Abortion

msjones21 · May 17, 2004

Sally, you should know that the majority of women who have abortions were using at least one form of contraception at the time they conceived. Also, most women who have an abortion only have one. The number of women who have subsequent abortions is very small, so women aren't really using it as a form of "birth control". Not to mention, I dislike the argument that women know where babies come from, ergo, they should suffer the consequences of their actions if they have sex and get pregnant. No, pregnant women are not victims, but it's extremely difficult to maintain a pregnancy when you're upset about your situation. Not to mention, there are so many more underlying circumstances in a woman's decision to terminate a pregnancy other than "well, I'll just use abortion as a contraceptive afterthought".

So why should the act of sex be "punishable" by forced pregnancy? Is sex so bad that women deserve to be forced to endure a pregnancy they never wanted in the first place?

SallyNow · May 17, 2004

Is carrying a baby a form of punishment? No!
Bringing a child into this world is not a punishment. Being forced to keep it is!

We live in a society that says sex is some sort of great thing which without life is meaningless. Well, that's a lie.

For instance, if you drink and drive, even though you thought you were legally under the limit, you can still cause a crash. It's the same here...if you go into without caring, you may end up a baby. Period.

What is the percentage of "many" women?

If you cause the situation, because hey, you wanted sex without the consequeses...you're silly. Male or female, you are silly. Yes, there may be times when abortion is the only route...I'm not excluding that possiblility, nor using some sort of slippery slope argument. I'm saying this: women are responsible for their actions just as men are. If you have sex...just as with any other activity...you must be ready for what could happen.

Look, to be honest, I never though I would be on this side of the debate. I still believe there are times when abortion is necessary. But what is going on today in America is just too far. I've see the Planned Parenthood webpages which seem to treat adoption as some horrid thing; the NARAL pages that seem to make abortion seem like a cure all. Well it is not. Fetuses as young as 20 weeks feel pain in the womb. They are human then. They can be born at 5 months old.

Contraception is something that I think should be open to all women in all of the world; and abortion should be available as a last-resort procedure. It should not be the front line of defense. Yes, methods fail; that is not good at all. But don't abort the baby for it. Be strong for those 9 months. If the woman is really so distraught that she does harm herself, with drinking, drugs, self-harm, etc, then she can't be strong. But otherwise...let it be honourable to give your baby up for adoption. It's pro-choice. That means either adoption or abortion; otherwise, it's pro-abortion, and that's saying women are stupid creatures. And we are not.

msjones21 · May 17, 2004

Sally, I applaud you for your stance, I truly do. I have more respect for your debate points than most pro-life people. Mainly because you can still see the need for abortion in some cases. To the best of my recollection, 59% of all women who have abortions were using birth control at the time they conceived. If you wish to see more stats on abortion you can visit www.religioustolerance.org. There is a list of hot topics on the menu. Abortion will be under that heading.

And I agree, contraception should be emphasized and accessible. Sadly it isn't as easy to obtain as it really should be. And I don't see adoption as a horrid thing. I support choice no matter what the woman's choice is.

SallyNow · May 17, 2004

Thanks, actually, as I said, just a few months ago, I was more on you're side than the other...so I know the arguments that are silly.

Choice...well, you DO seem to stand for choice, instead of the "abortion is the best answer" route.

BTW, I you're sig! (the sarcasm one) So true!

jingwei · May 17, 2004

You are speaking as if the baby is just a lump of flesh...............

msjones21 · May 17, 2004

Jingwei, at the time 98% of all abortions occur, the fetus doesn't even look like a "baby". It's the shape of a lima bean and the size of a tip of a pencil. And in a woman's eyes who doesn't want the pregnancy to continue, she isn't going to view it as a cute, cuddly little baby.

jingwei · May 17, 2004

That only confirms me though. A piece of meat.

msjones21 · May 17, 2004

Well, if that's how someone wants to view a fetus then why does it matter to you?

jingwei · May 17, 2004

It doesn't matter to me. It just makes me sad.

transientlife · May 17, 2004

msjones21 said:
*applauds* So true. The debate point that really irks me is when people say "there are millions of people out there who want a deserve a baby but there aren't any because they're all being aborted". Why are these couples placing themselves on a five year waiting list to adopt a white, American, newborn when there are already hundreds of thousands of children in America who already need a loving home? Statistics have shown that African-American and Hispanic women are more likely to opt for adoption or abortion and sadly, minority children are considered "less desirable". On that token, I take no pity upon couples who can't have children of their own and yet they somehow see themselves as too good to "settle" for anything less. The real problem is that there are too many yuppie couples who think it's fashionable to adopt a child from Asia but minority children here in America are somehow not good enough?

And let's not forget the millions of people out there throwing money at fertility clinics, rather than adopting.

transientlife · May 17, 2004

I found an interesting comment on another website about men who are prolife...went something like "men who are pro-life...unless they are willing to carry a kid in their upper colon for 9 months, then push it out, feed it, change its dirty diapers, wake up during the night with the screaming, deal with the crying and mess, clothe it and raise it for 18 years at least while putting their own life on complete hold, then don't talk to women about being prolife or prochoice"
an interesting line, I thought, which leads to the question : If a "prolifer" is so adamant about a woman not having an abortion, how willing would that prolife person be to step up and raise that unwanted child as their own? Or are they just comfortable stepping in so much as to delve into the woman's private life, and call her a murderer (in the extreme examples)...but what would they do about it, if they would or could? Not really a direct question, just a thought.
Most abortions are not undertaken lightly by the woman, most are a result of much grappling, thought, and soul searching and sometimes I think that is forgotten. Go to any abortion support page and I think you'd find nearly every woman there has everlasting regret or some effect from having it done. Those few that can go through with it without some negative after effect, well who knows...

Libby1 · May 23, 2004

Egg + Sperm = baby, child,

I would then endeavour to state that since you believe a 'fetus' as you prefer to term it can be murdered, killed, which obviously it has to be killed or it can not be terminated which then makes it a 'living' being (which of course would be human being/child/baby since that is what humans reproduce) in the womb, then you would most likely agree with euthenization?

Libby1

Libby1 · May 23, 2004

Abortion should never be permitted to be used as a form of birth control. Many teens and adults that have become pregnant have not used birth control. Many are on drugs, alcoholics, various diseases, etc. with a could care less attitude who attempt to use abortion as a 'quick fix' to terminate a so called unwanted pregnancy.

If I had been unable to have a child I would have adopted and personally would not have cared what nationality the child was. A child is a child......precious.....as is a child within ones womb.

Libby1

flicka · May 24, 2004

Libby1 said:
Abortion should never be permitted to be used as a form of birth control. Many teens and adults that have become pregnant have not used birth control. Many are on drugs, alcoholics, various diseases, etc. with a could care less attitude who attempt to use abortion as a 'quick fix' to terminate a so called unwanted pregnancy.

If I had been unable to have a child I would have adopted and personally would not have cared what nationality the child was. A child is a child......precious.....as is a child within ones womb.

Libby1

Unfortunately, the babies born of mothers who are using drugs and alcohol or have various diseases are the very ones that nobody wants to adopt.

It's good that you wouldn't care about nationality (and why should you?) but any healthy baby is a hot commodity, a sickly one...not so much.

msjones21 · May 24, 2004

Libby1 said:
Abortion should never be permitted to be used as a form of birth control.

It's impossible to use abortion as a means of birth control. Most women who have an abortion never have subsequent ones. If your birth control fails or if you do engage in unprotected sex (yes, it does happen) and can't get the morning after pill (a very common problem) then I see no reason why she shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion.

Many are on drugs, alcoholics, various diseases, etc. with a could care less attitude who attempt to use abortion as a 'quick fix' to terminate a so called unwanted pregnancy.

You would want someone with a disease or an alcoholic or a drug addict to give birth?

If I had been unable to have a child I would have adopted and personally would not have cared what nationality the child was. A child is a child......precious.....as is a child within ones womb.

I applaud you for that, believe me. I wish there were more people out there who shared your mentality, but sadly that's just not the case. The evidence to support this-there is a five year waiting list to adopt a white American newborn baby while hundreds of thousands of children are stuck in foster care.

megan76291 · May 24, 2004

i dont think that abortion should be there as a form of birth control. if two people were irresponsible enough to get pregnant, they should deal with the consequences. you are right, a fetus is not "living", but it has the potential to live and who are we to destroy that?

flicka · May 24, 2004

megan76291 said:
i dont think that abortion should be there as a form of birth control. if two people were irresponsible enough to get pregnant, they should deal with the consequences. you are right, a fetus is not "living", but it has the potential to live and who are we to destroy that?

msjones21 was right in saying abortion isn't about birth control. It's not irresponsible to end up with an unexpected pregnancy...really it isn't!! And someday your may find out. How a person deals with that is up to them and if abortion is chosen it is usually a one time deal.

Sure, you may find extreme examples of woman having multiple abortions, I've heard it's more common in some parts of the world where any forms of bc are practically non existent, but in this country it usually doesn't happen that way. And if you know someone who does this then they are either a glutton for punishment (since abortion is no cake walk) or perhaps mentally unstable. I don't know.

lovegod_will · May 25, 2004

im sorry but i disagree about feotuses not being living, an operation was carried out on a pregnant mother on her uterus whilst 2 months and 20 days pregnant, which legally u could still abort at, the foetus actually 'grabbed' the finger of the surgeon, this foetus was aware on some level of its surroundings? how can that not be living?
further more if people are more than just physical or material, that is they have some spirit or soul, like many people believe today and how ancient greek thinkers believed, when does this 'soul' come into exsistence? after birth? at conception when the foetus has been given all the genetic code it needs for life, or when?

msjones21 · May 25, 2004

lovegod_will said:
im sorry but i disagree about feotuses not being living, an operation was carried out on a pregnant mother on her uterus whilst 2 months and 20 days pregnant, which legally u could still abort at, the foetus actually 'grabbed' the finger of the surgeon, this foetus was aware on some level of its surroundings?

I'm sorry but that is false. At 10-12 weeks into gestation the embryo is only 1"-2" in length. A 1" embryo could not grasp the finger of a surgeon. Not to mention, embryos cannot feel pain nor are they aware of their surroundings. A newborn baby's hands are so tiny at birth they can barely grasp an adult finger. A fetus that could grab a finger during surgery on the uterus would have to be around 30-34 weeks into the gestation period.

lovegod_will · May 25, 2004

msjones21 said:
A 1" embryo could not grasp the finger of a surgeon. Not to mention, embryos cannot feel pain nor are they aware of their surroundings. . A fetus that could grab a finger during surgery on the uterus would have to be around 30-34 weeks into the gestation period.

hence 'grab' im sorry i didn't clarify that, i didn't mean physically grab, what i meant was that actually, yes, it did show signs of being aware of its surroundings, which is very surprising to be fair, but non the less it occured.
Foetuses are human.

Abortion

Well-Known Member

Blame it on the SOCK GNOMES!

Well-Known Member

Blame it on the SOCK GNOMES!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

lotus on the mount

lotus on the mount

Spiritual Warfare

Spiritual Warfare

Contributor

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Contributor

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency