Abortion

[7Deadly$ins]

Thank youi still feel it is not her chose to kill an inocent baby thought at lest i am glad you spoke up i could not have said anything more conpelling.

None of us think it's wrong to keep a baby if you decide you want it after becoming pregnant. We think that it's up to her to decide that.

[Laryal]

I'm really not sure if I should be posting in here because, well, it's a very difficult subject for me to discuss. I have a hard time even speaking to my husband about it and he knows exactly how I feel.

 

Firstly, my entire life I've been pro choice. It is ultimately up to a woman as to whether or not she feels she is capable mentally or physically of carrying on with a pregnancy to full term. If abortions were illegal, women would resort to back alley practices. It's something you cannot force on everyone - some women can be 'talked into' having a baby they don't want, but many more will do whatever is necessary to end the pregnancy. Therefore, I've always thought we should have the choice to have an abortion performed in a safe environment and the government/special interests groups should stay out of it entirely.

 

Second, and this is the difficult part for me, I've been in the position of having to make that choice - whether to have an abortion or not. I decided ages ago that I never wanted children, never cared to make myself a slave to another person's wants and needs nor have I ever been interested in being pregnant or giving birth. I told my ex fiance this and it ended our relationship. When I met my husband I had the same talk with him, that if he desperately needed to be a father then we just couldn't be together because I was never going to subject myself to such mental torture. I've nothing against children, I just never wanted any myself. Two years after we were married I found myself unexpectedly pregnant. It was the single most terrifying moment of my life to see the positive sign on that little stick. We had both recently lost our jobs and were being forced to move in with my parents until we could regroup and figure out where to go from there, so we didn't exactly have any financial means with which to support an infant. I had no health insurance. We had gone through our savings to try and make things work in our former home, but in the end we had to give up almost everything. And, of course, I did NOT want to have a baby. We put that knowledge on the back burner while we packed and moved to a new city to start over. A week after we began settling into my parents' home my husband and I broached the topic, began discussing options. I felt numb all over thinking of going through with the pregnancy and I knew he'd support whatever decision I made, even if it hurt him deeply to agree with me on an abortion. I spent a lot of my time just thinking, wondering if it was normal to feel so scared of something as natural as bringing a life into the world and made a list of the pros and cons of why I should or shouldn't have an abortion. It took me another couple of weeks before I decided that while I may not be cut out for parenthood, the fetus (I wasn't even thinking of it as a baby at that point) wasn't to blame for it's conception and I had to be responsible for my mistake. I decided to carry on with the pregnancy, applied for medicaid until we had employment and could afford private insurance again, and began seeking out a doctor. I was three months along before I finally landed an appointment with a midwife and the first visit she she did a sonogram and I heard the heartbeat. There is absolutely nothing in the world that could have prepared me for that moment. Nor the following ones where I saw the baby in an ultrasound and learned that the blob of cells growing inside me was a girl. That she had two hands with 10 perfect little fingers, a face, and the potential to be someone amazing some day. I fell in love, hard, so much so that I still cry thinking of the choice I almost made to destroy her. I smile brightly when I feel her kick, even when it's my ribs which makes breathing somewhat challenging for a few seconds, and I worry myself sick when she's sleeping and I can't tell if she's okay or not. It has been worth every second of vomiting, back pain, insomnia, and given the chance to choose once again I'd make the same decision.

 

Not every woman would feel the same way. That's why despite my experiences with struggling through the decision I am still pro choice. I agree that it could break some women because being pregnant isn't easy, nor is it especially safe for some. Adoption is a solid choice for women who don't mind surrendering their bodies and freedoms to another life for 37+ weeks, but I know a LOT of women who would terminate without a second thought. And in the end, it should always be an option. Your body, your choice.

 

Edit: And I doubt this matters, but my struggles had nothing to do with religion or moral grounds. I'm an atheist and my decisions came from a purely mental place, not a spiritual one.

Thank you i could not have said it better myself.a mother i gusee has the right to kill the baby but it is wrong anyway you look at it to kill anouther life.

[gravija]

Oh I don't think it's always a great choice. Most people want babies, not older kids, and often it can take years of going through red tape to adopt so by the time a couple gets the baby they wanted they've already lost years. Unless they meet up with the mother beforehand to arrange things, and if she doesn't change her mind and decide to keep the baby herself. I can't imagine the heartbreak of bringing a life into the world only to send them into the system where they have a small chance of finding a loving home some day. Some children do, certainly, but it's not terribly common. I'm glad it worked out well for you and I only wish it could go that way for every child out there.

 

 

@Laryal - I don't remember saying anywhere in my post that it's 'wrong' to have an abortion. A fetus isn't viable during the window of time abortions usually take place, so I don't technically consider it a life yet. If you consider it taking another life, what then would you do if carrying on with the pregnancy meant the woman's life would end? That the strain of the extra blood in her body could cause her heart to suddenly stop? Or any other number of issues? Also the mental toll it could take on her. How do you value one life over another?

[KageSora]

Oh I don't think it's always a great choice. Most people want babies, not older kids, and often it can take years of going through red tape to adopt so by the time a couple gets the baby they wanted they've already lost years. Unless they meet up with the mother beforehand to arrange things, and if she doesn't change her mind and decide to keep the baby herself. I can't imagine the heartbreak of bringing a life into the world only to send them into the system where they have a small chance of finding a loving home some day. Some children do, certainly, but it's not terribly common. I'm glad it worked out well for you and I only wish it could go that way for every child out there.

Yeah. I really wish it could work out well for everybody out there--the children AND the parents.

 

It's awesome when things go right, absolutely. I just wish it could go right more often, especially for the older kids...

[Emeraldmay]

Extremist Pro-choicers

 

Mental health problems is a broad category, so I would say that each problem would have to be judged independantly. Financially, if a women can't afford to keep the child it should be given up for adoption, and if that was her intent then she could be able to apply for a grant from the government/county/state/province etc.

 

 

[kiffren]

Just a gentle reminder to not attack each other. This goes for both sides of the debate. If someone starts to attack another person, please report that post so that a mod can step in.

[Fuzzbucket]

Oh but one day you will believe for evey knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.I wonder why you say that you can tell in the pic that is what they were doing.For they were hugging each other and the one who is alive now seemed to protect his sick bother all the time. I have CB and if i had a child and i was sick near to death i would not kill my child.Why it is becouse i lived my life they had not.So do not say that every one with a disabilty would do such a thing that is right down sick to me anyway.

Actually I could equally well say that one day you will realise that religion is hogwash.

 

I don't actually believe that either, but I do NOT believe in god, and in my book, Jesus was just a nice man who preached a lot (and there were hundreds by that name doing so at the time.)

 

But if you choose to argue for the commandment "Thou shalt not kill", you also have to allow for "an eye for an eye". The bible is full of contradictions.

 

Nevertheless, the day you can show me that a 3 month embryo can survive outside the womb and grow to adulthood, I will allow that it might be called a baby.

 

Choice is a basic human right.

[sparkle10184]

Thank you i could not have said it better myself.a mother i gusee has the right to kill the baby but it is wrong anyway you look at it to kill anouther life.

You can't use actual murder as an example for abortion. The thing inside the mother's womb is NOT a baby yet. It is just a clump of cells, which many things could happen to.

[vintageandroid]

I know arguing this is a bit like repeatedly hitting my head into a brick wall, but I'll try anyway.

 

You insist that the mother should die to save the fetus. What about times when both would die? Is there a point to that? What if the woman already has three kids who REALLY need their mom?

 

And seriously: why is it that a nonviable fetus matters more than I do? Like above, I have severe depression, and since my partner doesn't have man-parts, the only way I'd get pregnant is through rape. This would not be good for said depression. Having a bundle of cells renting out wombspace and causing me morning sickness, hormonal mood swings, making me pee myself--and those are just the standard pregnancy side effects, never mind the hundreds of other physical and mental changes that are often permanent--would also not be especially great for my mental health. I don't think you realize how hard pregnancy can be on a human body. If I got knocked up, here are my options: 1) abort and try to get past the rape without dragging some poor kid into it; 2) continue the pregnancy and mess up the kid with non-pregnancy-compatible medication to try to keep my mental state healthy, and risk trying to adopt out a kid with some epic issues (which are very low on the priority list for adoptables); or c) step into traffic and end all of it.

 

You say the "child" shouldn't be punished for a rapist's actions. But why should a woman be? Because she matters less than this fetus you care about so much, to you, at least. Because she exists as a walking uterus, not a person with feelings and people who care about her.

 

I know you're going to ignore this, or repeat yourself to tell me why I'm wrong. But maybe just consider it.

 

Also, spending all your time telling nonchristians that they're going to become godly someday is all well and good, but we don't believe you, so it's not much of an argument. Try logic.

[philpot123]

Actually I could equally well say that one day you will realise that religion is hogwash.

 

I don't actually believe that either, but I do NOT believe in god, and in my book, Jesus was just a nice man who preached a lot (and there were hundreds by that name doing so at the time.)

 

But if you choose to argue for the commandment "Thou shalt not kill", you also have to allow for "an eye for an eye". The bible is full of contradictions.

 

Nevertheless, the day you can show me that a 3 month embryo can survive outside the womb and grow to adulthood, I will allow that it might be called a baby.

 

Choice is a basic human right.

I'll borrow from C.S. Lewis (who borrowed from J. Gresham Machen) and say that you can't really say Jesus was "just" a nice man. He claimed divinity. Considering you've already ruled out his divinity, he was either a loony, or he was simply deceiving people. Either way, not very nice.

 

 

"Thous shalt not murder" does not exclude fair punishments. Murder is different from civil punishment altogether. "An eye for an eye" is merely a way of saying that the punishment should fit the crime. I see no contradiction here.

 

 

Why does the fact that it couldn't survive outside the womb nullify its humanity?

 

 

Yes, choice is a basic human right. But I don't have the basic human right to choose to kill you, do I? I can choose to do a lot of things, but they could be wrong choices. "My body, my choice" applies to your body. But unless you have four arms, four legs, and every once in awhile, male genitalia, the body within you is not your body. Where's his/her choice? Doesn't it have a body?

[TikindiDragon]

Yes, choice is a basic human right. But I don't have the basic human right to choose to kill you, do I? I can choose to do a lot of things, but they could be wrong choices. "My body, my choice" applies to your body. But unless you have four arms, four legs, and every once in awhile, male genitalia, the body within you is not your body. Where's his/her choice? Doesn't it have a body?

Choice requires consciousness, though. And as the, uh, body (wish I could find a better word there) in question is not in posession of a brain capable of consciousness in the time frame being spoken of it also cannot be said to be needing a choice.

 

How is choosing to remove a group of cells that have not yet developed conscioussness different from choosing not to produce those cells in the first place? Those cells have no more concept that they might be alive than an unfertilised egg does.

[St. Jimmy]

Why does the fact that it couldn't survive outside the womb nullify its humanity?

If it wouldn't survive outside of the womb, it's a given that it wouldn't be sentient/sapient either. To me, that's what makes someone a person.

 

Yes, choice is a basic human right. But I don't have the basic human right to choose to kill you, do I?

I'm not living inside and taking nutrients from someone else's body. I have emotions, memories, friends, dreams. There's no questioning my humanity.

 

"My body, my choice" applies to your body. But unless you have four arms, four legs, and every once in awhile, male genitalia, the body within you is not your body.

It's still feeding off of the pregnant person's body.

 

Where's his/her choice? Doesn't it have a body?

All right, I'll humor you. Go and ask any fetus what it would choose. And a body doesn't guarantee it will become a baby, as it has been stated many times in this thread.

[philpot123]

Choice requires consciousness, though. And as the, uh, body (wish I could find a better word there) in question is not in posession of a brain capable of consciousness in the time frame being spoken of it also cannot be said to be needing a choice.

 

How is choosing to remove a group of cells that have not yet developed conscioussness different from choosing not to produce those cells in the first place? Those cells have no more concept that they might be alive than an unfertilised egg does.

Because that "group of cells" is scientifically alive. It is not my place or anyone else's place to choose to end a life. For me, it boils down to an entirely religious conviction. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away, it's not for me to decide. The only times when ending a life is not murder Biblically is self-defense and civil punishment for capital crimes.

 

If it wouldn't survive outside of the womb, it's a given that it wouldn't be sentient/sapient either. To me, that's what makes someone a person.

 

So the day it can be extracted and live outside the womb, it's a person? But it still couldn't survive outside the womb at that stage without medical technology, so I guess it's not a person then either?

 

It's still feeding off of the pregnant person's body.

 

Why does that mean it's not a person?

 

All right, I'll humor you. Go and ask any fetus what it would choose. And a body doesn't guarantee it will become a baby, as it has been stated many times in this thread.

 

Obviously a fetus can't voice opinions and lacks rational capabilities. My point is that the idea of "my body, my choice" ignores the fact that there is more than one body involved.

 

True, but ending the life guarantees it WON'T become a baby. Not sure why the possibility that the pregnancy might miscarry or develop poorly gives us the right to end any pregnancy we wish for any reason.

Edited February 20, 2013 by philpot123

[sparkle10184]

Because that "group of cells" is scientifically alive. It is not my place or anyone else's place to choose to end a life. For me, it boils down to an entirely religious conviction. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away, it's not for me to decide. The only times when ending a life is not murder Biblically is self-defense and civil punishment for capital crimes.

For YOU it may be about god and religion, but not everyone believes in god.

 

It's right during self defense? Why? Because you're protecting yourself? Often, the person has an abortion to protect their own life. It is the same with self defense.

[vintageandroid]

I'll borrow from C.S. Lewis (who borrowed from J. Gresham Machen) and say that you can't really say Jesus was "just" a nice man. He claimed divinity. Considering you've already ruled out his divinity, he was either a loony, or he was simply deceiving people. Either way, not very nice.

 

 

"Thous shalt not murder" does not exclude fair punishments. Murder is different from civil punishment altogether. "An eye for an eye" is merely a way of saying that the punishment should fit the crime. I see no contradiction here.

 

 

Why does the fact that it couldn't survive outside the womb nullify its humanity?

 

 

Yes, choice is a basic human right. But I don't have the basic human right to choose to kill you, do I? I can choose to do a lot of things, but they could be wrong choices. "My body, my choice" applies to your body. But unless you have four arms, four legs, and every once in awhile, male genitalia, the body within you is not your body. Where's his/her choice? Doesn't it have a body?

But again the question: why is this nonviable, unwanted proto-human more important than the viable, independent woman who already has relationships, responsibilities, joys and an understanding of tomorrow?

 

Also, a lot of people who respect Jesus' message don't believe that the words in the bible were literally his words, and therefore he didn't necessarily claim divinity, but that's a topic for another thread.

[TikindiDragon]

Because that "group of cells" is scientifically alive. It is not my place or anyone else's place to choose to end a life. For me, it boils down to an entirely religious conviction. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away, it's not for me to decide. The only times when ending a life is not murder Biblically is self-defense and civil punishment for capital crimes.

Oh, I actually agree with you on the taking of a life. I just differ on where you define that life. I do not believe that something lacking consciousness fits my definition of sentient life.

[Syaoransbear]

Uhhhh if I go through with a pregnancy I'm almost guaranteed to have that thing rip me open from my V to my A so abortion pretty much is self-defense.

Edited February 20, 2013 by Syaoransbear

[High Lord November]

Why does that mean it's not a person?

A person to me is something mental; who they are, not what they are made of.

 

If my dog suddenly stood up and gained the intelligence and complex emotions of a human being, I'd consider that a person. If a human had only the basic instincts of an animal (completely savage, for example), I would not consider him/her a person.

 

HUMAN, on the other hand, is just a name assigned to a particular arrangement of cells that creates the homo sapiens. I couldn't care less about that. It's like pointing to an empty shell of a new laptop and saying "butbutbut it's a laptop!"/protesting its destruction. There isn't anything in there. No info. Again, I couldn't care less, especially against the life of a person who has emotions, connections, and thoughts.

 

A fetus is just a clump of cells. It isn't a person, it's just human.

 

Where's his/her choice? Doesn't it have a body?

 

It can't choose though! I can ask it, but I'm pretty sure no one will be home.

 

Why does the fact that it couldn't survive outside the womb nullify its humanity?

 

Let me put it this way. Since it is taking residence in my body, I'm the landlord, yeah? I'll just have to evict it then And since it's not a person, can't have any coherent thoughts, can't feel pain, and won't even lament it's own demise, I don't see any problem.

 

Sorry if that was a bit insensitive, but I found it to be a good analogy?

Edited February 20, 2013 by High Lord November

[KageSora]

All the pro-birthers who think I matter less than a clump of cells are seriously one of the biggest reasons I'd rather like to have my uterus removed.

 

I mean, I never plan on using it--the only thing it's good for is making my life hell once a month, and reducing me to nothing more than an incubator in the event of a pregnancy I don't want.

[Spelunker]

To all of the pro-lifers-

 

Carrying through with a pregnancy seems to be of utmost importance, sometimes (and often) regardless of the mother's wishes. Is it evil to you, then, to never start the pregnancy? Because by what I understand of your logic, never giving the fetus a chance is evil. So do you also want all of the other eggs in a woman that will never be fertilized to be born? To become zygotes and be placed in surrogate human incubators, then to go into the foster system?

 

 

[KageSora]

That's something I'd like to know, too. Why is it only evil to not give it a chance once it's been fertilized?

 

Because, y'know, all those other eggs have the potential to become humans if they're fertilized, just like a fetus has the potential to become human if it manages to survive long enough to be born.

 

Why draw the line at conception? Is it only because there's only a "soul" once it's conceived? If so, then WHY should we care if we're not of your religion? WHY should your religion dictate the actions of those who do not share your views?

 

Some people don't believe in souls. Some people believe beings aren't ensouled until actual birth. Or other times.

[Spelunker]

Other times, I don't know. It depends. Why draw the line at conception? Is it only because there's only a "soul" once it's conceived? If so, then WHY should we care if we're not of your religion? WHY should your religion dictate the actions of those who do not share your views?

 

Some people don't believe in souls. Some people believe beings aren't ensouled until actual birth. Or other times.

 

 

I am Christian, but I think sometimes that souls are a bunch of hooey. We are our brains, which in turn, are a bunch of cells sending signals.

 

And I agree with your points heartily.

[philpot123]

For YOU it may be about god and religion, but not everyone believes in god.

 

It's right during self defense? Why? Because you're protecting yourself? Often, the person has an abortion to protect their own life. It is the same with self defense.

Doesn't mean He doesn't exist. And it doesn't mean that taking a life isn't inherently wrong.

 

"Often"? That's not the case. Medically "necessary" abortions account for a very small percentage of abortions performed. And the "necessary" part is debatable in many cases.

 

But again the question: why is this nonviable, unwanted proto-human more important than the viable, independent woman who already has relationships, responsibilities, joys and an understanding of tomorrow?

 

Who said it was worth more? Who said it was more important? I just want the child's life to be of EQUIVALENT importance to its mother's. If I kill the mother, I get put in jail. If I kill the child, I get put in jail. Equivalent value, because they're both humans.

 

A person to me is something mental; who they are, not what they are made of. If my dog suddenly stood up and gained the intelligence and complex emotions of a human being, I'd consider that a person. If a human had only the basic instincts of an animal (completely savage, for example), I would not consider him/her a person. HUMAN, on the other hand, is just a name assigned to a particular arrangement of cells that creates the homo sapiens. I couldn't care less about that. It's like pointing to an empty shell of a new laptop and saying "butbutbut it's a laptop!"/protesting its destruction. There isn't anything in there. No info. Again, I couldn't care less, especially against the life of a person who has emotions, connections, and thoughts. A fetus is just a clump of cells. It isn't a person, it's just human.

 

I disagree. It's human offspring in the developmental process. It can't be anything but human. It's not going to become a cat. It has been argued on this thread that the developmental process can "malfunction" and it can become a tumor or miscarry, but that doesn't change the fact that it WAS a developing human.

 

Tell me then, at what point does a fetus become human? Because your line of reasoning sounds an awful lot like Singer's. And he argues that I should be permitted to kill my offspring until it can declare its will to live. Is it wrong for me to kill a just-born infant? If yes, why was it not wrong for me to kill it 5 minutes before birth? If it was wrong to kill it five minutes before birth, why was it not wrong to kill it a week prior? If it was wrong to kill it a week prior... etc. When is life worth being protected? I believe any line someone can supply about "life is worth protecting now" is completely arbitrary.

 

All the pro-birthers who think I matter less than a clump of cells are seriously one of the biggest reasons I'd rather like to have my uterus removed.

 

I don't think you matter LESS than anything. I think the child that is (hypothetically) within you matters just as much as you do.

 

 

Carrying through with a pregnancy seems to be of utmost importance, sometimes (and often) regardless of the mother's wishes. Is it evil to you, then, to never start the pregnancy? Because by what I understand of your logic, never giving the fetus a chance is evil. So do you also want all of the other eggs in a woman that will never be fertilized to be born? To become zygotes and be placed in surrogate human incubators, then to go into the foster system?

 

Life begins at conception.

 

WHY should your religion dictate the actions of those who do not share your views?

 

Because the idea that a fetus is alive is equally supportable by religion and science, and the killing of infants in the womb is morally abhorrent just like any other form of murder. We don't want new laws, we want the laws that are already in place to apply to all kinds of murder.

[vintageandroid]

"Often"? That's not the case. Medically "necessary" abortions account for a very small percentage of abortions performed. And the "necessary" part is debatable in many cases.

Medically necessary (no need for the sarcastic quotation marks there) abortions include, to me, mental health and general quality of life, not just "if she pops out this kid she will die instantly!!!111" I think I posted earlier, but side effects of pregnancy can include everything from incontinence throughout the rest of the woman's life, mental health issues, to pelvic floor disorders, to incredibly bones. These are just off the top of my head. Pregnancy isn't something that just happens, and then there's a baby, and then everything's all back to normal. Bipeds aren't very good at producing children, it turns out.

 

And you insist you don't think the fetus is more important than I am, but I still wonder why you'd rather risk me (as detailed above) over the Fetal Android. If I matter as much as it, my needs should at least be taken into consideration, should they not?

 

Also, yes, this god could exist whether I believe in him or not, but until that's proven one way or another, I'd rather keep him out of my policy making. I worship Anubis but I'm not picketing morgues to start pulling brains out of corpses' heads.

[Spelunker]

Life begins at conception.

 

Do you have evidence? Or just religious beliefs?

 

Quite frankly, if the pro-life movement is about saving the fetuses that will become children, then maybe you should start with quality instead of quantity- provide medical care for those mothers with deformed or medically unstable offspring. Or save more babies by providing health care in underdeveloped countries across the world.

 

I think abortion is about maintaining quality of life. Bringing an unwanted life into the world would be bad for its quality of life, and quite often for the mother's.

 

Look at the name of the movement: pro-LIFE. You guys seem to want more people to be alive, and maybe to have lives that are not very good. There are success stories, true, but not as many as stories of mediocrity, failure, or suicide.

 

There are kids who wish they had been aborted. Think about that- if someone hates their life that badly, wouldn't you rather all of that suffering never had to happen?

Edited February 21, 2013 by Spelunker