Pro choice or pro life?

[Sublime]

I believe that single cell is living and it would be considered murder if it was aborted. I know it sounds crazy to you people who are pro-choice, but that's my opinion and I won't be judged by it.

My thoughts exactly.

No matter how young, old, big, or small, a fetus in my eyes will always be a human being. And abortion would be murder of this human.

But that's just me being the pro-life person I am.

 

[ANARCHit3cht]

I am for it. Even though I believe that it is wrong, I am for it. It really is their choice. While that fetus could grow up to be a child, it wouldn't be wanted, or have a pretty bad life. They get abortion's because they don't the child, or simply can't own one. That could be due to emotional problems, or parents or whatever. I think, that if it was illegal lots of more people would end up dead. Teenage girls who didn't want one, would pay somebody who said that they could give them an abortion even if all that person used was a coat hanger. I am all for it, despite how much I think it is wrong.

 

[wolf]

I am definitely anti-abortion. Doing it takes away a life that could have done great things, I think it is like murder.

 

[Spinor]

Ok, so let me explain a few things.

The date of Birth is the day a person comes into the world.

A soul is pretty much the human essence in a body that gives consciousness.

However, a fetus isn't human because it can't provide for itself, as long as it is dependent on other systems, like any other human system, it is part of that body.

At the point were the fetus doesn't NEED the mother, when it can finally survive on its own outside even for a few minutes, then it is human, because it was able to live using its systems, but wasn't able to for long because of lack of development.

Before that point is objected. Its almost like as if an arm could lift something, but not for long because the muscle isn't developed by exercise enough. It was still capable.

Usually, a baby can survive at least some time by the time the third trimester comes by. However it still develops for higher chance of survival.

So in conclusion, adding by my last post, an abortion is Ok if it was unwanted due to rape in the first trimester, frowned upon in the second trimester, and probably illegal in the third trimester.

Because a fetus isn't human if it is dependent on another body.

 

[Penguin13]

Well for me, no matter what the case is, it's murder.

(Prepare for me to go a little religious here.)
If that girl ended up getting pregnant, rape or otherwise, it was part of God's plan for her. But if she aborts it, taking that innocent life would be interfering with God's plan. Everything happens for a reason. And remember, a baby is God's opinion that life should go on.

Hrm.. EVERYTHING happens for a reason?
Does an innocent teen getting murdered in a drive-by shooting because they were standing by the target happen for a reason?
Does a child get born with a horrible, debilitating, deadly disease for a reason?
Does thousands of innocent people getting killed in a terrorist attack happen for a reason?

If so, please explain to me the reason. Please.

(I'd get more into the religious aspect of this, but I want to stick to the topic at hand. Maybe another time.)

And now for my opinion on abortion:

People choose to get abortions because they are not ready to have a baby. Whether it be financially, emotionally, or otherwise. I'm not speaking in terms of a case-by-case basis, but in general.

Sure, there are people who go out and have unprotected sex and just get an abortion. Sure, there are people that get raped. Sure, there are people that just can't afford it. Sure, there are honest accidents, such as a slipped or broken condom, ineffective birth control, etc. But really, if someone is dumb enough to have unprotected sex because they CAN get an abortion, they're too dumb to have a baby anyway.

Not everyone is a devout [religion]. Please don't force people to suffer just because YOU think it's wrong; Church and state were separated for a reason.

 

[luke]

I support abortion. I'm not one to support telling people what do (no matter how gross it is).

 

[Volkner's Apprentice]

I'm anti-abortion for most cases. If the woman was raped, any incest occurs, or it's an extreme danger to the woman's life I support having the decision to remove the pre-child ASAP.

Otherwise, my response is don't have sex, ya lame-os. Sex is special and not part of an initial love process. I'm not preaching abstinence, but I do believe that couples should definitely be together for quite a long time before they consider it. Not that people don't have the ability to really get to know each other fast enough so that process quickens, but seriously...can't you like, wait? XD Self-control. Sex isn't an activity you do because you and your loved one are bored on a Friday night.

In my recent love of genetic sciences, I'm going to bring a slightly iffy topic in. I also support abortion if genetic testing during the first trimester proves that the child may have a serious genetic disease or mental disability is likely. There is no reason any being of life should have to go through the torture of living a life as a mentally disabled person. With todays testing, many of the possibilities can be determined well in advanced, as long as the couple agrees to it as a worthwhile expense before/during pregnancy (which of course, it definitely is.) I mean..a lifespan of 30 years at best, a gigantically difficult life in school/career building, a hardtime making friends?..it's too hard to cope with. Not to mention the stress, strain, and pressure of all varities it puts on the caretakers. If it can be stopped, it should be.

 

[wolf]

I'm anti-abortion for most cases. If the woman was raped, any incest occurs, or it's an extreme danger to the woman's life I support having the decision to remove the pre-child ASAP.

Otherwise, my response is don't have sex, ya lame-os. Sex is special and not part of an initial love process. I'm not preaching abstinence, but I do believe that couples should definitely be together for quite a long time before they consider it. Not that people don't have the ability to really get to know each other fast enough so that process quickens, but seriously...can't you like, wait? XD Self-control. Sex isn't an activity you do because you and your loved one are bored on a Friday night.

In my recent love of genetic sciences, I'm going to bring a slightly iffy topic in. I also support abortion if genetic testing during the first trimester proves that the child may have a serious genetic disease or mental disability is likely. There is no reason any being of life should have to go through the torture of living a life as a mentally disabled person. With todays testing, many of the possibilities can be determined well in advanced, as long as the couple agrees to it as a worthwhile expense before/during pregnancy (which of course, it definitely is.) I mean..a lifespan of 30 years at best, a gigantically difficult life in school/career building, a hardtime making friends?..it's too hard to cope with. Not to mention the stress, strain, and pressure of all varities it puts on the caretakers. If it can be stopped, it should be.

Agreed all the way! That is what I think.

 

[Tinhead Bruce]

@ Sublimea long time ago: I haven't had time to read all these posts, but if everything happens for a reason, then obviously the "baby " (not really) being aborted is part of the almighty gosh's plan as well. You can't just say that all things happen for a reason, and then contradict your own statement by saying that by doing something you are going against the big dude in the sky's plan.

I live in a very politically active, and liberal city, and through that I am well-informed. I am pro choice. I think it is situational, but I support choice in most cases.

However, there are some situations I do not think an abortion is in order. Not because "it goes against God's plan," but because I think it's taking the easy way out. Say a young girl gets pregnant, not through incest or rape. Getting an abortion takes a huge emotional and physical toll, but the girl is basically getting a pass by having the ability to get an abortion. Making the girl have the baby will teach her life lessons, and make her learn. I believe in this situation only if the family of the girl is stable enough to take care of the baby.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

Religion aside, I think that even scientifically life begins at conception simply because you're dealing with living, human cells.

So, to me it is morally wrong. But, I think there can be some exceptions. In general, I would say pro-choice simply because the options are basically everything or nothing. Most of my opinions on controversial topics generally lie in a grey, middle area. But that's never an option, so I have to pick one of them. XD

For me, I think it should be available to expectant mothers where going through with child birth would be harmful or even deadly to her. I think the option should also be available to those who were raped and other such extreme cases. I would prefer that they give the child up for adoption instead, but that's not my decision to make.

Other than that, no. Not really for it. Seems weird to me that in one room in the hospital you'll be having an abortion and in the room next door they're trying to save a premature baby. I don't want to see it become an active form of birth control (not opposed to contraception except for when it takes place after the fact). I would like to think that most women would not take advantage of it if the option is available, but... it's all about convenience. More new mothers are having C-sections out of convenience and not necessity despite it actually being riskier than the traditional route. So, it wouldn't surprise me and I'd rather it be avoided.

Also, partial birth abortions = no.

 

[jasonresno]

Huh. No.
I have an adopted sister, and I've been to many adoption centers.
The chance of getting adopted and living a better life is as common as winning the loterry. I could feel the suffering of the children that were imprisoned there.

Also, 'life' itself is something very relative.
Anyone who comes saying 'potential of life', 'to be life', 'almost life', please, be more specific. Because I fail to see a point in that.

edit;
And agreeing with matt561 below. Please, keep religion out of this.

For those of faith, they have the right to let their religion influence their beliefs and decisions. And, in fact, it's expected of them.

With that said: I am a religious person but even I've come to a more liberal stance on abortion.

First off: Nobody is PRO abortion. Nobody wants to kill unborn children. Nobody wants to be put in that situation. So I think that moniker is completely wrong and misleading. I think the question should be: Should abortions be legal or no.

And I think they should be legal but extremely regulated. They should only be used:
--To save the life of the Woman.
--Or in the event of rape.

There is no other way I could possibly see abortions being alright. Abortions are not a form of birth control. Abortions are not for the reckless Ashley and Joes that say "We don't need a condom.".

But the sad fact is that if a woman wants an abortion then she'll find a way to have one...with or without the clinic. And that's scary.

and whyyy must everywhere I turn there be heavy topics to discuss that I can't keep out of.

Ughah.

 

[Blitzballer]

I think this is a bad title for the thread. No one is really pro-abortion. You can be pro-choice, but pro-abortion would imply that you think abortion is the only logical answer all the time. Same with anti-abortion, which implies that you'd do anything to stop it (say, blow up an abortion clinic). Most of you won't agree with me on that last one, but I'm going by terminology. Now, pro-life, on the other hand, means you agree with the preservation of life.

Now, my lecture aside...I'm taking the legal side. I think a woman has a right to get an abortion, regardless of her reasoning. That doesn't mean that I would chose abortion, but I think it's her choice. Also, if she isn't allowed to get it, she'd go to some back-alley doctor to do it, or do it herself, and probably end hurting herself. I would accept teenage pregnancy as a reason to get an abortion, or rape/incest. I don't like it when people abort a fetus because of mental disability. I think it is also acceptable if the mother's life is in danger (i.e. ectopic pregnancy).

Also, lets be real here people. The majority of people get abortions for reasons above. I don't think it'd be fair to lump those abortions in with the abortions that take place in China, for example. I'm talking about their method for decreasing their population.

I have other reasons to justify my stance, but that's the gist of it.

 

[jasonresno]

I think this is a bad title for the thread. No one is really pro-abortion. You can be pro-choice, but pro-abortion would imply that you think abortion is the only logical answer all the time. Same with anti-abortion, which implies that you'd do anything to stop it (say, blow up an abortion clinic). Most of you won't agree with me on that last one, but I'm going by terminology. Now, pro-life, on the other hand, means you agree with the preservation of life.

Now, my lecture aside...I'm taking the legal side. I think a woman has a right to get an abortion, regardless of her reasoning. That doesn't mean that I would chose abortion, but I think it's her choice. Also, if she isn't allowed to get it, she'd go to some back-alley doctor to do it, or do it herself, and probably end hurting herself. I would accept teenage pregnancy as a reason to get an abortion, or rape/incest. I don't like it when people abort a fetus because of mental disability. I think it is also acceptable if the mother's life is in danger (i.e. ectopic pregnancy).

Also, lets be real here people. The majority of people get abortions for reasons above. I don't think it'd be fair to lump those abortions in with the abortions that take place in China, for example. I'm talking about their method for decreasing their population.

I have other reasons to justify my stance, but that's the gist of it.

Doesn't it seem absurd that the child should suffer for the woman's mistake (assuming the pregnancy was caused because of unprotected consensual sex)? I think teens should have to own up for their mistakes as well.

But you did flesh out the big problem. If a woman is denied at a legitimate clinic she'll find her own way to do it and hurt herself in the process. That's the catch 22 of the situation.

 

[Blitzballer]

Doesn't it seem absurd that the child should suffer for the woman's mistake (assuming the pregnancy was caused because of unprotected consensual sex)? I think teens should have to own up for their mistakes as well.

But you did flesh out the big problem. If a woman is denied at a legitimate clinic she'll find her own way to do it and hurt herself in the process. That's the catch 22 of the situation.

This is my honest question: In the early stages, does a fetus feel pain, etc.?

If I had to answer this, I'd say no, because there isn't a nervous system. If someone'd like to explain this to me (in a scientific, not religious, way), I'd be happy to listen.

And to answer you're question (even though I think it was rhetorical), I don't think it's absurd. Based on the answer I just gave to my own question (haha), I think bringing a child into the world to an unfit mother is worse, because it's just continuing the circle. Now, this isn't even considering adoption. That has it's downsides/problems, but it's my preferred solution to the teen pregnancy problem.

Regardless of how I feel about abortion of a teen pregnancy, I think the teen has every legal right to get one.

 

[jasonresno]

That's the thing though. I don't think it matters if a fetus can feel pain at all because the bottom line is that, if left alone, a child will be born. That's all I need to know.

What if your mother, at the time, wasn't fit to have a kid. What if she had aborted you? Say your best friends mother didn't look fit to have a kid and decided to just abort her? That's the line you walk with abortions. Maybe a fetus doesn't feel pain. Maybe that question is irrelevant. What is relevant is that there IS a child waiting to be born.

The what-if game is crazy. And this is me speaking completely without my religious bias. What if Obama had been aborted? What if Einstein had been aborted? To lose life before it's even been truly granted just seems so tragic.

I think I've come full circle on this issue. And just a disclaimer: If my views rub you the wrong way just let me know. I don't mean to get anyone upset and if you let me know I'll be sure to keep my posts in check.

 

[doesn't matter]

I guess no one read icomeanon6's link? Here's a link to the entire book.

And some of my favourite quotes.

A Realtime ultrasound video tape and movie of a 12- week suction abortion is commercially available as, The Silent Scream, narrated by Dr. B. Nathanson, a former abortionist. It dramatically, but factually, shows the pre-born baby dodging the suction instrument time after time, while its heartbeat doubles in rate. When finally caught, its body being dismembered, the baby's mouth clearly opens wide — hence, the title...

and in other chapters...

In this method, the abortionist must first paralyze the cervical muscle ring (womb opening) and then stretch it open. This is difficult because it is hard or "green" and not ready to open. He then inserts a hollow plastic tube, which has a knife-like edge on the tip, into the uterus. The suction tears the baby's body into pieces. He then cuts the deeply rooted placenta from the inner wall of the uterus. The scraps are sucked out into a bottle (see color photo in back of book). The suction is 29 times more powerful than a home vacuum cleaner.

Because of these problems, the D&E or Dilatation & Evacuation method was developed and largely replaced the above. It involves the live dismemberment of the baby and piecemeal removal from below.

A pliers-like instrument is used because the baby's bones are calcified, as is the skull. There is no anesthetic for the baby. The abortionist inserts the instrument up into the uterus, seizes a leg or other part of the body, and, with a twisting motion, tears it from the baby's body. This is repeated again and again. The spine must be snapped, and the skull crushed to remove them. The nurse's job is to reassemble the body parts to be sure that all are removed.

If you can't guess, I'm pro-life.

@I'm Betting On Alice: You're wrong.

@jasonresno: Why are you apologising? There is no need to.

Also, everyone should refrain from involving religion in this, just because your beliefs don't apply to everyone.

 

[Aether]

I don't really understand the huge deal people make over this controversy, but I do personally believe a woman has the right to do whatever the heck she wants with what's inside her body.

.02

 

[Melody]

Personally, I'm a Pro-Lifer. I do not condone abortion. Now, I'm not going to sit here and try to rattle off the moral reasons why or anything like that, because to be perfectly honest, I'm not a bible thumper.

I do believe that abortion should be allowed in certain situations. Only if the health of the Mother and/or Child are in extreme danger, should there be an option to abort. If there is a medical condition where the birth is likely to kill the mother or cause harm to the child, then abortion isn't really wrong. So I'm against any law which would completely ban abortion. I just think that expecting mothers shouldn't be able to walk into any clinic or doctor's office or whatever and ask for one. It should be a highly regulated procedure.

Now I know you Pro-Choice fans will probably gripe at me for this, but not even being raped is a good enough reason to abort a child. If the mother and child are healthy, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO ABORT.

If the mother doesn't feel like she is capable of taking proper care of the child, she should be able to (within the child's first year of life), put the child up for adoption, without fear of penalty by law or society. There are plenty of couples who would love to have children, but cannot have one themselves because either the male or female is sterile, or have other medical problems.

Just to clarify, I'm not against contraceptive measures, like the morning after pill. That's not too bad either. I'm just saying that abortions ought to be heavily regulated. as for rape victims, abortion shouldn't be an option after a set timeframe. So if a woman is raped, but she keeps her mouth shut about it and ends up finding out she's pregnant a month later....it's her own fault for not reporting it and having herself checked immediately afterward.

Also, if it's still in the embryonic stage, I really dont consider it a person until it reaches the Fetus stage.

 

[Idiot!]

I am pro-choice. Different people, different opinion, different response. So, just because it's murder to you doesn't mean it is murder to someone else. That's why pregnant women should have a choice to abort or not to abort. It's pretty simple when it comes to the legality(if the word exists) of abortion. Let the girls decide. Men can never get pregnant naturally, so who's to say men should decide if abortion is legal or not.

 

[doesn't matter]

I don't really understand the huge deal people make over this controversy, but I do personally believe a woman has the right to do whatever the heck she wants with what's inside her body.

.02

Back in the day people could do whatever they wanted to their slaves, including ending their life. The only difference now is that people think it's alright to kill a life because of it's age, handicap and place of location.

And what's inside her body isn't just a "thing". It's a human life. A unique human life. It may be her body, but not her life. Plus, half of the murdered kids are male.

Personally, I'm a Pro-Lifer. I do not condone abortion. Now, I'm not going to sit here and try to rattle off the moral reasons why or anything like that, because to be perfectly honest, I'm not a bible thumper.

I do believe that abortion should be allowed in certain situations. Only if the health of the Mother and/or Child are in extreme danger, should there be an option to abort. If there is a medical condition where the birth is likely to kill the mother or cause harm to the child, then abortion isn't really wrong. So I'm against any law which would completely ban abortion. I just think that expecting mothers shouldn't be able to walk into any clinic or doctor's office or whatever and ask for one. It should be a highly regulated procedure.

Now I know you Pro-Choice fans will probably gripe at me for this, but not even being raped is a good enough reason to abort a child. If the mother and child are healthy, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO ABORT.

If the mother doesn't feel like she is capable of taking proper care of the child, she should be able to (within the child's first year of life), put the child up for adoption, without fear of penalty by law or society. There are plenty of couples who would love to have children, but cannot have one themselves because either the male or female is sterile, or have other medical problems.

Just to clarify, I'm not against contraceptive measures, like the morning after pill. That's not too bad either. I'm just saying that abortions ought to be heavily regulated. as for rape victims, abortion shouldn't be an option after a set timeframe. So if a woman is raped, but she keeps her mouth shut about it and ends up finding out she's pregnant a month later....it's her own fault for not reporting it and having herself checked immediately afterward.

Also, if it's still in the embryonic stage, I really dont consider it a person until it reaches the Fetus stage.

If the health of the child is in danger an abortion won't help it o_o
If both lives are in danger and both can be saved, fantastic! But it's usually the case that whenever the mother has to have an abortion or else she'll be risking her life, the child is already doomed anyway, so it's better to save one life than to doom both. The problem now is that abortion is mostly used to kill one life instead of saving one.

You're right about the lack of regulation regarding abortion. Accurate records aren't even kept, plus the procedure differs greatly to the way other surgeries are carried out.

from here

I don't understand why you're okay with the morning after pill, since it works in three ways, two of which are contraception, the final being an abortifacients.

Why the distinction between stages? Nothing changes in between except the child's size - it has human DNA from the start.

Also, you're not pro-life.

I am pro-choice. Different people, different opinion, different response. So, just because it's murder to you doesn't mean it is murder to someone else. That's why pregnant women should have a choice to abort or not to abort. It's pretty simple when it comes to the legality(if the word exists) of abortion. Let the girls decide. Men can never get pregnant naturally, so who's to say men should decide if abortion is legal or not.

Murder is murder. The unborn child is human in every way, and it's murder if you kill it.

It's mostly women who participate in pro-life movements, but regardless, it could be my child. It could be my grandchild. It could be my nephew, niece, or cousin.

It could just be another human life. Why can't I care for that life? Why does the rights of the mother override that of the unborn child? Why can anyone decide whether the unborn child lives or dies?

Furthermore, by your logic doctors wouldn't be able to treat a disease unless they've had the disease.