Pro or Con: Abortion

[Ethan Rosen]

I wasn't saying that. The couple should have to still pay for the procedure.

Nobody is saying they shouldn't. But if abortion was only legal in cases where condoms failed, you would just see people reporting broken condoms.

 

[iasimp1997]

Actually, I think I changed my opinion. If a girl was raped and conceived a child, then, for sure, they could just have the kid and then give it up for adoption? Surely better than death?

 

[Daniel Wu]

Pro-life. Killing innocents is wrong.

Well I say holding a woman's reproductive system hostage because a clump of cells has more rights than she does is wrong, but everything's not as black and white as you make it seem. What if the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy? What if the pregnancy was the result of rape?

The clump of cells would be a human being. Killing the child to save the mother would send the message that one human being is more important than another. That's like saying let's kill people from third world countries because they suck resources and are endangering the health of the world. Regardless of how the child was conceived, the child still has rights as a human being and human life should be protected from the moment of conception. It's human life, not just a clump of cells.

 

[Mastersonian]

I am pro life. It is when a girl gets raped and gets pregnant though that I think it just depends. One of my friends is also 100% pro life, she had a pregnancy scare this summer and told the potential father that even if he didn't help her she would still have the baby.

 

[Muesli]

Pro-life. Killing innocents is wrong.

Well I say holding a woman's reproductive system hostage because a clump of cells has more rights than she does is wrong, but everything's not as black and white as you make it seem. What if the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy? What if the pregnancy was the result of rape?

The clump of cells would be a human being. Killing the child to save the mother would send the message that one human being is more important than another. That's like saying let's kill people from third world countries because they suck resources and are endangering the health of the world. Regardless of how the child was conceived, the child still has rights as a human being and human life should be protected from the moment of conception. It's human life, not just a clump of cells.

Consider this;

Girl is raped at 10 years old, and just happens to get pregnant. What would you do?

1: Force her to have the child because the ball of cells could become a child. Every life deserves life, right?

2: Allow her to abort the child, thus allowing her to live her life free of the burden of an unwanted child.

In my opinion having a child that young would destroy the mother's life as well as the unborn, unwanted child's life too.

 

[ajmorgan25]

I'm against abortion except for certain situations such as rape.

 

[shelley]

Pro-life. Killing innocents is wrong.

Well I say holding a woman's reproductive system hostage because a clump of cells has more rights than she does is wrong, but everything's not as black and white as you make it seem. What if the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy? What if the pregnancy was the result of rape?

The clump of cells would be a human being. Killing the child to save the mother would send the message that one human being is more important than another. That's like saying let's kill people from third world countries because they suck resources and are endangering the health of the world. Regardless of how the child was conceived, the child still has rights as a human being and human life should be protected from the moment of conception. It's human life, not just a clump of cells.

Wait, so if carrying a pregnancy to term would endanger a girl's life, you would rather have both mother and child die than save the mother?

The clump of cells could be come a person, but what's so special about the moment of conception? You could argue that a sperm could fuse with an egg, so preventing it by using a condom is wrong because you're preventing a human life from forming. I can understand if you say abortions shouldn't be allowed beyond a certain point, when a fetus has started developing a nervous system, but the moment of conception is a pretty arbitrary line to draw. If you want to think of it as a human life, it should at least have a central nervous system.

 

[LewisJ]

Pro-life. Killing innocents is wrong.

Well I say holding a woman's reproductive system hostage because a clump of cells has more rights than she does is wrong, but everything's not as black and white as you make it seem. What if the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy? What if the pregnancy was the result of rape?

The clump of cells would be a human being. Killing the child to save the mother would send the message that one human being is more important than another. That's like saying let's kill people from third world countries because they suck resources and are endangering the health of the world. Regardless of how the child was conceived, the child still has rights as a human being and human life should be protected from the moment of conception. It's human life, not just a clump of cells.

What, exactly, differentiates human life from a clump of cells? And wouldn't letting the mother die and the baby live (or possibly both die) send the EXACT SAME MESSAGE?

 

[Daniel Wu]

Pro-life. Killing innocents is wrong.

Well I say holding a woman's reproductive system hostage because a clump of cells has more rights than she does is wrong, but everything's not as black and white as you make it seem. What if the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy? What if the pregnancy was the result of rape?

The clump of cells would be a human being. Killing the child to save the mother would send the message that one human being is more important than another. That's like saying let's kill people from third world countries because they suck resources and are endangering the health of the world. Regardless of how the child was conceived, the child still has rights as a human being and human life should be protected from the moment of conception. It's human life, not just a clump of cells.

Consider this;

Girl is raped at 10 years old, and just happens to get pregnant. What would you do?

1: Force her to have the child because the ball of cells could become a child. Every life deserves life, right?

2: Allow her to abort the child, thus allowing her to live her life free of the burden of an unwanted child.

In my opinion having a child that young would destroy the mother's life as well as the unborn, unwanted child's life too.

I think that's the key issue. Is the life within the womb a child? I believe that it is. It's a human that is developing. It is genetically different than the mother and therefore is a different person.

As far as number two, abort is equal to kill. That pretty much says that one would kill the child to free the mother from the burden of an unwanted child. In my eyes, that's murder.

What, exactly, differentiates human life from a clump of cells? And wouldn't letting the mother die and the baby live (or possibly both die) send the EXACT SAME MESSAGE?

A different 'clump of cells' having a unique DNA. Who's to say that the mother is going to die for certain. The mother and child should both try to be saved. If the child is intentionally killed in the process, I believe that that's wrong. If the child in unintentionally killed while trying to save the mother, I would say that that's not as bad.

 

[Edmund]

Pro-life.
And what is the difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice? I see no difference.

Adoption is always an option for a mother.

 

[LewisJ]

Pro-life.
And what is the difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice? I see no difference.

Adoption is always an option for a mother.

Pro-abortion would imply wanting to kill ALL the babies while pro-choice would imply wanting a choice to be possible.

 

[Edmund]

Pro-life.
And what is the difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice? I see no difference.

Adoption is always an option for a mother.

Pro-abortion would imply wanting to kill ALL the babies while pro-choice would imply wanting a choice to be possible.

The mother dying due to child-birth is very rare with modern medical procedures and as far as rape goes adoption is an option and there are plenty of groups that will help poor mothers who decide to keep their child.

Also is it just me or have lots of threads that will obviously lead to fighting popped up more than usual?

 

[TheBB]

I'm pro not beating dead horses.

Implying that this issue is finished.

Not finished, just discussed to death. Hooray, let's repeat the same arguments again. The only debate more beaten to death than this one is that evolution vs creationism thing.

Pro-life.
And what is the difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice? I see no difference.

Adoption is always an option for a mother.

These terms are so stupid. So I think abortion is fine, am I now pro-death? Excuse me while I jump in front of a train then.

I don't go around subjecting women to forced abortions. That's the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. Again stupid terms. It's not like pro-lifers are necessarily pro-slavery.

Bottom line is, I'd like to live in a world where people can make mistakes without having their lives ruined, or at least heavily derailed, because of it. This isn't always possible, but at least in this case it is.

 

[shelley]

Rape is a traumatizing experience. You say adoption is an option like it's a simple fix, but it still requires the woman to spend nine months carrying her rapist's baby, and then living the rest of her life knowing a product of the rape is out there somewhere.

The problem is if you make abortion illegal there are going to be people who are desperate enough to get them anyway. And having a safe, legal procedure available is better than having women possibly endangering their own lives.

 

[Edmund]

I'm pro not beating dead horses.

Implying that this issue is finished.

Not finished, just discussed to death. Hooray, let's repeat the same arguments again. The only debate more beaten to death than this one is that evolution vs creationism thing.

Pro-life.
And what is the difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice? I see no difference.

Adoption is always an option for a mother.

These terms are so stupid. So I think abortion is fine, am I now pro-death? Excuse me while I jump in front of a train then.

I don't go around subjecting women to forced abortions. That's the difference between pro-choice and pro-abortion. Again stupid terms. It's not like pro-lifers are necessarily pro-slavery.

Bottom line is, I'd like to live in a world where people can make mistakes without having their lives ruined, or at least heavily derailed, because of it. This isn't always possible, but at least in this case it is.

And you can't just put the kid up for adoption? Why the hell not?
Yes it is your rapists baby but isn't 9 months of sacrifice worth not killing someone?

Is it okay to be okay with slavery even if you don't own slaves and are not forcing people to own slaves? Of course not, so why is it okay with abortion?

 

[Dene]

Why are people completely ignoring adoption? The life of no one has to be ruined by going through with a pregnancy. You could infact bring joy to a poor couple unable to conceive (FACT: 1 IN 6 COUPLES ARE INFERTILE. Don't even try to refute this because I will slam you down so hard (I'm serious. I just don't want to find the evidence because it would mean digging through lecture material from last year)).

Personally, I'm all for eugenics (controlled conception). I think the world would be a much happier place with a ruling class of superiors and a working class of inferiors. This would solve any abortion problems.

EDIT: Since I started writing up this post adoption came into the picture >.<

 

[LewisJ]

Pro-life.
And what is the difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice? I see no difference.

Adoption is always an option for a mother.

Pro-abortion would imply wanting to kill ALL the babies while pro-choice would imply wanting a choice to be possible.

The mother dying due to child-birth is very rare with modern medical procedures and as far as rape goes adoption is an option and there are plenty of groups that will help poor mothers who decide to keep their child.

Also is it just me or have lots of threads that will obviously lead to fighting popped up more than usual?

Quote the post you're actually responding to next time? I never said anything about rape so it doesn't seem you're responding to me....make yourself more clear

 

[Edmund]

Pro-life.
And what is the difference between pro-abortion and pro-choice? I see no difference.

Adoption is always an option for a mother.

Pro-abortion would imply wanting to kill ALL the babies while pro-choice would imply wanting a choice to be possible.

The mother dying due to child-birth is very rare with modern medical procedures and as far as rape goes adoption is an option and there are plenty of groups that will help poor mothers who decide to keep their child.

Also is it just me or have lots of threads that will obviously lead to fighting popped up more than usual?

Quote the post you're actually responding to next time? I never said anything about rape so it doesn't seem you're responding to me....make yourself more clear

Well I figured that was implied of when you thought it was okay. When do you think it is okay? Anytime the woman felt like it?

 

[shelley]

Yes it is your rapists baby but isn't 9 months of sacrifice worth not killing someone?

Is that how you would feel if this happened to your mother or sister or daughter? Someone did something completely horrendous and because of that his progeny should not only have a shot at life, but use your family member's body for it?

 

[Muesli]

Rape is a traumatizing experience. You say adoption is an option like it's a simple fix, but it still requires the woman to spend nine months carrying her rapist's baby, and then living the rest of her life knowing a product of the rape is out there somewhere.

The problem is if you make abortion illegal there are going to be people who are desperate enough to get them anyway. And having a safe, legal procedure available is better than having women possibly endangering their own lives.

This. People are talking as if rape only involves the act. There is the psychological, physical and emotional aftermath. Just imagine being violated in that way, then being forced by law to carry the memory, the trauma and the actual offspring of that horrible act.

On another note, imagine being told by your mother that you are the offspring of some low-life rapist and you are an accident.