I'm against abortions but if a woman wants to have one, it's her business. I would never have one myself and that's why I planned my 2 pregnancies. ************************************************* 03-14-04, 08:23 PM jusork I actually lean a little more towards oppose just because everything has the right to live.
On the other hand though, my mind has barely developed and if I never lived, what would it matter in the long run. Why do I have a right to live? Doesn't a sperm also have a right to live and thousands of sperms die all the time. They didn't get their right to live. How is it different? Sure I may turn out to help society, but there are also thousands of others possibilities that I could affect including adding to the overpopulated world.
I voted support a woman's right to choose but oppose late-term abortion unless the mother will die though.
03-14-04, 08:39 PM honilov Jusork, the thousands of sperms that die, aren't killed. They were living, but died natually, and not by a butcher.
So the difference is...butcher vs nature
03-14-04, 08:49 PM jusork I mentioned that in order to question the right to live. If all living things have a right to life, those sperm didn't get theirs. Are they missing out? Did they not get those rights that all babies have? Why can't the loss of the right to live that happened to the sperm happen to the baby if the right to live isn't certified naturally (as seen with the sperm).
[This message was edited by jusork on 03-14-04 at 09:12 PM.]
03-14-04, 10:32 PM Tree Well, I think that each and every case is different and has to be viewed and dealt with individually.
There are no fast and steady rules here!
03-14-04, 10:45 PM newnickname It's not just sperm that miss out, naturally. About 50% of all fertilised eggs die, naturally, without implanting in the womb. This fact surely makes it problematic to say that a life begins at conception.
03-14-04, 10:55 PM coldfuse Count me among those who don't believe that the full journey of the birth canal suddenly makes a baby a human being. Also count me among those who believe that a woman has the freedom to do as she pleases with her own body. The trouble I have here is that unborn children have different heartbeats, brain waves, and often different blood types than their mothers - their bodies are not their mothers' bodies.
That said, the abortion debate is one frought with peril on both sides. It is often an example of emotion posing as intellectual discourse. Anger, grief, guilt and other emotions color our feelings and cloud our intellect on the matter.
Our language even reflects our discomfort with this. A baby is called a fetus in the abortion debate, yet no pregnant mother I have met ever called her developing baby anything other than "my baby." Is someone "pro abortion" or "pro choice?" Is someone "pro life" or "anti choice?"
When did millions of people get the idea that is's OK to slaughter a child who hasn't quite made it all the way through the birth canal? Why do otherwise righteous Christians condemn their fellow man, stoop to fear tactics, bomb clinics, commit homicides, and engage in other behaviors that little resemble the example set by Jesus Christ?
Tens of millions of women in the United States, and countless others worldwide, have made the difficult decision to abort a pregnancy. Many undergo a long and difficult process of coming to terms with that decision. These are our mothers, sisters, aunts, nieces, and friends. Any debate that does not provide them with a compassionate emotional landing serves no purpose other than division.
Note: this was copied from a previous 'fuse post
03-14-04, 11:00 PM methos aha ... I was reading along and had to check the timestamp because it did sound familiar 'fuse Wink
03-15-04, 01:24 PM Elexina I fully and completely support a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her own body. Whether I approve of specific abortions would depend on the details of each case, but I do believe that women have that right. After all, it is the woman’s body in question.
Late-term abortion is kind of iffy for me because if she didn’t want the child, she should have decided before then. I wholly support it if the woman’s life or health are endangered, but I do believe that such abortions should be limited if it’s just about being “inconvenient.” She’s been inconvenienced for six months, at least. You’d think she could have made up her mind earlier. But again, it is her body, and her choice.
Yes, the fetus is a separate being with a separate circulatory system and, often, even a different blood type. It is a separate body, but it is within the body of the woman. I do not mean to imply that fetuses should not be afforded some rights (as I explained in the C-section post, a fetus may have to be protected from its own mother), and I believe that the penalty ought to be somewhat more severe if a person causes harm to or kills a pregnant woman, resulting in injury to or the death of the fetus. I just do not believe that the rights of the fetus should ever be more important than or supercede the rights of the woman. ...Unless the woman is not mentally competent enough to make the necessary decisions, of course.
Abortion is certainly not a decision to be made lightly, never one to be made without thought and debate, and the understanding that the result -whatever the decision may be- will have long-lasting effects on the woman and her family. An abortion can be devastating, but giving birth to an unwanted child can be just as traumatic. Is the fetus better off never existing, or born into a household void of love, full of resentment?
And yet, it is the woman’s body, and it is her choice.
03-15-04, 01:52 PM DorianGreyed "If all living things have a right to life, those sperm didn't get theirs." - Jusork
Jusork, you imply that sperm are 'alive' by saying that all living things have the right to life, but then, in the same sentence, you say that they didn't get their chance at life. If, as you say, they didn't get that chance, then how did they got that right?
03-15-04, 04:13 PM IndigoFlavours I am very pro-choice. Any of you who had read the Abortion debate back when we still had a debate forum would know that. I oppose the so-called "partial birth abortion" ban, which limits late-term pregnancies. Those are only performed in rare conditions when the mother's life or serious health is in danger or when the fetus is deformed, etc. Elective late-term abortions are illegal in almost all of the states. Besides, it's not like any woman is pregnant for seven months and then decides that she doesn't want it anymore. (Ignoring the C-section case)
03-15-04, 05:42 PM jusork
quote:Originally posted by Doriangreyed: Jusork, you imply that sperm are 'alive' by saying that all living things have the right to life, but then, in the same sentence, you say that they didn't get their chance at life. If, as you say, they didn't get that chance, then how did they got that right?
Sorry. I should've said all potential living things have a right to live.
03-15-04, 05:55 PM MrsS Sperm generally get their chance....they just have a naturally short and (for the overwhelming majority) pointless lives....Only a very, very few "win the race" out of millions and millions of little swimmers, and that is the natural course of the lives of sperm....What, pray tell, do you think they missed out on?
03-15-04, 06:59 PM jusork I'm reconsidering my use of the right to live (as a human). Why use the right for babies to live as a human if every potential baby doesn't get it? The right itself kind of becomes absurd reasoning to use.
03-15-04, 07:33 PM frankvan I fully support a woman's right to choose. On the other hand I fully support making every method of contraception and birth control information available. That some can oppose abortion and also all available means of birth control other than abstention seems ridiculous and inconsistent.
03-15-04, 08:47 PM coldfuse Here, here, frank! Two thumbs up to prevention!
(looks to confirm that his thumbs are opposable Big Grin)
03-16-04, 04:31 PM samantha I do not agree with abortions unless the mothers life is in danger.
03-21-04, 10:33 PM Tree Sammy, I think that you and others who are opposed to abortion may re-think your views when you are raped by the freaking drunk down the road on your way home.
I don't think that the pregnancy and birth of this child would be delightful by any stretch of the imagination.
03-21-04, 10:42 PM Leppi I agree with Sammy. I believe abortion should only be done in the case, if there is no abortion then the mother and the baby will die. Tree, when it comes to the czase of rape, I still do not believe that that is a reason for someone to have an abortion. Even if the baby(fetus) came into being through rape, it is still a baby nonthe less and deserves every right to live. And if it did happen to me, while I would not be delighted, I would understand that it was my duty to allow the child to live.
03-22-04, 07:11 PM coldfuse Abortion. I spoke with a retired OB-GYN who was Chief of Staff with a major hospital and delivered thousands of babies in his lifetime. Not once did he encounter a case where the mother's life was in danger.
There are particular pregnancies that he explained as "inconsistent with life" where the baby will always die shortly after birth.
03-22-04, 07:23 PM Leppi Coldfuse, there are such cases. Times like when the mother has cancer and needs chemotherapy. I am not 100 % sure about it but I believe a mother can not have chemotherapy while she is pregnant. Also if the embryo is implanted on the falopian tube, that is another case when the mother's life is in danger.
03-22-04, 07:35 PM coldfuse Sorry, my point was unfinished and you are exactly right, Yafa. There are cases - they simply happen to be rare. One of them you mentioned - according to this site, "The death rate is about 1 per 2000 ectopics in this country. About 40-50 women die each year from ectopic pregnancy in the U.S."
03-22-04, 07:57 PM Leppi The death rate is low from what I understand because the embeyo is removed. Technically this can be considered an abortion because it is not allowing the embreyo to continue to grow. This I believe is an okay reason to have an abortion. it says 40-50 deaths ont hat page. Not 40-50 cases. If the embreyo was not removed it could easily be much more dangerous.
03-23-04, 10:25 AM Elexina Ectopic pregnancies must be dealt with immediately because a fetus cannot develop in the fallopian tubes. That is not a suitable environment. The tube will likely rupture, causing the fetus to die and it is possible that the woman could be infertile after such an occurrence. You are right, coldfuse, that such pregnancies are rarely fatal for the woman, but they are disastrous for her future and usually fatal for the fetus anyway, even if left alone.
03-23-04, 11:11 AM methos Since the topic has veered towards ectopic pregnancies, I wonder what those normally opposed to abortions think of it, and what everyone thinks of the Catholic viewpoint. That is, direct abortion is not permissible even in this case so the fallopian tube (not just the fetus) must be surgically removed to protect the woman's life.
The logic is that the abortion is a bad act with a positive result, which is not permissible. The surgery (which is more likely to leave the woman barren than drugs or surgery to remove the fetus directly) is a good act with a bad result. The fact that the fetus cannot be born in any case is seen as irrelevant.
By the way, I believe ectopic pregnancies are fairly common, on the order of 1 or 2 out of every hundred. The death rate may seem low, but I have read that it is the most common cause of pregnancy-related deaths (but then, pregnancy-related deaths are thankfully low these days). I don't know that the removal of the fallopian tube is more risky, but I can't see how it would be less so.
Oh, and yes, Yafa, the fetus can be damaged or destroyed by chemotherapy.
03-23-04, 02:26 PM Doug I'm for abortion. It is the woman's own body and not the gov't. She should make the choices that will effect her body the gov't should have no say as to tell a woman what she can and can't do to her own body and her own child.
03-23-04, 08:49 PM samantha That is good then fuse if its not often that it happens isn't it? This is just my opinion and thats all I have to answer to is myself on this. If you guys believe in abortions thats fine I just don't myself. You never see me degrade those who feel this way at all Even if i don't agree with someones opinion I respect it i wish poople would do the same with me.
03-23-04, 09:48 PM coldfuse From my pro-life standpoint, abortions in cases inconsistent with or threaten life are acceptable and necessary. Anacephalic infants are such a case - they are born with only their lower brain stems functioning and die shortly after birth.
My original pro-life stance came about when I became satisfied that a developing fetus was a human being. My tolerance for pro-choicers is quite high, because most of them do not believe this. My trouble lies with folks who believe that fetuses are human yet insist it's still OK to abort them, often for their own economic or social self-interest. My greater difficulty is with self-righteous people who refuse to treat those who have made a very difficult decision, often with unforeseen consequences, with compassion and acceptance.
03-23-04, 09:49 PM coldfuse Darn - no edit function! Consider the above post edited for grammar. Smile
03-23-04, 09:59 PM samantha I agree with you fuse and for that I do have compassion with poeple. If someone choses to do this I am there for them 100 percent. I had a girlfriend who not long ago chose this route and even though its not what I would do, I supported her decision. She needed her friends with her to help her through this without our opinions or judging her. It was her choice.
03-24-04, 12:51 PM Elexina I had a friend in college who had an ectopic pregnancy. Interestingly enough, no one ever referred to the fetus's removal as an "abortion," but actually as a "surgery." Probably because there is really no choice in the matter.
Methos asked, but I'll ask again: really, if you are opposed to abortion (which is fine, that is your belief), what is your position on the fairly common ectopic pregnancy? What would you do if it happened to you, or your daughter, or your wife?
03-24-04, 01:54 PM Leppi ectopic surgery is the same in my belief as abortion. The only difference is the reason is it being done is to allow more people to live. The mother and future children. I don't see more people being allowed to live because a regular abortion is being done.
03-26-04, 10:16 AM Elexina Perhaps not, but the woman is allowed to live her life on her terms, not on the terms of society's whim. Note: I do not approve of the use of abortion as a form of birth control. However, in cases of rape and incest, especially, I believe far more harm can come from keeping the fetus than not.
03-26-04, 12:26 PM samantha I know no matter how much we argue this we will never agree. I know I can't at all be persuaded to change my beliefs and im sure others can't either. As stated I don't believe in abortions but, I don't go protest them and cause others to feel bad because of my beliefs. I usually pretty much keep my beliefs to myself. I don't judge others who have them or believe in them. Judging is not my thing to do at all. I only believe i have to live according to how God wants me to live and answer only to Him on that and not others. He judges me.
03-29-04, 11:41 AM Elexina I respect that, Samantha, that is commendable. I understand that you don't believe in abortions, and that is fine. That is your belief and your practice. I don't believe I am trying to force my belief on anyone, and I'm glad that you wouldn't, either.
03-30-04, 10:48 PM stampeding turtles I have no problem with those people who are so adamant about the love for the unborn as long as they continue to love and support all human beings throughout the life cycle. It's an admirable thing to be so very concerned about humans right to live.... I just try to be consistent. Otherwise, how can they justify such a concern for the fetus, but less concerned for unwanted and abused children. Or how about the hungry, the poor, the elderly, the disenfranchised, or those unwanted by American society.... like the homeless, gay people, etc. One part of the life cycle is not more important than any other, in my mind.
I don't want to see people be thought of as 'expendable' and die in a unnecesarry war either.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 6723 | Location: Land of Lincoln, USA | Registered: 07-04-02
