Actually they are. At least they are by a significant segment, albeit minority, of the population if the polling data is any indication. However, if you are speaking in terms of a broad societal context, the root of the issue is that the culture places its emphasis on rights and thus has relativized the value of human life.
The essence of the Roe v. Wade decision, boiled down to its essentials, was that life has no objective value but is only a subjective individual judgment. Thus, the state has no standing to step in to protect the child as it is not a standard to which the law can recur.
That is also, by the way, why the limitation on abortions - beyond the standard rape, incest and life of the mother exception - has been shifting. Originally, abortion after the the third trimester was not permitted. Then, as technology has identified more characteristics of human life at earlier stages of gestational development, the standard has begun to shift to viability, i. e., that moment when the child can live independent of the mother.
Of course, science has moved viability itself to earlier and earlier stages of development. Thus, the line is vague and the law is turning handstands trying to avoid defining the moment when life can be held to exist as an objective scientific - and therefore presumably moral - and legal standard.
Which is also why states like Alabama keep writing tougher abortion laws that prima facie fly in the face of the Roe v. Wade decision. They are trying to force the courts - legislatures had the decision taken out of their hands by the Roe v. Wade decision - to define when life begins and thereby force the issue to the Supreme Court and in turn thereby force its overturning.
All of these legal/political questions aside, the broad societal indifference to abortion is because the culture - coming out of the Enlightenment - have made natural rights the defining characteristic of the human animal. In that context, the "right to life" has been juxtaposed to the "right to choose" and there is no objective standard to resolve that question.
So the law - and the culture more broadly - has basically thrown up its hands and periodically tried to offer some arbitrary standard - i. e. third trimester or viability - but in general is saying, in effect, "We can't decide, so you decide."
The problem of course that it then reduces the culture to an ethic of power. The individual with the power gets to decide and the other side is either denied its rights because it cannot articulate and defend them, or simply has its very humanity defined away. This then begging the question that if it is not life, when does it become life and what is the objective defining difference one second before that moment and one moment after.
We shape our laws and then our laws shape us. Roe v. Wade was both a product of its times and has since reinforced the ethic of those times. The law increasingly, it was believed, and still is to a great degree, should withdraw from moral questions, neglecting that, as Burke said, "The true principles of politics are those of morality enlarged."
That is why the contemporary political debate is so shrill - particularly as relates to abortion. The nation is engaged in a moral argument but is unaware of it. Thus principles clash without any underlying understanding of the pedigree of the ideas and the moral standards that underpin them.
Consequently, abortion is not seen as a moral issue for a large segment of the population because the emphasis is on rights, and thereby by default autonomy and thus power. The humanity of the unborn child is therefore never considered or is deemed a subjective judgment in which society, through the law, can have no say.
Suffice to say, historically, that line of reasoning has some bad historical precedents. Once the definition of life becomes subjective, it becomes arbitrary and subject to other secondary considerations. Not good, but there it is.
3
0 Reply
Most Helpful Opinions
Anonymous
(25-29)
+1 y
That's because people are living under different world views. One world view says God creates all life and is in control. The other says life created itself and we are in control. Both views put us in responsibility for our actions, but only God's view acknowledges the source, meaning, and value of life. Those that respect God realize when life starts and that wrongfully taking a life is murder. Those that disregard God believe they control life and decide when it starts, ends, value, and its meaning. less than 5% of abortions are incest, complications, and or rape. That argument is a crutch as 19 times more are pure selfishness/irresponsibility on both parents. At the end of life Jesus judges the life and if you didn't repent and accept his sacrifice, this is one of the many acts that leads to Hell.
When I was a child my father, a provincially hired social worker, assisted our neighbor with the foster kids she was in care of. He got the funding to have a ramp built onto her house. He got the old 1980s wheelchair, a pile of absolute garbage she struggled to push up a small incline, replaced with a modern one.
She wasn't on his caseload. The social worker who was supposed to help her & the kids she fostered in a highly religious area where abortion was frowned up could not give one shit about them. Whatsoever. Just as how the "parents" (disgusting as it is to call such dogs parents) could not give one shit about their disabled children abandoned as if no more than trash on the side of the road.
People I've found who harp about abortion just do it to feel special about themselves. They judge when, if religious, they've no more right than a toad to judge others.
More often than not such self-righteous people care little if not not at all for the parents who may have disabled children, who may not have the mental capabilities themselves, who may be unfit financially or through addiction to raise children properly. And they couldn't care less for the children whose disabilities may mean they'll live short lives full of pain, who may be bullied for their entire lives, who may be abandoned into care where they are abused (physically, mentally & sexually), or who are brought up in terrible conditions with parents so stoned or drunk or drug addled they can't even set aside $20 for some food (like the 7 year old I found as a teen panhandling cause his worthless parents were too stoned to even get out of bed).
Well if they didn't want a kid they should've used protection. Now the innocent kid had to suffer for their parent's mistake.
Many women can't bare children and seeing some people abort their kid breaks my heart. It's not about that bullshit called women's choice, it's about taking responsibility for your actions.
As for rape cases, it's not the girl's fault so she shouldn't blame herself and the kid inside her.
There should be a law where rapist get their dick surgically cut off.
And abortions a fetus that was conceived from rape and not “blaming” it. Many women just don’t want to carry her rapists child and that is extremely understanding. Nobody should be forced to have to do that.
You used him or her, but in early stages it is just undefined cells... not a living being with organs... it is no different to scrapping off cells from anyone's body... If someone has carried something to to the point that it could survive loosely without reliance on the mother, killing it would be inhumane (mainly because if it survives the process it will be a living thing suffering as it hasn't developed enough to live but enough to suvive)... but early stage tissue is just cells... no brain no conscious thought, so not human... you might as well scold people for mastabating or having their period as it is basically the same
I am reading both my answer and several others, im somewhat changed I believe. Whether its called murder or not, it very ofter stops a child from living in bad situations. Lookingwithin, it also does something much more profound to the fetus. It never feels love never feels at all, never grows to its own beautiful children, stopping an possible avenue of children, families etc from ever even existing. Abortion , i believed was a alternative to being tied down with an unwanted child. So we decide thats he's unwanted, maybe he grows, cures cancer, frees a nation or paints masterpieces, wwhat if he feels so strongly about a problem like poveety that he finds a solution? And even if he never accomplishes great things, he still is a natural masterpiece, can see hundreds of colors, feels, has someone hell love, and many emotions, thoughts and 10,000 other senses or experiences , he could matter to someone else father a poet or magician, be a great author or poet. All this plus his thousand dreams never happen, the place alloted on his Earth remains cold and forever empty. Every challenge, explanation, thought or promis he would make never even is allowed to happen. What have I been thinking? How can I remedy this when there's nothing to remedy. I didn't think, i was too busy, I saw the sunset but never eemembered its color and majesty. All things shall pass, but when it can't experience that thing because he never existed, my God! I was just too young to help care for him, she asked but I forgot to give an answer, my God! What do I do now, where has my child hiddenwhere can I hide?
Please read what i wrote or tried to, i never even stopped to consider my boy, never even gave him any chance, i was supposed to nurture him and protect him but i didn't even let him meet me, i can't facwe God now, what have i done? Oh my god,
@Rocco7070 as you've said maybe he does that, maybe he would be worse tha Hitler was. We can give a good or bad maybe, but neither is a reality so it's a zero sum game.
@Rocco7070 sucks to be you, I live a guilt free life, I'm the single dad of a 2 year old and she's a beacon of joy. You can keep your gift of guilt, and your personal experience and emotions don't affect my beliefs that stem from logic and verifiable facts
That is not how things work. Tell me WHY it should be immoral. Is it because you think it should be immoral? Because if it is, that shit dont fly here.
Now lets break this down. The more we look into life and what life means the more complicated things become. This brings problems such as trying to define a human life. To cut a long story short we can't necessarily point towards anything physically and say "That is a human person". You can consider this the hunt for the "human soul" if you want and so far we have found jack shit. The closest we have found is the brain which just seam to be another vital organ since it can be modified through surgery without necessarily killing the person.
So that leaves us with a distinction between the human body and SOMETHING going on in the brain that is unique to you as a person. Of those the body is not really all that important. We can add, remove and change it around more or less however much we want but we do generally consider it as an intimate property of the individual in question which gives it some rights by association.
What is important is that SOMETHING in the brain. That is the essence of you as an individual. That is what gives you your human rights and what someone destroys when they murder you. The body? Do you feel bad when you cut your hair? When your skin dies and is replaced? Do you give human rights to your left if you were to have it cut off?
Even when you as a person, that SOMETHING, dies.. parts of your body still lives on. Body functions like digesting food for example still continues for a while after and muscles can still do their job. Your perception of the situation is irrelevant, once that "something" dies you are considered dead even if your entire body still functions. No matter how alive and "human" you look at that moment you are still dead. Your heart can still beat. Your bodily functions can still continue. You can still have brain activity. Your muscles can still move around but you are dead.
Enough beating around the bush. Lets talk about fetuses. I hope I have perfectly well demonstrated that being alive and "alive" is two different things. Just because a fetus moves around does not mean its alive in a human individual sense. Just because a fetus has brain activity does not mean it has that "something" in its brain making it alive. No matter how feature complete their body is or how much their heart beats does not mean they are alive.
None of those are the definition of "alive" that we are thinking of when we consider a human being as all of those things exists independently of that. Now the thing is, we do not know what that "SOMETHING" is. We can not point to the exact moment it goes from nothing to "SOMETHING". What we can do is point out when that is impossible. Where it can't exist which is why there is a period of time where we are confident that we can have an abortion without having to kill a human life because that does not exist yet.
Up until the point where that "SOMETHING" is developed the fetus is just an extension of the womans body and just like hair she can decide what to do with it which includes removing it. So tell me. Why should we see abortion as immoral?
@Soteris I understand your argument and I respect it by the way. But regardless of my personal views on the topic, I find your argument not comprehensive or neutral enough. But before going there, I find it strange that you would argue not placing any limits on when to terminate a pregnancy just because the number of days is still debated within the scientifuc community. Basically, you are saying we will continue to end third trimester pregnancies (as an example) until someone says we have proved scientifically that that was wrong. With no regard to the lost or ethics of doctors oath of doing no harm. Just bare with me a second here. Today we know that babies born in their third trimaster actually can live and survive fine and healthy. This was a break though and never thought to be the case few decades ago. Knowing we can't give life and with your logic, we would of not even tried to save something believed to be 'not alive'. And no one should of bothered even developing technologies trying to save third trimaster pregnancies (waste of resources and time). Moreover, today doctors and scientists are trying the same and to save second trimaster pregnancies. But should we invest in saving something that carries no value more than your nail, hair, or dead skin? And what if they succeed. Did you, me, the doctors cause any harm in that case by terminating all these second trimester pregnancies already? who will be held liable or accountable?
There is more to say about when the feeling of pain starts and how much of that gets carried as trauma to the brain and behavior of a baby after birth. The fetus is the baby so that continuity is missed often and it is usually treated as if it is two different creatures. But are they? Now, before debating pain and the method of which these terminations are conducted especially third trimester terminations. Just watch videos of the procedure. It will give you prospective why I mentioned the ability to feel pain here. Then parallel to that read what research say about fetus memory and gained knowledge during pregnancy. That gets carried out after birth. But I am not debating that now. I just think you need to look at the topic more holistically and not only from one aspect.
You see another reason why I think your logic is not comprehensive is because when debating ethical or moral issues like reviving a human extent species, or cloning adults for the commercial use to supply organs for transplants, or mexing human and animals genetics. There are more questions need to be asked than the limits of science today. To be careful and cautious in setting boundaries is the usual rule followed by scientist. The same goes for when does mercy killing becomes a murder?
Debating a moral issue or an ethical issue was never bound with what today's technology can or cannot prove. That's why your logic is not comprehensive in discussing this topic from all aspects. Anyway, I enjoyed reading your comment but I thought it is good to share some food for thoughts.
@mindNsoul That is a misunderstanding. I specifically did not mention any time-limit because that is not my argument and quite frankly I am not knowledgeable enough or interested enough in trying to define when the threshold should be. All I know is that whatever the limit currently is decided on the ethical question of the personhood of the fetus. It is also the central question in who has the right since the womans rights to an abortion is based on the idea that without the fetus having its own personhood its an extension of the womans own body and she has the authority.
There is also a large difference between viability and a human person. Technically speaking we have artificial wombs like this:
Combined with our ability to take sperm cells and artificially inseminate eggs we can "save" any egg and sperm until they become a living child. It does not mean that cum now has human rights. The future viability of their personhood does not mean they are a person already and just like how the body can survive after you are dead it can survive BEFORE you are alive.
@mindNsoul Likewise bodily functions like pain is not an indication of human life since again, life can exists without it such as people who can't feel pain and the body can also react to "pain" without the brain such as reflexive motions. Even mental functions is not necessarily part of you either since the body does a lot of complicated stuff including mental stuff to "assist" you as a consciousness to make decisions for the body.
A good example is for example your heartbeat. Its not something you do yourself or how about all the trickery your body does with what your eyes see before your consciousness experience like flipping the image upside down, merging two images together, applying extra colors, rewriting memories and quite frankly fucking time travel just so that you get a cohesive viewing experience. These things are not really fundamental to your life, granted living without them would be afoul.
It is obvious we are talking about different arguments of the same issue. But that was my point exactly to bigen with. We should objectively look into each of these arguments and not only one of them while ignoring others. I said from the beginning that I understand your argument and I respect it. So I didn't even debate when life starts. All I was trying to do is to explore other aspects with you. To make sure that we are fair, comprehensive and neutral with our approach to takle the asker's question if it's moral. Never I said your points were not valid either.
Medically/ technically speaking sperms and eggs are not a fetus. The most adopted and accepted threshold for ending unwanted healthy pregnancies is 6 weeks globally. It is the medical number and in some religions it is set at 40 days. Pretty close to the medical duration. That's when the heart starts beating by the way. Anyway, I actually liked the way you state your arguments and I have to apologize for my English. I try to look at the issue holistically. We all know that 'life' starts inside the mother we just don't know when. I agree to that. But women don't exactly carry their babies for nine months. Even with natural births that is different. Plus and minus give or take. So a third trimaster pregnancy after the 8th month considered alive. Because even without intervention a baby can survive a birth. Yet, some women do chose third trimaster abortions. Which at that stage the baby feels pain, hears voices, have cognitive ability, and heartbeat. The baby experience stress and fear according to research. So is a one day old baby who was carried for eight months born at home naturally alive? or he is still an extension of his mother as long the umbilical cord still attached and she can chose to kill him with a knife?
Also, third trimester pregnancies are ended by enduced heart attacks to the baby. It can take days and sometimes the baby survive the heart attack so they do it all over again. Using a needle directed to its heart. Why waiting that long to end a pregnancy? and who protects the baby? Will a mother be accepted to do that even hours after labor? So what is the value of a day or two to decide in this example whether it is okay or not?
I don't have the answers. But we can't just look at this from one angle only and ignore all others. And remember, children used to be considered the property of their parents like women were to their husbands and fathers. Honor killings, child marriages, and the burry of young girls were tribal rituals for centuries. People believed it was their right. But we developed as a society and now we consider the idea crazy. We said your child is not your property to decide whether they live or not. So will we change our views in the future about those who terminate a third trimaster pregnancy following that logic and considering they can survive alone without their mothers. I don't know but someone needs to advocate and at least talk about it objectively.
Again pain by itself is not an indication but the fact that after birth that trauma still registers in the brain and carries out to the baby's life is the important factor here. Because that's the realm of consciousness and unconsciousness which is the difference between a physical response in your examples and your response if you lost a leg as you will be aware of it and feel it. Which leads me to the second point, you are confusing muscle movement with feeling. Muscle movement can even be induced to a fully paralyzed person through electricity. Feeling pain however is defirent. Adding that the fetus carries this feeling/ trauma to his baby status as one creature and not two separate creatures.
I keep asking you to try and look at it from other aspects combined with your first argument 'when life starts' but I can see that you are unwilling to. which is fine. I'm going to leave it here and wish you a pleasant day.
Wow, your mom should have aborted you because you are obviously not alive by my definition. Science doesn't know shit. But it will be God who will be the final judge, not us as to whether it was murder or not.
Of course any man who wants to fuck freely and not have to pay child support for 18 years would have your view. Hey babe, I am not going to use a condom. But if you get pregnant I'll pay for the abortion. What a putz!
@Daniela1982 its funny how often I see pro lifers wishing death upon walking, talking human beings. Clumps of cells are more important to you than people who think differently. Is there a stronger word than bigot? Because that's you, sweetpea
@TienShenhan A clump of cells until a certain point. Do you by any chance recall Partial Birth Abortions? That is where the full term baby is delivered except the head. Then a suction tube is inserted into the head to suck the brains out. How can anyone think that this is not murder by all moral standards? That is why it was outlawed but at one time it was legal. So just because abortion is legal now doesn't make it moral. I agree that in some cases , like if a mother's life may be in danger , it can fly. But a life is a life. Using abortion as a lazy ass bitche's means of birth control is not moral. If you don't want to get pregnant have your fucking tubes tied! How hard can that be?
@Daniela1982 its not so black and white. Way too many women have babies before they are even 20, when they should be waiting until they are 30. As a Country we are not sustaining our rapidly snowballing population, and if it wasn't for abortions it would be even worse. I'm glad that it's an option, especially for people in impoverished areas
@TienShenhan That is because these twats spend more time sexting guys then paying attention in sex Ed. classes because the think they know it all, which they obviously don't. These twats think they have to have sex and give blow jobs in order to have a boy friend. WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK?
@TienShenhan No, my objection is girls thinking they have to have sex at all to have to have someone who actually gives a fuck about them other than a fuck hole.
@MzAsh So you are one who doesn't give a shit about human life? Why don't you get your tubes tied then so you never get pregnant? Then you can screw to your heart's content and never feel guilty, if you would at all. Have you ever thought about what kind of loving person would be that you aborted? Or do you just have no soul?
@MzAsh Mz Ash wants to fuck to her heart's content. If she gets pregnant. no big deal, just abort it. Of course most of those who abort are atheists so they don't give a fuck one way or another.
@soterisHey, go and fuck freely as that seems to be what you want. Someone gets pregnant? Just kill it and keep on fucking. You are some piece of trash.
@Daniela1982 No problem , it sounded like an invitation to me , one which sounded like it might be some fun. I was going to ask when to I fly in? Yeee Hawww
@Daniela1982 Quite frankly both you and 888 is some of the most reprehensible humans I have meet on this site. All you have done is reinforced my conviction that USA is doomed to become a 3rd world country. I see little difference between you and the Taliban.
Without implied attached responsibility, a right to something cannot by definition exist. Something which exists solely for the purpose of flouting responsibility, therefore, can never be a right.
No one is taught to reflect on this simple truism of definitions anymore. They also think rights come from the opinions of men who hide behind certain desks, when those men didn't create any of the items over which they'd presume to define news laws to. It's futility.
Because of this arrogance, the logical fallacy of a right to an easy life and a dopamine rush free of guilt is a persistent delusion, which demands nothing overrule it.
Under the precepts of such pitiful substitute religion, child sacrifice to ensure more sex and money, while a superstition that is not a guarantee, becomes sacrosanct. To accept consequences for the pursuit of sex and money is seen as sacrilege. To be told one is unworthy of this consequence-free mad dream, an act of blasphemy.
And so mankind is reduced to the savagery of a New Mexico brown mouse, who will kill for more sex, unable to find meaning in anything else.
Is it immoral to go against someone’s inalienable right to abort a child? ONLY a woman can and should be able to make that decision without branding her as evil or for that sakes bringing in the idea of what “killing” actually is.
You need yo understand at what point is life and what point isn’t life elbeofr you can die harsh words such as “killing”.
Are you going to also be against the use of condoms? You’re effectively “killing” any chance of pregnancy. “Killing” the potentiality of life.
Then let’s say you is no condoms, and you pull-out, does that also condemn you to the killer of potential life?
What about birth control pills? “Killing” the chance Of ovulation to occur.
At what point do we consider life? Every time a man masturbated, that’s billions of sperm cells, that could have been life. Is it immoral to masturbate?
Let’s say you stop masturbating to stop cells leaving your body, men have wet dreams. And now you have wasted sperm cells that could have been life. Is it therefore immora to have wet dreams as a part of your bodies function?
So for our moralists, every time you pull out, use a condom, jerk off, use birth control, etc. you’re effectively “killing” life.
As a Christian I do think that abortion is technically immoral yes. But also you have to wonder, God is a loving a God; at the end of the day, how could He hate His own children for a choice that they felt they needed to make?
If a woman were raped or made a mistake and gotten pregnant and felt they were unfit to have a kid, then I don’t see why that should be judged by someone who is not going through what they are going through.
I really hate when people like to put their own two cents on an issue like this because regardless if you’re a woman or not, you really will never know what you would do in a situation like this unless it happens to you. I personally could sit here and say “oh I’ll put my child up for adoption,” but I will never know how much that will affect me or my kid.
I really think when it comes to issues like this it really is important to be open to both sides of the argument but at the same time to practice compassion and empathy because no one ever really knows what is going through a woman’s head when they decide to terminate a pregnancy and we really shouldn’t judge.
If we are being technical here... an unborn child is a parasite that feeds off their host to the point of killing he host if it means the survival of the offspring... Second, the world is over populated so getting rid of a few cell clusters here and there isn't bad when considering overall survival rates for the human race... Third, his argument actually takes rights away from the mother who's body and life is being used to develop a child that may not be wanted... so you are saying that a child is better being born into a world that doesn't love them, then cells being disposed off when they dont have any consciousness that makes them human yet? Forth point, one argument is "what if the person who cures cancer was aborted", well what if a young scientist who's contraceptives didn't work one night is forced to carry a child, has to give up her research to raise the child and as such doesn't cure cancer?
Shouldn't it be a person's choice whether they bring a child into an already overly populated world? Why should others have the right to judge how an individual chooses to live their life?
1
1 Reply
Opinion Owner
+1 y
And to answer your question, yes humans are just a bunch of cells
It's a very difficult thing to wrap one's head around but a foetus is not a child. It's not really alive. Ending a pregnancy is not the same as killing someone.
Sure, it's emotionally and morally tough but I'd rather see someone getting an abortion rather than having a child and not giving it a good life.
I only support abortion when it's done in the early stages of a pregnancy and in scenarios where it's really necessary. Like if the child is going to be born with painful conditions or deformities or in cases of rape or if the family is not suitable to take care of a child (drug addicts etc).
My mom had to undergo an abortion some 21 years ago. The child was going to be born with severe physical and mental deformities and wasn't going to live long. As much as it hurts them and it still does because they still talk about it a lot, I think they made the right call.
My reasoning is that: When you birth a child, you bring life onto Earth, the child doesn't have a say in whether he wants to be born or not. It didn't ask to be alive. So it's your responsibility as a parent to give it the best possible life you can and if you know your child will have a bad life, it's better to terminate the pregnancy while it's still in an early stage.
That's just my 2 cents. Maybe some people won't agree on that... it's fine. I just don't want people coming at me on that. :))
A fetus is not a child in the same way a child is not a juvenile, they're just different stages of that person growing. You are factually wrong about the them not really being alive as well as scientifically life begins at the conception where an entirely new being with it's own unique DNA has begun to form itself.
Yes, I am a guy, although I am not a girl, I believe an abortion should only be done if a girl or a woman is raped and later impregnated. However, if women are not taking birth control pills and men aren't wearing condoms, and people just have sex constantly unprotected I am going to question those people why don't think protect themselves? Or don't have sex at all, simple. Guys and men are always looked at wild horny dogs but women today who over sexualize their bodies and ask guys to "stop by" are also agreeing to have sex. I know women in particular will dislike this comment and say ITS MY BODY.
Well to those girls/women do I openly walk around in public with a boner when young women are dressing in skirts and low cut tight fitting tops? No, in fact I look away. I don't gawk and stare and say, MY BONER = MY BODY! I don't like abortion but like I said if a woman or a girl is FORCED into sex or she was not in the right mental state of mind then having an abortion within a certain time period is fine by me. If a girl is having sex with multiple guys and getting abortions all the time, i'm sorry but that is disgusting and that girl or woman better look at herself in the mirror and admit to her faults then.
Because to deny any person bodily autonomy is depersonalizing and dehumanizing act of agression against them on the same level as enslaving or outright kiling them, for every pregnancy is potencial death sentence for the women involved, and to deny her right to abort "for example" a child concepted from rape is literally on the same level as to agree with the rape itself or even raping her or murdering her. It is also a classist weapon against poor people without acces to costly anticonception, because the pregnancy and caring for child requires copious amount of resources and money, which brings them even more into poverty, making their suffering even less bearable, and the childs life and their life holow and full of misery. Also, the anti-abortion policies are literally only made because the people who own the means of production need more cheap workers- the more people there is, the cheaper is the cost of their work, and the more workers can be harvested for profit, the more people to sell products to. The whole idea of anti-abortion argumentation sees women as breeding stock, creating more people to be enslaved, used and harvested, dehumanizing them to the point where they aren't seen as people anymore, but as numbers, herds, farm animals. To truly recognize somebody as human and love them as they are is to recognize that they are not there to be used for procreation, that they have value as they are, without requiring them to apologize for their "faults" by creating another life that can potentially be faultless.. And last but not least, one *can* see this world as the world where wast majority of life of wast majority of human population is painful and full of suffering, and to create another life full of pain and suffering is hardly moral...
The worst part is many people don't just see it as a necessary evil anymore, they celebrate it. They see abortion as an ultimate expression of women's freedom. The goal isn't "safe, legal, and rare" it's "a woman should be able to get an abortion every other month if she damn well pleases."
Those who use the "just a clump of cells" argument are philosophically ignorant. They use a fetus passing out of a womb through a vagina or c-section as an arbitrary standard for that fetus suddenly having value. They fail to recognize that we were all "clumps of cells" at one point, and that we now are just larger clumps of cells. Our DNA was created when our father's sperm met our mother's egg. A fetus has a very high chance of being an individual one day if not interfered with. A person with feelings, thoughts, friends, and lives of their own.
in my opinion, because it is a good thing. If the pregnancy was unplaned & the parents are not financially/emotionally stable enough to take care of a child, why should they be judged badly for making the sensible choice? Or even if the parents were capable but just did not want the child, it prevents the child & paeeents being unhappy and treating each other poorly because of an avoidable consequence.
I get that adoption exists, but too many children end up having a poor time in that system, so best not have the child you can not/will not properly care for
Apparently you only listen to the religious nut-bags and don't actually look into the process. They are getting rid of cells, that if given enough time, could turn out to be a child. When abortions are done, it is nothing. Also, even if it was you say, why does that have any bearing on you? Why stick your nose into what is right for someone else? I could never ask or would never want a woman to go through with an abortion. However, I would never tell someone else, esp a woman, what she needs to do with her body.
1. If you eat eggs u can't say shit, theyre the same thing 2. Because most people would rather not have it live than let it live a horrible life because you werent ready 3. You could die giving birth and your life could become horrible or comepletely ruined for having one 4. Accidents 5. Because an unborn baby has no memories, consciousness, or any of the traits of a more grown human, therefore its more like a blob that feeds off of you than an actual human 6. MANY MANY MORE REASONS
All people knows it is immoral. Some just don't care and do immoral acts anyways.
Science has proven that life begins at conception. Human DNA equals human. That all starts at conception.
It is odd how so many people who claim to trust in science will claim scientific evidence is needed to believe something. They usually do this to not believing in God or certain things about the earth. Yet when you show them the science that life begins at conception, they all of a sudden want to reject science.
11.9K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
We are terminating the lives of a fetus/embryo/zygote, not a child. Children are already born.
Semantics aside, it’s because we have that choice to determine who can use our bodies for whatever reason. That is our right to do so. You don’t have to like it.
Think of it this way, what if the government removed YOUR choice to have a child? Every time you got pregnant, they forced you to abort. Would that be alright with you? If you’re answer is no, and you don’t support women’s choice, congrats, you’re a hypocrite.
Why isn't eating fruits and vegetables seen as immoral?
Why aren't predators in the food-chain eating their prey seen as immoral?
Why isn't it considered immoral, that we butcher animals and process their corpses, so that we omnivores can eat their meat? We literally boil and fry chicken eggs every day!
Why isn't cutting down the forest trees seen as immoral?
And why aren't we in favor of capital punishment for confirmed murderers (since once they get released they'll just kill their next victim)?
It is considered immoral to most, in fact. And to most religious people, Christians in particular, it's definitely immoral.
But the fact remains: the feotus is not a human child. It is on its way to possibly developing that way, but it is not "conscious" or really sentient.
The mother, however, is.
Sometimes abortion is the only way to save the mother. Childbirth isn't an easy process. There are many life threatening risks, and even in a successful birth there are lifelong after effects.
Sometimes, the feotus is clearly malformed or otherwise unable to develop into a healthy (not even necessarily "normal", just healthy enough to live outside the womb) baby.
As with all moral arguments, this is a shade of grey.
There is an argument to when the fetus or a forming baby have a soul... No one is sure since the soul cannot be seen or detected... That is why it's considered a murder because the baby might be carrying a soul and your killing the baby...
Sex should be done after marriage, that's the best because pregnancy is one the most beautiful moments in life, when a wife tells her husband that she is pregnant, the man makes a celebration and all the close people are invited to celebrate the event, the wife receives a special treatment from her husband during her pregnancy and everyone is happy, unlike abortion, cries, sins and murders...
Look no one likes abortions ok, we aren't all going around having as many abortions as we can for fun.
The fact of the matter is that the question is not about and has never been about whether or not abortions take place, the only question is about whether we make them safe and civilised or not.
It is not a matter of assigning zero value to the unborn child is it a matter of placing greater value on the mother, the born and unwanted child and society at large.
There is a net gain.
What you advocate is barbaric, you want women to have no control over their reproduction and you want to live in a world of back street abortions with knitting needles and if you think you are a superior moral agent with that sort of thinking you can go and fuck yourself.
the situations under which a woman might be wanting abortions. What's the point of forcing it on , some women would hate it so much they will abandon the child.
For the same reason as refusing to donate a kidney, or a liver isn't considered immoral. For the same reason refusing to provide social assistance too single mothers isn't considered immoral. For the same reason that refusing to donate blood isn't considered immoral.
Demanding and forcing pregnant women be forced to risk birth is what is immoral. Imagine if when someone is in need of an organ donation, the police turn up at the door of someone with a match and they are forced to donate. Would that be moral?
@Cryptic-Game I'm talking about dying as an example. Pregnancy and birth are not as safe as you anti-choicers make out.
If you want abortions decreased, you know the proven way of doing that? Proper, comprehensive education. But no, you'd rather just push abstinence only lies and pretend like you're not at fault.
let women have control of their own bodies legally, and stop trying to legislate slavery.
You are right that women have a right to her own body but the problem is the life inside of her is another's body and not her body. A baby inside of a woman's body is not her body. It is another's body. That's why if a pregnant woman is murdered, the murderer will be charged with multiple murders.
You anti lifers even knows that.
Abstinence only would work because it would prevent misusing sex for evil consequences like abortion.
Also, when men are raped and he didn't have a say in which woman got his seed or if he even wanted any woman to get his seed, you are fine and dandy with that. Shouldn't a raped man be allowed to call for the abortion of his baby that he had no say in wanting to create? You seem okay with women doing so. Hmmmm, guess you are also anti man.
@Cryptic-Game "A baby inside of a woman's body is not her body. It is another's body. " Regardless of when you you decide the threshold is that you call a foetus a separate life form. One life form does not have excess rights to another life form's body.
A hypothetical - if I am going to die, and the only way I would survive is to have a tissue matching volunteer filter my blood for a few months, and you happened to be the only tissue matching person available. Could you be charged with murder if you refuse? And what if, you say yes, then in a month become aware of the risks, is withdrawing your consent murder? The short answer is no. NO-one has rights to your bodily autonomy outside of you. yet you propose, nay INSIST, that a POTENTIAL human, a life form that is not even remotely independant, has MORE rights to a woman's body than I would have to yours?
Interesting you should claim we are anti life... None of us has made a stance on abortion beyond that the legislative body, and you, and in fact me have ANY right to that decision. That is none of our business. Just as if you have a cancer cut out of you, you are not required to hold a funeral for it, despite there being a chance that one day it might become an independant life form.
The idea of abstinance only education is a laughable joke. It is lying by omission and doomed to the same failure as the enforced abstinence of alcohol during prohibition. A proper sex education educates the students to the real risks, all of them, and to all the ways to mittigate and avoid them. It doesn't lie to the students. And we know for a fact, that it works FAR better, with FAR better results, less abortions, less teen pregnancies, less unwanted pregnancies, less STI's and so forth. All this is documented fact.
Ohhhh wow, you actually admit men can be raped. How astonishingly progressive of you. In those cases, the best case a man would have is a case of theft. The pregancy poses no further risk or concern to him. ensuring there is no child-support or the like is as simple as showing to the court he was raped and not a willing participant.
Should he have a moral right to insist on an abortion, That's a point that has merit. But by that same token, every guy who sleeps around without protection, should be forced to take responsibility for every one night stand pregnancy he causes. Every woman who gets pregnant and is not certain of the father would have the right to get every man tested and demand child support from them.
Let me address all sides. if the person is ""unfit"" to carry baby then it is NOT immoral to abort... From a religious perspective totally immoral unless the person is unfit from an irreligious perspective, still immoral (unless the person is unfit) because you have sex knowing the consequences... maybe yes the child is not gonna suffer because they don't have the abortioner as a parent who isn't ready... but 1) there are others who would love to care for them and 2) in the first place you should not be having sex carelessly to make the child then kill it...
RAPE: is the only moral exception... people may say that she can give the child for adoption but pregnancy takes a toll on the body and some youngsters aren't prepped for it.
Who cares? I’m pro life and I’m sad babies die... I also have no right to tell a woman what she can do with her body... she don’t have the right to kill the baby...
Morality’s stupid... it’s the only way that both sides can be both right and wrong at the same time... the government shouldn’t be a part of anything not defense related... means they can’t legalize either side...
If you can’t win The moral victory then switch to logic... if the argument don’t effect me then I don’t care... short term ignore all the problems we’re having or create short term solutions while changing the way society thinks over the course of 10-15 years... control schooling and parenting and you control society.
I think that sometimes the better choise is to do it. I don't have enough time, energy, money and space for a child. If I would get a girlfriend with the same problems, we might take the abortion. I want to be able to take good care of my child. I can't right now so I rather don't, for the child's future.
But besides that. I don't know how bad I feel about abortion. At what point is the baby aware of its existence? When it hasn't been born yet but about to? 3 days after the creation? We don't know yet.
On another hand, since overpopulation is a problem people talk about more often, I think that any chance of helping out in that aspect couldn't hurt. I you know for sure that you can't accurately take care of it and would only make it's life worse, you might have to consider it. I want my child to have a happy life, not a fuckedupp one just because daddy and mommy didn't use a condom when they weren't ready and woops. I want to decide when I'm ready to have a child
Because it benefits women I guess I find it tomorrow but that’s the explanation I can come up with. It’s funny though celebrate a woman getting pregnant and then if that woman decides to kill that child will praise that as well so go figure the leftist logic makes absolutely no sense
4
0 Reply
Anonymous
(25-29)
+1 y
I wouldn’t really feel too guilty about ending a “life” that hasn’t even lived yet. I’m not saying that abortion isn’t a big deal for the people that go through it. I’m just saying that a fetus has no memories, no experiences, no attachments to the world, and so it’s ending something that hasn’t even really begun yet. I think abortion is a serious topic, and parents should think long and hard on their decision, but at the end of the day I don’t think it is immoral. People have various different reasons for wanting abortions. Some people are victims of rape, some just aren’t equipped to raise a child, the child or mother could have life threatening medical issues, or maybe the person just doesn’t want a child. All of these reasons are perfectly valid reasons to want an abortion.
@Jamie05rhs Tell that to the women who have had still born babies, if they were human or a lump of flesh. You assholes slap them in the face and say your baby was not a human, just a lump of flesh and you lost nothing because it was not alive as we define a human baby.
It's like people have hardened their hearts and blinded their eyes to the fact that never being born is the far, far kinder alternative to dooming infants to a life of abuse, neglect, mental health issues and lifelong misery because of being born to incapable or unwilling mothers and subsequently being placed into the foster care system in which they are very unlikely to find an adequate family environment alternative.
Because it’s 1) it’s big business 2) people have been brainwashed into thinking the fetus is a “clump of cells” which is bullshit.
Now I know is more complicated than a quick judgment. I can imagine if a young disadvantage woman got pregnant this would be a very difficult decision to make. I’m actually completely behind state sponsored birth control (including plan B) across the board. If a 14 yr old girl wants to get a IUD she should be able to get it without parental consent. Sounds crazy but it will help prevent BIGGER problems from happening.
But the way you worded it was “it usually happens with someone who the women does not trust and the man does not care about the woman.” “If they took the time to have sex with someone they trusted” This wording definitely puts the wit of responsibility on the woman
It’s a medical procedure, the fetus isn’t conscious or anything so it’s like an appendectomy. What is truly cruel are anti-choice people forcing people who don’t want babies to leave them. This means a life of being unloved, cruel and tantamount to torture. Anti-abortion is pro-cruelty for the unwanted child
Economics. People that are against abortion usually respond with nothing when I ask them to donate to friends who are struggling because they refused to abort. They yap all the time about not wanting people to abort, up until the point where they are asked to make sure that child is economically feasible. Then SUDDENLY, it's not their problem, especially once that same child ends up as an orphan turned homeless. Suddenly that same fetus they "cared" so much about is a burden to society who should just shape up and get a job or something.
Part of the reason I refuse to have kids and encourage others to do the same until this hypocrisy is fixed.
Because dumb people like you only like to think with their hearts , not your brains. Imagine the consequences of no abortions. Child abuse , over population , unemployment , social services overwhelmed , not enough adopting parents , kids not being loved and nurtured well enough, orphanages bombarded and underfunded , government going broke due to all the kids without parents
You know what prevents all that before deciding to kill a defenseless and innocent being, being thoughtful and cautious about where you stick your junk
@danieljackson123 how about how terrible the lives these kids would have to live if they were actually born. Their lives won't be miserable too , your life would also be terrible. Why put a child into the world only to suffer?
@danieljackson123 you're not doing these kids any real favors. No child deserves to be born into earth with parents who Dont love them. No child deserves to be raised by adoptive parents who may or may not treat them with love. No child deserves to be thrown into an orphanage with nobody to love them. Our government also will go bankrupt trying to support these kids in orphanages. Child abuse cases will soar. Social services will be bombarded and underfunded.
You're not doing these kids a favor. You're just a weAK unintelligent person who can't see the bigger picture.
Everyone see abortion differently. As a mother of two I truly know how hard pregnancy and raising children is. Woman that dont want to go through it shouldn't have too. That is why I completely support abortion. If you notice most men and non sexually active females are the ones that are against abortions. The woman that are sexually active or have children are the ones supporting it which makes sense since that is the only real people that abortion should even matter too.
It's only leftys that support abortions. If you made the child and you didn't want it that was your responsibility. If there was no such thing as abortion people would have a different view of sex.
@Si213 Not a leftist and I have two children that I chose to give life too. I'm completely anti birthcontrol in my own life but I will not judge if someone makes a different choice then me. I've learned as a parent to never ever judge someone else's choices for their child even if that does include abortion.
You chose to make a life with the person you had sex with. If you are anti birth control but pro abortion is that not that not cruel. You would get pregnant when you had sex then abort the baby each time or just never have sex. Either way is that not just madness?
Is abortion not birth control? While I am not a women surely there is a better way to deal with this like the many forms of contrastive that's out there.
1.) Men shouldn’t and DO NOT have a right to tell a female if they should keep the pregnancy or not. It’s soley a woman’s right, PERIOD.
2.) There shouldn’t be any law or for that matter any discussion of a law to stop abortions. Laws are created mostly by men, men who don’t have to carry a child in their womb. So they don’t have a right to say anything.
3.) if your religiously afflicted, let’s talk about the other religious vows you might have betrayed. When the last time you masturbated... sin. Sex before marriage... sin. Arrogance... sin Astrology... sin Eating blood... sin (ever sucked on your finger after it bled?). Etc
4.) If men are trying to go against pro choice, then How about we give laws to neuter you or vasectomy if you get a woman pregnant after a certain amount?
Men should have the same rights as women that's equality. When it comes to children men already have fewer rights than men. Grow up and stop virtue signaling. On day you may have children of your own and have a completely different opinion.
@Si213, stop jerking off, pulli g out, using birth control... oh wait, you’re perfect and follow all rules except abortion? Get real dude.
You should use birth control of all types. Or vasectomy, because the world needs less unintelligent people like you to stop procreating. (That means having sex, and creating life).
Anti-abortionists fail to make good arguments or see the bigger picture. What's immoral is forcing people to be parents who aren't ready to do so. Anti-abortionsts demonstrate over and over again they are entirely unconcerned with the hypothetical child, all they care about is punishing people for having sex they didn't approve of.
I don't think many people argue against abortion in circumstances of rape or medical necessity, what most people argue against is there use of abortion as a form of birth control due to irresponsibility. Hell, my ex stopped using her birth control, lied to me about it, got a false positive, and I freaked out. I was having some doubts about the relationship but still wanted to be with her at this time. I was picking up her birth control for her for 2 years before this. I would have taken the child and raised it alone if she would have had it because she proceed herself too irresponsible to not run her future by not taking her birth control.
The issue isn't one of morality, the issue is one of responsibility.
Exactly - being responsible means not having the kid. Not having the kid out of some misplaced sense of obligation.
And anti-abortionists who make excuses for rape or anything else always demolish their own arguments by doing so. A rape fetus has as much right to life as any other, yet the anti-abortionist suddenly changes their position when they're made uncomfortable by realising they'd need to also punish rape victims in order to be consistent.
It is to moral people. Others just see it as a form of birth control. Most don't see it as murder, not even considering that they were not aborted by someone because they were not wanted. . Sometimes you wonder if this place would be better off if they had. and sometimes it makes no sense at all.
Never said that, no Dem ever mentioned takeing guns, however they do request background checks everywhere and ban on assault weapons which police can't even have or use i used to believe they did too, but researched freedom of info saw republicans, which i am one, used as manipulating facts for election propaganda. Many republicans dont favor th e use of assualt weapons, but nra contributes millions to the party, i wasxreally suprised
Well, a lot of people consider it murder. I have terrible feelings about it. Mom tried. To abort me, myself andxtwin were born anyway she asked forgiveness the rest of herxlife
@Rocco7070 Those who abort babies have no guilt because they have no soul. Being pregnant is just an inconvenience to them. These types should just have their tubes tied so they can fuck to their life's content. If they did every want a child some time in the future I'm thinking they will always wonder what kind of person, the one they aborted, would be. That is the same kind of feeling a mother whose baby they wanted and were ready to love for the rest of their lives, was still born. I know I would be devastated if my child was still born. But some women just don't give a fuck.
Hey, can I just ask one think politely, not trying to be rude or whatever just genuinely curious to what u might tank cause of what u have said here.. Why, would u wanna differentiate between, that and u know maybe normally Cumming or having periods? I mean they too are potential human beings no? Well rather a million of them if u consider a a cum.. and should almost a million die just to create one human.. each males each sperm should be given to different different females to reproduce... The sperm and eggs are as well quite a close to foetus, just a few cell divisions away actually.. not many organs are even formed by the time they are actually dissected and taken out... I mean why is that any different?
@Rocco7070 You haven't even heard me start being sarcastic yet. I'm giving my views, the same as you. I guess I just can't understand why people keep having irresponsible sex if they don't want a a baby. I guess a baby is not a life until God gives it a soul. When that happens is anyone's guess. To some kids are an annoyance and they don't even want kids so why don't they just have their tubes tied? A woman is born with a finite number of eggs , and the older she gets the greater the chance of their DNA degrading and causing birth defects. I find it cruel that wo many women want children and can't get pregnant or can't have children for some other reason. Then on the other scale you have women who don't want kids and get pregnant at the drop of her panties. To the mother who has lost her child, for whatever reason, the fact that women are having abortions daily when the child that she loved more than anything was taken from her... well I think you can see the cruelty of it all.
Yes I can appreciate you point. I now see things more realistically, I unnderstand how it is so easy annd so wrong, to be as we were. I was 15, but thats not an excuse, I've known. right from wrong from the time I knew anything. Its really strange and wrong to talk to me about my... guilt trip.. its not anything to just pass off as guilt, its now much deeper, much more feeling than just guilt. can't say anyone has no soul, thats being coy and putting everything in a little box, cheap one, and since the box is labeled its settled. Of course many have guilt, its just bad there wasn't any gyilt before it was done to the fetus. But everyone has a soul, everyone feels and feels one thing at one time, can switch or just feel whatever they feel. I believe I am forgiven because I feel I've asked for that. Im a good person but even good people make errors and if he or she can't learn from that forgiveness is empty.
Throughout the animal kingdom a very specific action must take place very exactly as required. Womans blood flowing throughout her veins contain no eggs. Thats strictly within the reproductive system. A males sperm is thought to be near 1 billion in no. Not millions, thats theory I guess. But how can each sperm be exactly whats required to join with an egg, how? And how many pass the egg without fertilization? Its not reasonable to believe sperm so near a fetus, its nothing usablw with no egg to fertilize. Absolutly un productive, in any way. Sperm isn't even remotly similar... by cell divisions... to a fetus. If it were boys would become pregnant. To begin the fetal growth a sperm cell can pass an egg a million times without fertilization. So, man has no way of randomly tempering with eggs or sperm, nature handles that. Only a well educated specialist can TRY to allow egg fertilation, without it being natural, and a couple can even attempt to conceive a thousand times without syccess. And who cares and feeds all these millions of babies you believe can be conceived? We always entertain thiufhts but should know he's very limited in being successful..
I can also ask. Why is it seen as immoral? Easy. It's just a matter of point of view. One does not simply think the same as anyone. So yeah you have the rights to call us whatever you want for having to disagree with you "It's like people have hardened their hearts and blinded their eyes to the fact that they are terminating a child's life" <-- ofcourse for trying to put laws claiming pro choice are evil, that would actually make you one. Call everyone evil and should die if they disagree with you. Sounds familiar?
Update: we basically are but living in a civilized society compared to sperms and fetuses. If you want to compare as to the universe, you will realize we are basically microscopic.
If we are truly free and have the liberty to decide for ourselves, why would you care at all? It's not your life, not your business, and not your problem, right? Best to focus on living up to your own standards and not playing god and judging what others do.
It is seen as immoral just not to every single person on earth. We just disagree. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with an abortion. But you do. And that’s just that 😂
Abortions are a right every woman should have. If you believe it’s immoral then that’s your opinion. If people don’t believe it is then that’s their opinion also.
Because it’s not, you should look up the definition of a child, because it’s not terminating a Child. It’s terminating a clump of cells. Woman shouldn’t have control over their Own bodies.
1. I meant woman should have control over their own bodies 2. Definition of a child: a young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority. 3. A clump of cells is a clump of cells, it can’t feel anything nor can it do anything.
@scarlett774 Do you not realize that the so called “clump of cells” you are referring to develops a heartbeat at 6 weeks and a nervous system which can detect pain at 8?
1. 91% of abortion happen in the 1st trimester, in the first trimester the embryo/fetus is an inch long and can’t feel pain. 2. At 21-22 weeks a fetus becomes viable and can maintain homeostasis, virtually no abortions happen past 20 weeks (unless medical purposes) 3. Fetuses cannot feel pain at 8 weeks that argument has been debunked many many times. At 8 weeks you can see the first signs of brain waves in an embryo, this being a neuro circuit, however neuro circuits do not specifically imply that an embryo of a fetus can feel pain, neuro circuits are just a group of neurons. Activated though they carry out a specific function, for the function in this instance being pain the neuro circuit would have to go through the dorsal posterior insula, which is the part of the brain that we feel pain, however the dorsal posterior insula is not fully developed until the 33rd week, so neural circuits cannot carry out the function of pain until the 33rd week, which is when 1% of abortions happen (usually when tyr fetus is dying and or the mother is dying). So no the fetus cannot feel pain at 8 weeks.
Your terminating cells not a baby. As for morality that changes from culture to culture. An Eskimo choosing to commit infanticide on a newborn would not see it as an immoral act.
@purplepoppy that is because enough oxygen is stored in the blood for the patient to temporarily survive without a heartbeat. It works the same way with unconsciousness.
The fetus is not alive the moment it forms a heart. There is no blood pumping, no brain and can’t feel pain. The heart may be formed at 6 weeks but it is not functioning.
For the same reason you don't lose your shit when you have a wart removed.
An embryo is not a child. Here's how you can tell the difference, okay? If you can stick it in the freezer at -180 degrees for months at a time, and it doesn't die? NOT A PERSON!
If you're raped by a homeless guy and get pregnant would you keep it? Even though you know the father won't be there? That's why I support abortion for that alone. Women shouldn't be forced to keep a baby they didn't intend to have due to rape and the child never meeting their father.
A fetus is not a child. A baby is the result of a live birth. Abortion doesn't kill a baby, it kills a fetus. Instead of posting a picture of a baby, you should have posted a photograph of a 8-week-old fetus.
Because they lack the sympathy. Its easier to deny something than to accept responsibility for it. I don’t know any virgin women who are pro-choice. All the pro-choice girls in my school fuck non-stop
Yes but you have to recognize all the men that are in favor of it bc they want to use women for sex and not be burdened with the responsibility. You don’t have to be a virgin to be prolife.
I dont think that any woman ever wants to have an abortion. Sometimes women have to make sacrifices. Some circumstances are just not ideal for children and not bringing that child into that environment could be the most loving thing that the mother is doing. I've never had to have an abortion so I can't speak for those women but I've known women who have had abortions and they're not bad people. Its not an easy decision and without it, there would be more unwanted babies suffering in this world.
Some people do see it as immoral that is why it is so contentious. The men and women who oppose abortion do so because they consider it murder. They have no desire to control a woman's body or control the woman. I laugh whenever I read someone claiming that the Right wants to control their bodies. Men and women who oppose abortion because of their moral beliefs not because of some stupid claim by those who support abortion.
Well it isn't seen as something to celebrate... It is a hard decision that we would rather not face at all, but it is a necessary one. At the end of the day we don't think a fetus is significant enough to give human rights to yet, and that the woman carrying it should have ultimate say in what she chooses to do with it. But no one is saying hey I'm going to get pregnant so I can have an abortion cause I just like having abortions!
abortion is immoral according to God ! when a woman gets one then all had best leave her alone , for the wrath of God is upon her for her butchering one of Gods - innocent unborn babies - ! thanks
For me it depends more on the reason. If you have no other choice but to do so then fine w/e. If you get an abortion because it would say get in the way of your carrer, your party life or just to spite your spouse thats when it becomes bad. Its the motive behind it.
Because they changed the language to rule that a fetus isn't a person. Dehumanize someone and everything is possible... just look like the Jews in Germany when Hitler was in power.
It is seen as immoral, but just because it's immoral doesn't mean it won't happen and that also doesn't mean people won't find a way for it to be justified. It's all a matter of opinions going down into it.
Really, even drugs used to treat cancer? Pain medications? Digestive medicine? Heart medicine? It doeant look like you think things all the way through, hence your desire to ban things that dont even affect you
@TienShenhan i'm not talking about these kind of drugs, such drugs are used for medical purposes with precise dozes to ease pain and for treatment unlike drugs that are sold on the streets or elsewhere to hurt people...
By the way, why are you talking about something that is out of this subject?
We're getting there, once you stop struggling so much. When you say "all drugs" that means "all." But you actually just mean harmful drugs. So now we can take a step back - those drugs are ALREADY banned. How useful is that prohibition? Drugs you could at one point buy at a store you now must get from an underground dealer, who isn't vetted or regulated in any way. The drugs could be mixed with horrible ingredients, and the money the dealer gets could be used in the black market for even more nefarious purposes. How is that a better situation?
@Cryptic-Game I'm not talking about women that willingly get pregnant and even in that case, you are choosing a woman who will feel pain as she does vs something that will not feel pain.
If a man is raped, you see nothing wrong with forcing him to be a father tho. He had his seed forced from him and had no choice which woman got his seed or if he even wanted any woman to get his seed.
That is a member post. Quit using the @ symbol with my username and name calling me. When you add the @ symbol and use my username, that's a member post.
@Cryptic-Game who said a man that was raped should be a father? The woman should be arrested and the baby should be put in a home or adopted, unless the rape victim chooses to keep it.
Well there you have it, you just took an L in this debate because you just admitted that you are not open to be enlightened and you will dismiss facts in favor of your opinion. Have a great day.
My initial comment already addressed that I was. I do not agree with abortions unless child birth might kill the woman or she has had a child forced onto her. I never once said that I like abortions and agree with a pro-choice mindset. However, a woman should not have to die in order to bring a child into this world. That's just 9 months anticipating your own death to bring a child into this world when you can just abort. If the woman never asked for it, she shouldn't have to go through 9 months of pregnancy and have her life altered anymore than the trauma she experienced being rape has, just to give birth to a child she never wanted.
YOUR telling me, that women don't matter. The baby matters. If a woman is going to die in child birth, you telling her she is not allowed to abort is the same as murder. You are saying her life is expendable.
But allowing women to abort in certsin instances like rape is only advocating and supporting abortion. The rapist should be punished, not the baby growing inside of her.
Back in olden days women sacrificed their life so that their baby can live. Yes, if the baby would die anyways, save the woman's life first. A lot can go wrong. If a woman is raped and can have a baby safely, she should. I don't think it is fair that a woman dying during a pregnancy that came via rape is fair. If her life is in danger, her life should come first but that's not the case usually in our medical advancement era.
I think it's fine within the first trimester, where it hasn't formed a heart or brain and it's still just a cell. It depends on your definition of "life".
It's the way modern society look at life. They say it starts at birth. Before that it's just a part of of a woman. The Bible is from conception. Part of the Mosaic law if a man causes the death of an unborn child, he is to die. Life for life...
2
0 Reply
Anonymous
(30-35)
+1 y
Well, factually, you're not terminating a child's life. You're terminating a mindless hunk of flesh. Like a growth. And "life" only applies as much as a tree is alive. So... That's why.
@888theGreat Just don't want messages in my inbox over it, but I say it openly to anyone who asks. And yes, I also believe if you're brain dead, you're dead. You are your brain, the rest is just a flesh suit you wear to get around.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Anonymous(25-29)+1 y
+1 y
u +1 y
+1 y
+1 y
Anonymous(25-29)+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
311 Reply
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
+1 y
Most Helpful Opinions