Today we had this debate in my biology class and it was very interesting to hear their opinions and i also want to hear yours.
I am pro-choice to an extent.
I understand that accidents can happen. There are any number of reasons why a woman might suffer an unwanted pregnancy. Contraception can fail. Rape can happen.
A young girl can be stupid and naive. I had two girlfriends who got pregnant from their first boyfriends in their early to mid teens. They got early-term abortions and learned their lessons. From then on, they took the pill and never had another pregnancy scare. They went on to become good wives and mothers years later. But their lives and their young boyfriend's and parent's lives would have been messed up if they hadn't gotten those early-term abortions when they were kids.
Forcing a woman to carry an accidental or unwanted pregnancy to full term and deliver a child can be cruel and even sadistic in so many ways for both a woman and child.
So I have zero problem with chemical abortion that can be done up to 8 weeks after her last period. The embryonic cells have no nerves or consciousness at that point.
I don't even have a problem with an abortion within the first 12 or 15 weeks. It becomes problematic after that, though, because the fetus is starting to develop into a baby. With the availability of test kits, she should know by at least 3 months that she is pregnant and whether she is prepared to care for a child.
Abortion after the first trimester should be illegal unless there is a good reason.
I think using abortion as a means of birth control is absolutely wrong. Serial abortion shows irresponsibility and callousness. It should be illegal.
I am a strong advocate of contraception. I think any method a woman chooses should be available free of charge. People who oppose abortion should have no problem having their tax dollars spent to prevent it with contraception.
Abstinence is fine, but it should not be the only means of avoiding pregnancy. People should not be forced to choose between abstinence or popping out babies. I actually oppose abstinence, myself, but it's an individual choice.
I'll add that if abortion is a woman's choice, then it's 100% her responsibility to avoid getting pregnant if she doesn't want a baby.
”I believe in this stuff... but this other stuff that the Bible expressly forbids, well I don’t believe in that!”
The way people pick and choose what aspects of Christianity and the Bible they agree with, while tossing out those passages they don’t, turns your faith into nothing more than an all you can eat buffet, where you’re free to skip the broccoli and eat all the sundaes you want.
What’s even more annoying when dealing with abortion advocates is that they think that ANY objections or criticisms you have of abortion HAVE to come from a religious basis.
So apparently ever single atheist or agnostic out there supports abortion. And the ONLY people who oppose it are stuffy, ultra conservative Bible-thumping Christians.
Oddly these same people who now feel emboldened to attack Christians somehow completely ignore the Jews and Muslims who also oppose abortion. It’s only those mean Christians standing in the way!
There are so many interventions that can be made before abortion. Abstinence. Family planning. Condoms. Female condoms. Spermicidal lubricant. Birth control pills. Using the timing method to track your periods and cycle. And finally, emergency contraception and the morning after pill.
Yes yes. I’ve heard all the stupid counter-arguments before. “Birth control isn’t 100% effective!” WTF is? Seriously, what the hell in life is EVER 100% effective?
Oh that’s right. Death. And that’s why we just gotta be able to kill the babies!
I’m for abortion in very, very limited and special circumstances that are life threatening to the mother (and no, having to raise a child and feed them isn’t “life-threatening”). But the reasons and justifications Liberals have for abortion are patently absurd.
”Abortion is healthcare!”
Yeah. And so is birth control. Use it.
So you say that someone got raped. Okay. Take emergency contraception. It’s very widely available in the majority of pharmacies, is very cheap, and there are even organizations that will help you get it and pay for it. There is literally nothing keeping anyone from taking emergency contraception short of being locked up in a dungeon.
It's another disgusting wedge issue used by disgusting political manipulators to control people.
The issue is easy for anyone with an IQ over 10 to understand. Some people think that a fetus has human rights at say 8.9 months that a baby has as a newborn and do not think it is okay to kill either one except in defense of the mother's life. Others would then extend this to 8.8 months, 8.7 months, etc until you reach the various developmental milestones or even conception. They feel that they are DEFENDING THE LIFE OF A BABY.
The other side does not view an undeveloped fetus as the same as a newborn baby. The think that since for most of its existence it is 100% on the life of the mother and that it is the mother's burden to carry it, she should determine by her own choice whether to keep the baby. The earlier in the pregnancy this happens, the less debate there is, but late term abortions are particularly controversial.
But, that is not what is discussed. If a nationwide compromise of no post first trimester abortions unless in defense of the life of the mother, the issue would die down and with it the money and fury. This means a loss of power by really powerful groups who never want to see an end to it.
If you get up in arms over abortion, you are a tool. You are being used to vote against your own interest on several other issues just to "ensure" abortion goes the way you want, which really hasn't changed in 50 years, despite the crazy talk.
The USA had the MOST liberal abortion laws in the first world. Europe is comparatively draconian compared to the USA.
It's time to stop ignoring our country's decline to fight some stupid issue from 1970.
In terms of simple legality, the government should not have the power to ban medical treatments. I understand why people hate the idea of a woman aborting a baby she doesn’t want, but this is the same procedure used for unviable fetuses too. It’s the same treatment, but going through with the birth means the death of the baby, or the death of the mother, or both. If we give the government the power to ban medical treatments regardless if their reason, it opens a very dangerous door to ban any non-medically urgent treatments which just causes more harm than anything.
Opinion
48Opinion
yes. women should have access to legal, safe abortion care.
pro-choice politics lead to lower maternal mortality, lowered neonate mortality, and fewer abortions over the 4-5 decades since roe v wade was decided. the reality is pro-choice is pro-life.
furthermore. you cannot legislate successfully against a choice people feel is a matter of life and death. before roe v wade people got abortions. if every state makes abortions illegal people will still get abortions. providing legal and safe access is the best path
u I am pro-life. I am so because, first and foremost, I also am a practicing Catholic. I therefore believe that man is made in the image of God and the Church has defined abortion as an objective and grave moral evil.
With that in mind though, contrary to popular belief, abortion is not a religious issue, let alone just for Christians. Jews oppose abortion and so do Muslims and Hindus, but the ancient Greeks (pagans) did as well. And so do some atheists. Look up the organization Secular Pro-Life, which was started by Kelsey Hazzard, an atheist lawyer and also, a woman. True, the most vocal opponents of abortion may be Christians, but that does not make it a strictly religious issue.
I also oppose abortion because of what it is and what it does, and because of what the object of an abortion is, that being the termination of a pregnancy, a fetus. If a fetus can be "terminated" or "aborted", then the only implication is that it is in fact a life. It is not a "potential human life", because what else could it be? What else will it be? The "potential human life" bit is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard in my life.
If the claim is that life does not begin at conception, then those who so claim have to grapple with all sorts of ethical and metaphysical questions regarding when life begins, how they know, why then and why not before or after that specific point, who decides when life begins and on what authority, and a host of others. Then, of course, there are also the facts of fetal heartbeats, separate sets of DNA, and the sex of the child.
So yes, I'm against abortion and no, it should not be permitted by law.
Consider that the fetus could one day also become Catholic and never lives to find God because that choice was taken from them. I generally lean toward legal discretionary abortion up to the first heart beat, not viability. Or, viability of an ORGAN. Prior to that, it's a bunch of somatic cells. Cells reproduce on average 55 times before senescence, it's happening all the time in our bodies. But once those cells agglomwrate into tissues which thhen layer into a functioning organ, new life has officially emerged.
I also still support medically necessary abortions left at the discretion of medical personnel on whether to override this mandate in the interests of saving the life of the woman and the child. Both should be of paramount importance. It would be utterly cruel to bring a child into the world without a loving mother.
By state:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law_in_the_United_States_by_state
Shit happens and the miracle of life can't escape death.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/2Pkgdcypu0UThere's that or holes in fetuse brains so large the newborn will be in so much pain that they will never experience falling asleep before they die. Similar reasons are the reason for late stage abortions that is 1% is because the fetuse is not compatible with life.
My personal belief that there is a special place in hell in stopping a blushing wanting mother giving mercy to a fetuse that isn't compatible with life.
From before the founding of America government of the United States of America. It was already a solved issue. Veteran midwifes was able for such accommodation and newer midwifes needed years of experience to handle the procedure.
It was only 1910, 10 years before women suffrage and ability to vote is when USA cared about abortions. It has been and will forever be a wsy to control women.
On top of that since 1910. In the Bible belt majority of child marriages happen. Were a teenager gets raped by someone in their adult to even elderly age and ask the parents of the teenager to marry them and the parents fearingly agreed so the child dosen't go to hell for being a whore.
So i see no reason why women shouldn't have access to an abortion.
a I think, it's a deeply personal and complex topic with varying opinions. My perspective is that a woman's right to make decisions about her own body is fundamental. Sympathetically speaking, it's crucial to respect a woman's autonomy and her right to make choices regarding her reproductive health.
Abortion should be safe, legal, and accessible, allowing women to make the best decisions for their unique circumstances. Many factors, including health, personal beliefs, and socio-economic conditions, can influence this decision. It's essential to approach this topic with empathy and understanding, recognizing that every situation is different.
Supporting comprehensive sexual education, access to contraception, and healthcare services can help reduce the need for abortion while respecting a woman's right to choose. Ultimately, it's about balancing individual freedom with societal values and the well-being of women's health.
#1 Most husbands and boyfriends feel entitled to regular sex from their wife or girlfriend.
#2 A male condom has an in-practice failure rate of 18% and roughly only 4-5% of married men have had a vasectomy, it's probably even less for single men.
For all the men who tell a woman to keep her legs closed, why don't they check themselves on the basis #1 and #2. Men are perpetuating the problem while thinking a 20% failure rate is the woman's fault. All while less than 5% of men are taking any sort of (reversible) medical intervention to actually solve their 50% of the cause of pregnancy (no sperm = no Prego).
Of course, men could also keep it in their pants.
The knowledge and science is constantly in a process of development. The day might not be far where babies can wouldn’t even need the body of a woman to develop.
The debate of viability is still going on, there might just come a day where the age of viability becomes established at the moment of conception. How many people would then want to be remembered as child killers then? Although I think by that time the world would reach a level of degeneracy where there is no guilt for murder.
Tons of debates going around based on the nervous system, respiratory system, dependence on the mother etc etc however people fail to realise nothing has been declared as the absolute factor that determines viability. Everyone’s picking whatever fits their narrative and jumping left, right screaming it. No one’s thinking that you could actually be murderers
What else to expect from a time where indecency has been normalised for entertainment. Mind you the old days weren’t really better just different kind of savagery used to go on.
bad wording, women dont "do abortion" they hire MEDICAL staff, for something that isn't MEDICAL not healing the mother. and lie that it is health care.
pregnancy is not illness to "heal". doctors should get DOUBLE punished for "malpractice" meaning misuse in a harmful way to human fetus, because not real healing, and 2 for harming a human fetus. first "do no harm".
3, the PAIN fetus can feel pain.
how can a mother ignore pain of her own child. who has different d. n. a. not her body even if female. certainly a male fetus isn't realy "her body". so not her choice.
deter clinic staff will save at least half of abortions saving lives.
It's a woman's right to choose and always will be... i think most people have problems with killing babies after a certain period of time... like nobody wants to see a baby at 9 months get aborted. At least I would hope not.
Abortion is healthcare and must be legal.
Even abortions for no other reason than to terminate a pregnancy are good. An unwanted child is both the cause and victim of so much suffering. The parent (s) suffer an unexpected life change that costs over $1mil in their lifetime, their families and friendships likely suffer, and most importantly the child they unwillingly brought into this world will suffer more than any of them.
An abortion becomes the most ethical option, to save the suffering of the child who has no say in being born.
Yes. Because let's just think logically why would a mother would want to drop her own child? Because obv she's not ready/capable of giving that unborn child the life it requires. It's mentally unhealthy for the mother as well as the baby. And "legally" speaking if that child is born then it's probable to violate both the mother and the child's right to life Because in my country right to life does not simply mean to be alive. In my opinion a needed abortion can literally save two lives from going down hill.
Don't like gay marriage? Don't get one!
Don't like cigarettes? Don't smoke them!
Don't like abortions? Don't get one!
Don't like drugs? Don't do them!
Don't like sex? Don't have it!
Don't like porn? Don't watch it!
Don't like alcohol? Don't drink it!
Don't like guns? Don't buy one!
Don't like your rights taken away?
Don't take away someone else rights!
Mind your own business, keep your nose on your own face, and worry about your own problems, cause we all have our own problems, focus on yourself cause if you are focusing elsewhere, you are missing the true problems of this world! You!
By the looks of your update, I am not so sure that you want to hear mine. We'll see.
The question is purposely not worded correctly Ms OTG.
Here is the properly termed question...
'Should women be allowed to murder their child?'
Common sense provides the answer without need to 'overthink' it.
Today's global Marxist educational system, or better worded also 'Non-Educational System, has removed common sense from the equation. That part of the thinking process no longer applies.
Those who will attack this reply are the products of the Marxist non-educational system. Some are even paid to attack replies like this.
The others, and most likely you yourself, are a part of a type of MK Ultra without even knowing it... very sad.
99.9% I'm prolife. reasons why us bc it shouldn't be a form of birth control or oh I can't afford having a child or I'm not ready blah blah. if you think your old enough to spread your legs then take the responsibility of what could happen. the the.1 % of the reason why I'm ok is if having a baby puts the woman's life at risk ok but have a medical doctor say it will and sign off on it. if you don't want a child then use birth control etc and if you don't it or what ever reason then give the child up for adoption.
i think it should be illegal except for very narrowly defined special cases. it's your body your choice. your choice to get pregnant so you should be held accountable to the consequence of your actions cause if you are already pregnant "your body your choice" applies to the fetus and we can not assume that the fetus would choose to die.
exceptions would be rape or rare cases in which giving birth would be a major health risk for the woman, which is less than 1% of all abortions that were undertaken during it being legal.
I have no problem with Abortion by and of itself, but there has to be limits applied, and 'Good Reasons' for an abortion to be performed, but I do not believe that abortion should be used as a primary form of birth control when women have over 30 methods of birth control available to them, fro barrier methods like the diaphragm small, dome-shaped device or a cervical cap, all the way through to long term hormone implants. And of course guys should use condoms even if a woman is on birth control.
And I do not believe in the current vogue of 'full term' abortion which has been promoted in the US by certain groups on the political Left, If a woman is going to carry a child to that late date that may as well carry to birth and then place the child for adoption.
Abortion is questionable, so as bringing an unwanted child to this world and force him/her to be part of the foster care system, which don't really protect children as it should. Foster care has serious internal problems, worldwide, alouding child predators to infiltrate the system. We all know what come next: future adults with traumas, who could have been fully functional.
I must clarify that some parents do decide to raise their unwanted newborn, but with the time some may bill up resentment towards that child; hence: parental abuse.
So, in my opinion, abortion is the best option; the others are the most cruel. You don't just bring a child to this world, you gotta care for the child.
Yes. Women should absolutely be involved in deciding what they do with their bodies. It’s sad that this is a topic of debate and the amount of men think it’s fine to tell women what they can do while they are pregnant. It’s obviously not the males who are the ones being pregnant and pushing babies out of their bodies. It’s rather easy to have their own opinion when it literally doesn’t involve them beyond just fertilizing the egg.
Im pro-life. Not over the top about it like some people but I still dont believe its right. Isn't a baby a person when it comes out of the womb? The only difference is its still shaping inside. Its murder. Some cases like rape I UNDERSTAND why but I still don't SUPPORT the idea.
Im for abortion in certain cases where it is incest, rape, mothers life at risk, baby will not survive. What i am not for is abortion for learning disabilities or minor disabilities that can be treated with simple surgery or abortion being used as a form of contraception, and yes i have come across some cases.
One woman here in the UK had 10 abortions.
