judging another till you've walked five miles in their footsteps... as a mother of 7 who was pregnant 8 times [losing one naturally] and a mother of 6 girls, all i can say is that before anyone weighs in on this argument, give birth to a child... better yet, give birth to 6!

 

Good, then we see eye to eye on this.

 

glad to know there's at least two of us!

hugs, m

 

I was still dressing up and going out with my friends. Getting pregnant does not put your life on hold. Yes so you aren't able to dress exactly the same as before. But you can still dress very nicely and go out with friends. Going out with friends to lunch, dinner, most of the things you did before.

maia I agree with you, that a child being forced to bring their unwanted baby into the world could lead to child abuse. But even when some of these woman aren't forced to do so they abuse their children. Yes it is on eof the causes for child abuse, but then some young girls have turned out to do a fabulous job. As far as I am concerned there is only one person that has the right to make the decision or not and that is the one who carries the child though.

The thing is you DON'T know how good of a parent you are going to be until the child is born. You don't know what life is going to hold instore for you and your child or how hard or easy it may be.

I think it really comes downs to the fact that no matter what any of us think. Abortions should remain legal, for many of reasons. Whether we agree with it or not. I'd rather it be done by a doctor than have these girls ending up getting critically ill or worse from back yard jobs. Or even suicide.

 

It is a decision that should remain with the mother. Not the governments, not any one church, not even the father (although I would hope the father's wishes are at least considered).

That is my position. I won't try to split the fine hairs of when in the pregnancy it is no longer ok, or what the parameters may be (age, mental state, etc) that override the assumption that the mother is competent to make that decision.

And right now Mitt Romney is on Meet The Press pontificating on exactly why the government SHOULD own the decision. I will not be voting for him under any circumstances.

 

I wonder if any place allows you to add the other 9 months to your age if a person feels it would be beneficial to them. For example, taking your driving test earlier than would be expected.

 

Yes. The problem is that the people legislating on abortion are 90% men. This should really be an issue that women have say on and women alone. What the hell business do men have trying to tell women how to treat themselves and their potential children?

 

Hmmm... I may try that if I'm still seventeen when the next election comes around

 

I don't readily accept that even a small group comprised wholly of women should be legislating the decision for all women.