Abortion: Your Views

[Darth InSidious]

Against.

 

If you have no self-control and end up with a child that's your own responsibility and you should bloody well accept it and live with it.

 

re: rapes: Virtually no rapes result in pregnancies carrying to term. Almost always they miscarry largely because of the state the mother is in after an experience like that.

 

re: 'deformities': Why should we kill because something/one is different? Everyone has a right to life. Its just laziness, IMO, from people who can't be bothered with the hassle of bringing up a child with difficulties, or xenophobes who cannot conceive of having something different being their progeny.

 

In the UK at the moment, a child can be aborted if 'deformed' up until the day before the mother comes to term. Such 'deformities' can be something as small as a cleft palette.

 

Moreover, over 180,000 abortions are procured every year in the UK alone. Don't tell me that's right...

 

re: choice: So if a woman decides to sleep with a man, then finds him, for example, insufficient, she has the right to mutilate him? That went on in her body...

 

 

Also, there is evidence that performing abortions -which are crude and rather brutal operations - can have long-term psychological effects on a woman.

 

If having a baby will harm the woman, then surely the Principle of Double Effect comes into effect - that is that if in attempting to save the mother, and after doing everything possible to save the child, the child dies, that is not murder. At least under the ethical system described as Natural Law...

[TK-8252]

re: 'deformities': Why should we kill because something/one is different? Everyone has a right to life. Its just laziness, IMO, from people who can't be bothered with the hassle of bringing up a child with difficulties, or xenophobes who cannot conceive of having something different being their progeny.

 

There's a difference between "different" and "retarded." And a fetus at early stages cannot be considered a person so really it has no rights.

 

Is it honestly "lazy" to not want to raise a child that's retarded?? Are you not aware that a child that is retarded is NOTHING like a child that's normal. Their brain doesn't ****ing work right. You can't teach it **** and it doesn't have common sense and never will. It's sad yeah but in the Middle Ages, retarded people weren't just aborted before they were born... they were tortured and killed for being possessed with demons. Now THAT is sad.

 

And what about a fetus that is going to just die a couple months after its birth anyway? Wouldn't it be better to kill it before it can become a baby?

 

There are too many retarded kids as it is, and they're a hassle. They will never become productive members of society. Parents can't deal with a kid that's retarded anyway, and they have to take them to all kinds of doctors and specialists. Bringing a retarded kid into the world that is only going to be a burden is stupid.

[Jediphile]

Pro choice. It always seemed rather too easy for me to have a bunch of guys telling women what's right and wrong (and I'm a guy myself). If a woman wants the choice, then who am I to tell her she can't have it?

 

That said, pro choice is not a free pass and should not be used as an excuse for behaving like an idiot (and that goes for both guys and girls). Use of birth control is always better. Period. And abortion should take place only early in a pregnancy.

[Palpatine_dc]

I'm for it, within legal constrains. Is it better to bring a child into the world when it is not wanted, than having an abortion? And I am not talking about late term contraception, but mistakes do tend to happen.

 

And a fetus at early stages cannot be considered a person so really it has no rights.

 

That is an issue to which there is no real answer, and up until this present day discussions are still being held. People will allways have a different opion about that because of religious or moral beliefs which will inavertably differ.

[Jae Onasi]

There's a difference between "different" and "retarded." And a fetus at early stages cannot be considered a person so really it has no rights.

 

Is it honestly "lazy" to not want to raise a child that's retarded?? Are you not aware that a child that is retarded is NOTHING like a child that's normal. Their brain doesn't ****ing work right. You can't teach it **** and it doesn't have common sense and never will.

 

Have you ever been anywhere near a retarded person? Yeah, actually you _can_ teach someone who's retarded a lot. There's a huge range of levels of retardation. Google "Down's Syndrome", go to one of the reputable sites, and you'll learn a lot about retardation. So what if they don't think the same way as 'normal' people do? I see retarded people on a pretty regular basis in my office, and they're a joy to be around.

 

And what about a fetus that is going to just die a couple months after its birth anyway? Wouldn't it be better to kill it before it can become a baby?

 

When/if you have a child, you'll understand it. I loved my children before they were even born. I would treasure whatever time I could get, even if I could only have a few hours, days, or months with them.

 

There are too many retarded kids as it is, and they're a hassle. They will never become productive members of society. Parents can't deal with a kid that's retarded anyway, and they have to take them to all kinds of doctors and specialists. Bringing a retarded kid into the world that is only going to be a burden is stupid.

 

This is a provocative and judgmental statement.

 

I see retarded folks being productive members all the time. Sure, they can't do the same things as a lot of us. But they do contribute the best way _they_ can. They learn to read, write, and do a variety of tasks, so obviously they can learn stuff.

 

I've worked in a Children's hospital. I have seen and continue to see parents deal with their retarded children just fine many, many times and yes, love them dearly. Some retarded children do have health problems that require more care, however, a lot don't.

 

If you kill off a baby because it's supposedly going to be a burden on society, where do you stop? Let's say you have an accident and become a quadriplegic. Should we euthanize you because you're now 'a burden' on society?

 

There's so much more to life than physical or mental abilities.

[Emperor Devon]

That is a very interesting and highly debatable topic, Jae and TK. Since you both post at the Senate Chambers regularly, I hope you'll discuss the issue further in the thread I plan to start.

[Palpatine_dc]

There's so much more to life than physical or mental abilities.

 

QfE

A disablity shouldn't be a reason for abortion. I have several friends who work with people of lesser mental capabilities, and most are perfectly capable of leading a more or less 'normal life'.

[90SK]

A minor disability, no. But one that compromises an individual’s functionality from birth would justify an abortion, in my eyes. If that was what the mother wanted.

[TK-8252]

That is a very interesting and highly debatable topic, Jae and TK. Since you both post at the Senate Chambers regularly, I hope you'll discuss the issue further in the thread I plan to start.

 

Agreed. I will refrain from responding to Jae in this thread for that reason.

[REDJOHNNYMIKE]

I'm Pro Choice...

My hands are MY body, I can do with them as I please, and I can use them to dislocate as many inconvenient jaws as I dang well please (who cares about those jaws anyway).

 

That phrase, "it's her body, she gets to choose" has always rankled me a bit. Yes, I understand that the fetus is dependent on her, but it will grow into an entirely separate entity on its own, if given the chance. There's just something about snuffing out that opportunity that just doesn't sit well with me. To end that life, just because you didn't have your partner wear a condom...it's just so wrong.

 

ExtraQFE

 

@Sithy, I'm confused... You equated abortion to murder, and still support it?

 

@Jae, Personal experiences are always informative.

 

Everyone has free will to make whatever choices you want, that doesn't make your choices right, tolerable, or supportable.

 

There is a difference between a legal Right and doing the Right thing, this often seems to be a semantic confusion both sides use to justify their position.

 

The one thing about this that really seems wierd to me is the whole "women's body" thing. I see the relationship as more of a symbiotic/host situation, rather than a baby (from conception) being an arm you can chop off if you don't want (why, is beyond me).

[El Sitherino]

@Sithy, I'm confused... You equated abortion to murder, and still support it?

I'm arguing his point against him. He said abortion is murder, he later said it's okay to abort them if they have deformities or such, therefore he's saying murder people with deformities. Hence the genocide comment.

[Totenkopf]

I see the whole claim of "my body, my choice" as both disingenuous and a bit sophmoric. I fully support a woman's right to have plastic surgery or donate her kidney or bone marrow, etc.. w/o requiring a man's approval. That "right" stops with another person's life, just by definition. It is no longer JUST her body. If women are given the sole right to decide whether the child lives or dies, then they should get the sole responsibility for raising the child to adulthood. Also, as long as a parent is legally responsible for a child's welfare, they should not be cut out of the loop on abortion for reasons already listed above.

 

 

To paraphrase RJM, what's legal isn't necessarily right and what's right isn't necessarily legal. You can cite any law you want as justification for an act. Just remember, slavery was legal and genocide is often legal w/in the country that's carrying it out. In the case of abortion, all arguments about tissue viability are just rationalizations for a selfish decision. If someone has been raped, the solution (however tough) is not abortion, but punishment of the perp. And remember, don't do the crime if you can't do the time (most abortions are statistically retroactive bc, that's just the cold hard fact).

[HerbieZ]

Imho. This will sound obnoxious to some people but, i don't care. I don't care about it because it will not affect me. We have a government to make these decisions, they are the ones who sort the billions and have big meetings and discussions. If and when the time comes where this is a topic that presents itself to me and requires an answer, il base it on a personal opinion at that time. The whole point of life is that we grow and we change, minds and ideas change in years time. I really do not think it is time for me to express my opinion because there simply is no need.

[Negative Sun]

For it, in the first few months...if they cannot cope afterwards, give it up for adoption and give it a decent home...

[Jae Onasi]

Don't you think they'd be 'haunted' more by the knowledge that they had a baby when they weren't ready, or if the mother was raped or something? Would you want a sibling who was the result of your mother being raped?

 

I did want to address this one.

We don't know if they would be haunted more or less. There are psychological effects to having an abortion--guilt is a big problem for a lot of women, and a number of women do mourn.

 

And I would not tell my child that s/he was a product of rape. I _might_ tell them once they were adults and able to understand the reasons why I wanted to carry and birth them. However, that is a burden no child or his/her siblings should have to carry. It would serve no useful purpose.

[Mace MacLeod]

My official opinion:

 

I'm not touching this with a ten-foot pole.

 

Just so everyone knows there's at least one place I won't go.

[Totenkopf]

I agree that no mother, in any true sense of the word, would burden her children with that kind of knowledge. Though I think you'd have to be careful about revealing that to an adult child as well. Not everyone could handle that kind of knowledge. One could only hope that others would not let such info slip either.

[mimartin]

I voted for it, but personally I am against abortions for moral reasons except (like others wrote) in extraordinary circumstances. What I’m against is a government forcing their moral and ethical view down anyone else’s throats. It just does not work (look at the 18th Amendment of the US Constitution for a good example). Abortion has been illegal before and that did not stop abortions.

 

@Jae thanks for your word about the mentally challenged. I have an 11 year old cousin that has more than a few problems. She may be a burden on society and me the rest of her life, but I am very glad that she has been given the opportunity at life. I love her with all my heart and even though she is not my daughter I would gladly give my own life or mental capacity if it would help her. She has already progress further than the doctors ever thought possible. My only problem with her is she hates Star Wars.

[Totenkopf]

.............What I’m against is a government forcing their moral and ethical view down anyone else’s throats. It just does not work (look at the 18th Amendment of the US Constitution for a good example). Abortion has been illegal before and that did not stop abortions.

 

----------------------------

Unfortunately, that's what govts do. Why do you think there are kinds of laws about stealing, murder, etc.. on the books? If that's not an imposition of some type of group morality on the individual, nothing is. Some of he problems you run into with things like abortion are that if the govt is going to allow it, who should pay for it? If you're going to allow society to dispose of inconvienent lives, why not euthanasia? And if you go down that route, where does it all end? But just in the case of abortion alone, why should anyone else have to pay for you to correct your mistake? If the govt is to allow abortion, regardless of who's offended by the concession, then any sod dumb enough to get knocked up w/o taking precautions should have to pay their own way and those unfortunate victims of rape/incest can get some kind of private support (no doubt PP or NARAL, etc).

[Jae Onasi]

@Mace--your restraint is noteworthy.

 

@mimartin--you're welcome.

 

I prefer the government not pay for abortions. I don't want my tax dollars paying for a procedure that I have ethical/moral difficulties with.

[Darth InSidious]

There's a difference between "different" and "retarded." And a fetus at early stages cannot be considered a person so really it has no rights.

 

Is it honestly "lazy" to not want to raise a child that's retarded?? Are you not aware that a child that is retarded is NOTHING like a child that's normal. Their brain doesn't ****ing work right. You can't teach it **** and it doesn't have common sense and never will. It's sad yeah but in the Middle Ages, retarded people weren't just aborted before they were born... they were tortured and killed for being possessed with demons. Now THAT is sad.

 

And what about a fetus that is going to just die a couple months after its birth anyway? Wouldn't it be better to kill it before it can become a baby?

 

There are too many retarded kids as it is, and they're a hassle. They will never become productive members of society. Parents can't deal with a kid that's retarded anyway, and they have to take them to all kinds of doctors and specialists. Bringing a retarded kid into the world that is only going to be a burden is stupid.

 

They said the same things about black people. It was pile of crap then, and its a pile of crap now.

[TK-8252]

They said the same things about black people. It was pile of crap then, and its a pile of crap now.

 

How do black people have any relation to the topic at hand?

[Jeff]

Yeah, I don't really think that was a completely appropriate association.

 

But I also disagree with your previous statement TK. I know neither of our opinions will sway because we have different views of when is a fetus considered a human being, but in my view a fetus, even at early stages, that is known to be retarded has the same rights to life as any other child.

[Commander Obi-Wan]

I am against it. You have unprotected sex, you should have to face the consqeuence, whether it be good or bad, of having a baby. The only exception should be if someone were to be raped.

[JediKnight707]

Even though I hate it, I've got to side with TK. He's right about the mentally challeneged, though we may never want to admit it. No one here could honestly say that, if they could, they'd rather have a child with Down Syndrome or another mental defect, then a "normal" child.

In ever single dream that people have with their children (or there future children) they seem themselves playing catch with a child that can catch a baseball. I happened to read a book called At First Sight by Nicholas Sparks, and its about a couple getting ready to have a baby. It turns out that there is the possibilty that an ABS (I think that's right) cord is near the baby, and there's a possiblity that the child could end up having a birth defect, if the cord attaches to the baby.

The main character, Jeremy, was thinking to himself, that he always pictured himself with a child, but that child in his dreams never had an ear the size of a penny.

In some ways, having an abortion with a child that could have a mental defect is better than letting it be born. Think about it. If a child with down syndrome goes to a normal school, do you realize the absolute torture they'd go through? Trust me, I haven't been that far removed from my before-10's. Although I'm not proud of it, and never will be, I did pick on kids, simply because they were different, and everyone else was doing it. I never, thank the Lord, picked on a kid who had a mental defect, because I had been told never, ever to do that. But, I do know that some kids would. So, maybe putting someone out of their misery before they ever have to face it isn't such a horrible, disgusting thing to do.