Topic: What do you think of Abortion?

[carbine]

You make a good point I forgot about those peope somehow...the people who get multiple abortions because they aren't ready...or never use any contreceptives are criminal and should be charged.

I say give these people who get pregnant and don't want it one chance to abort thier baby. I am thinking of this being a teenager that made a bad choice. If they continue to have multiple abortions then fix them.

[TheOnlySpiral]

I say give these people who get pregnant and don't want it one chance to abort thier baby. I am thinking of this being a teenager that made a bad choice. If they continue to have multiple abortions then fix them.

It wouldn't be right to fix them...charging them and giving them, jail time I am fine with.  Everyone has the right to reprodce. 

[Captain Leonidas]

Didn't mention this in my first post but I am against late-teram abortions because I feel at that point the baby is formed and is not a blob of cells. And to your last post OnlySpiral I could not agree more.

Well aren't we all for compromise

The baby may kill the mother during birth, the mother is very young and is not ready to take care of the baby, the mother is very poor and would not be able to take care of the baby, the mother is a drug/ alcohol abuser and the child may have severe mental/phyhsical problems, the baby is a product of a rape. Good enough?

The baby is going to ba abandoned in the African jungle because there is no system to take it and the village doesn't want to care for it.

All of the example of 'good excuse' you gave constitutes the lesser minority of people committing abortion. Only the first reason are more or less justified and forced option. But most abortion was for convenience sake (feeling not ready, thinly disguised economic reason, and/or social pressure like pregnancy before marriage). Like what Rasmus said, intent play a stronger part here rather than the consequence. pregnancy is a consequence of option NOT an option. Sadly most abortion occured because of INTENT not consequence (mother's death, economical reasons etc) Want to avoid pregnancy there are a wide range of contraceptives available honestly and then there is an option of staying chaste. Many abortion apparently occured on 3-4th month of pregnancy where it is more than just 'a blob of cells'. Speaking of blob of cells, we are constituted by cells too, aren't that making us liable for kills  

[carbine]

It wouldn't be right to fix them...charging them and giving them, jail time I am fine with.  Everyone has the right to reprodce. 

How is charging them and giving them jail time going to stop them from having abortions? It may change some people's mind's but still some people will still continue to have sex, and get pregnant, and have abortions. I do not think they should go to jail because jail is a place for people that are a threat to society. How is a woman that has had multiple abortions a threat to society? She has not hurt or killed anyone (arguable the baby) and does not deserve to go to jail. If there was a law that was like this (people getting fixed) then people would be aware of the consequences and would not abort a baby over and over again.
I do not think everyone has a right to reproduce. How would you like two, trashy, stupid, moronic, people to have kids. They would just raise more trash and that is something we all ready have too much of.


Commissar: Want to avoid pregnancy there are a wide range of contraceptives available honestly and then there is an option of staying chaste.

I know several people that were born and thier mother was taking contraceptives. I think it is too much to ask a human being to stay chaste. We are humans and it is in our nature to...well..you get it. So are you saying that because somone is pregnant because they have sex or because the contraceptives fail that you should punish them by making them have a baby?

[Captain Leonidas]

I know several people that were born and thier mother was taking contraceptives. I think it is too much to ask a human being to stay chaste. We are humans and it is in our nature to...well..you get it. So are you saying that because somone is pregnant because they have sex or because the contraceptives fail that you should punish them by making them have a baby?

Punish ? I think the word punish is a misuse here. No contraceptive is 100% and when one took the risk of having sex , one MUST be prepared for the pregnancy consequence. It is well-known disclaimer that no contraceptive is 100% except abstinence.
As for chastity, Too much or not too much is not up to us to generalize but individual humans. I know many men and women (religious or not) who stayed chaste until their marriage and never regretted doing so. Saves so much trouble on arguing about pre-marital consequences INCLUDING pregnancy.

[carbine]

As for chastity, Too much or not too much is not up to us to generalize but individual humans. I know many men and women (religious or not) who stayed chaste until their marriage and never regretted doing so. Saves so much trouble on arguing about pre-marital consequences INCLUDING pregnancy.

But for people who never do get married staying chaste is asking alot. Also, what if a married couple have a baby and want to abort it?

[Keetom]

I know many men and women (religious or not) who stayed chaste until their marriage and never regretted doing so. Saves so much trouble on arguing about pre-marital consequences INCLUDING pregnancy.

How old were they? How long did they wait before marriage? IMO, waiting to have sex until you are married is a foolish risk. Sex is a very big and emotionally charged part of a relationaship, and if it aint good or what you expeated or need, the relationship will suffer. So wouldn't  it have been better to discover this before you got married. I think the same for marriage before cohabitation.

As for abortion, I always said to myself and my partner that if I get pregnant (i'm on the pill), then it will have to be aborted, as I am not old enough or financially stable enough to care for it. As I am coming to the last year of my degree, this is even more important as, if I got pregnant now, I would have the baby right on top of my final exams.

Do you think that if a baby is conceived while the woman was using contraception, that the woman should be forced to keep the baby irregardless of age, wealth, mental state and what she is doing with her life at the time (e.g. at uni, serving in one of the forces, etc - something that, if stopped now for a baby, may never be continued)?

In my case, if I got pregnant now while using the pill I would have an abortion, but after my degree that will probably change. I do want kids, just not really till im at least 25. But if my partner and I could manage it then I would cope.

I think it is unfair to make a child of under 18 (my opinion) have a baby. Whether they were foolish or not, you are effectively taking away their life for the next 18 years, a childhood which they can never get back, by giving them no choice.

I have a close friend who has just had a son at 18. Unfortunately when she was both 14 and 17 she had abortions. This is an example of a person with no common sense not unsing contraception. Ever. Withdrawal does not work. Education is the key, as well as empowermment of women to value themselves more. Alot of young girls seek out pregnancy as a way to feel useful or loved and needed. This is sad.

Reduction of the need for abortion through these methods is great, but criminalising it is foolish and unfair.

That was a rant, sorry
Thoughts?

[Captain Leonidas]

How old were they? How long did they wait before marriage?

They were 24(m) and 21(f) when they got married. My uncle (unreligious heck he is). They were bf and gf since they where 16 and 13 and practically kept chaste till marriage. However after married, 10 months later my cuz is out, since they were 'hot on each other'. Another family friend who got married on 27 and 26 respectively both were also chaste but when got married they practically cant stop and ended up with 4 children and surgically blocked uterus.
But anyway its THEM not me. Nope chastity not for me. But I am well aware of my risks. Hence I commit it with contraception and calculated calendar (again, not that its 100%)

As for sex being an important part of relationship, I actually agree with you but apparently our opinion is not shared with all of the people. There are people who still thinks keeping chaste is more important than sex in relationship.

Do you think that if a baby is conceived while the woman was using contraception, that the woman should be forced to keep the baby irregardless of age, wealth, mental state and what she is doing with her life at the time (e.g. at uni, serving in one of the forces, etc - something that, if stopped now for a baby, may never be continued)?

They were forced to have sex ?

Everyone bears consequences for their own doing I believe. It is unfair for the baby (or baby to be or blob of cells) to abort it for doings that are not consequence of the baby themselves but their creators.

I am speaking on seeing the 'reasons' of abortions here. Majority was because of 'financial state' and social pressure, but when asked was the sex intentional, majority, if not all, answered yes.

With this basis I see the abortion is taken on the light of shortcut to 'freedom' or choice of life by extinguishing another life (ironically).

Reduction of the need for abortion through these methods is great, but criminalising it is foolish and unfair.

Its a rather complex situation that you call unfair as you are basically eliminating another life while mantaining it is 'my choice'. Hardly fair, no ?

But for people who never do get married staying chaste is asking alot. Also, what if a married couple have a baby and want to abort it?

Whoever said you need to be chaste during marrieage ?

Reason aka intent must be examined. There were abortions in regards the women had heart failure or entopic pregnancy. That are the cases which abortion sadly is an option.

[the solitaire]

there are situations where i can see abortion (crude word for what it is when thinking about it.. to abort) being nescessary or desirable.
most of the times though there are contraceptives like the pill and condoms and what not that can let you have sex without having a kid as well.

having sex is just a way to share your love with someone and it's a pretty nice way to do it. i see it as a nescessity in a good relationship so chastity is not an option for me.

now then, what happens when contraceptives fail?
in some cases, when in doubt, the girl can take a morning after pill or, when being late in having her period and severely in doubt there is a 1 week program of taking pills that also do the same. this in my eyes is closer to being a contraceptive the to an abortion but still is basically ejecting the newly created life in a fairly nasty way.

girls i slept with had to take the morning after pill on one or two occasions, only once the second option was nescessary and in both cases i'm fairly happy these options were available.

both relationships did not work out in the end and i do not wish to see the image of how my life would have looked like if i would have had a kid by now and had to stay with one of those girls to raise that kid.

i do believe that one needs to find teh partner that suits one best, and in doing so one needs to try different partners before being able to determine the right one.

now at the age of 26 i'm mentally ready to raise a child but haven't found that one girl yet. untill i do i will not ever doubt about discussing an abortion when that would be nescessary.

consider following: boy and girl meet up, spend a night doing some (very healthy) exercises and in the end the girl is pregnant. that isn't a completely unlikely scenario as children are born that way every day. now, if those two people do not belong together as they initially thought they did then they would better split up, yet what becomes of the infant that should be born out of this relationship?

one option would be a lonely mother having to look for a partner with the burden of a child. on occasion that works. i know some succesfull relations where one of the people already had a child, but these are rather rare. most people don't like the idea. in my opinion however children are best raised by two parents instead of just one.

a second option would be that the two people from the little story stay together to raise the child. they would not be happy since they don't fit together and teh kid grows up in a family where mommy and daddy are constantly fighting, mommy does drugs and daddy is an alcoholic (extreme example but still realistic. i've seen these falimies, i know they exist)

again, less then favourable situation.

so, if the third option would be having an abortion so both people can go on their own seperate ways without an 'accidental pregnancy' then that for me is just the best option. when a child gets born from in a future relationship it will probably have the option to grow up in a far more pleasant family situation, and when talking about humanity i think it's inhuman to force two people to hate each other and raise a child that was born through failing contraceptives where it is fully human to give both people the oppertunity to lovingly raise a child at the time they are ready for it.

[Tuisich-Anastari]

Interesting that this topic started just now.  Been cruising the internet and found this rather...well it's an article that might raise some new questions on this issue.  Take a look:  http://slate.msn.com/id/2120872/fr/ifr/nav/ais/fr/ifr/nav/ais/

On one hand, it might be usefull, but only if you consider things form a scientific point of view.  If you base things more of religion, you might consider it more of a travisty.

That article claims to be about determining when life begins, but it is actually about determining when consciousness begins.  The two are not the same.

T-A

[Col. Or'es'o (retired)]

however, consciousness is what we should value, not life.
Life is just meat, consciousness is what makes it worth anything.

[Rasmus]

So people with mental disabilities are not people then, by your definition?

[Captain Leonidas]

however, consciousness is what we should value, not life.
Life is just meat, consciousness is what makes it worth anything.

Consciousness is in an idea. Just like 'life'. If you actually take a look around, some people does not have 'consciousness' idea or are aware of their existence being of anything (courtesy of capitalism and co). Just wake up, work, reproduce, die. The question of 'meaning of life' or even purposes might come in head but then again, it might disappear in a snap and back to the giant machinaries of human society.

Concurring with Rasmus, if conscioussness is what you value, then, mentally-disabled and people with no education/knowledge about philosophy/not knowing/realizing ideas of consciousness should be exterminated or not valued as human being, no ?

[Wurzelmaniac]

So people with mental disabilities are not people then, by your definition?

They are still conscious. On another level to you and me, but conscious.

My own view is somewhat mercenary I guess.

Morally people should bear the concequences of their actions. You get told about contrception and taught how to use it (in the UK anyway). You have no excuse.

Realistically I feel that abortion is necessary. There is a justified minority and a fairly large number of borderline cases. If smeone simply isn't mature enough to care for a child something needs to be done to deal with it. If it is 'inconvenient' then maybe you should have thought about it first.

I do feel that fathers are not held accountable for their actions. It takes two to tango and if you are the partner in question you need to face some responsibility.

What I hate is the 'pro-life 'till it leaves the womb' lobby.

[Captain Leonidas]

Realistically I feel that abortion is necessary.

Agreed, but how many actually , truly, necessarily, need abortion as a matter of life and death ?

Morally people should bear the concequences of their actions. You get told about contrception and taught how to use it (in the UK anyway). You have no excuse.

There you go. Education plays a hard importance here. Anyway, I heard Uk teenagers start doing it since 14 and above. People on the other end of the earth commonly kicks it off at the age of 17 and up.

What I hate is the 'pro-life 'till it leaves the womb' lobby.

What is wrong with this actually ? Just wanting to see people's opinion. I think I fell in this category, judging from the no excuse part.

[Jarem Asyder]

Theres another factor that I dont think anyone has brought up.

before Roe vs. Wade legalized Abortion, there were a great many illegal ones taking place. And these were done without proper equipment or with dirty tools etc. These were extremely dangerous and caused alot of deaths of the mother.

Legalized abortion stops this from happening.

Most abortions take place in the first trimester to begin with. Its when you get into partial birth abortions that things get ugly, and I have a feeling thats what alot of people think of when they think of abortion.

Another thing, teen pregnancy has always been a problem and while here in the US it is starting to go down a bit, there are some programs that are not making things any better. And alot of these abstinence or condom use programs dont even reach the inner city areas, where your more likely to have abortions.

If anyone has memories of being in their mother's womb, then I'll change my ways and say that a fetus is a human being, and not just "blueprints"

[Wurzelmaniac]

What I hate is the 'pro-life 'till it leaves the womb' lobby.

What is wrong with this actually ? Just wanting to see people's opinion. I think I fell in this category, judging from the no excuse part.

I'm not sure where you fall but my comment was basically aimed at the people who want to abolish the local equivalent of the Welfare State but are 'pro-life'. It's hypocrisy at it's worst.

Anyone here seen the Jacky Fleming comics? She had the perfect one for this, I'll hunt it down.

[Captain Leonidas]

If anyone has memories of being in their mother's womb, then I'll change my ways and say that a fetus is a human being, and not just "blueprints"

Do you remember what is happening in your sleep ? Do you remember what happened when you were one year old ? two years ? three years ? What was your youngest memory? If you are having amnesia for one reason or another does that make you liable of being suspended from the status of 'human being' ? If memory constitutes human being, I'd tell you, so many humans would be liable for termination.

[Col. Or'es'o (retired)]

So people with mental disabilities are not people then, by your definition?

Course they are, however brain dead people are only potential people at best (presuming they can recover).

Concurring with Rasmus, if conscioussness is what you value, then, mentally-disabled and people with no education/knowledge about philosophy/not knowing/realizing ideas of consciousness should be exterminated or not valued as human being, no ?

No. As above; mentally disabled peeps, or peeps who lack education are no less conscious then me. However, they should have some experience of the world, if not they are just potential people (without something to analyse the brain is not conscious).

 

[Plato XXIV]

and if the woman doesn't want the baby they can give birth and take it to an emergency room within 2 days of its birth so it can be given to someone else. at least in the U.S.