Pro-choicers justify their view by claiming fetuses are not living humans. In fact, (from what I have heard and read, many times) pro-choicers claim fetuses are more like parasites, because they take from the woman without giving.
Based on this reasoninng, is abortion a cure for fetuses? Since this "parasite" is only passed via sex, is pregnancy an STD? Since there are thousands of new pregnancies a day, is pregnancy an epidemic? Are born children evolved parasites, (such as viruses) that have learned to survive on their own, and duplicate? If so, how can we rid the world of them?
2006-07-04 13:59:52 · 16 answers · asked by man_id_unknown 4 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
This has to be one of the dumbest questions I've seen on here. Rid the world of our children?? Children are not parasites the are a miracles and a blessing!
Abortion is not a "cure", it is murder.
2006-07-04 14:07:47 · answer #1 · answered by patticakes 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
I am prochoice, but I do not believe fetuses are parasites. In being prochoice...my personal choice would be to give life. Though, I may not agree with what other women decide, I feel it is their choice. There are ugly people in this world, who would care little for a baby and if they made abortion illegal they could hurt the baby cause it birth defects by taking drugs or drinking while pregnant, even kill their baby. It is a shame and awful but it is true. I would not want to see a baby brought into this world be put threw such torture, so to have an abortion would be a far better answer for such people. In a perfect world, woman that became pregnant and did not want their baby could put it up for adoption, or give to a family who could not have children.
But, your other question, is abortion a cure for not having babies at all, well I guess it is, but that would be an end to the human race. Babies are not parasites, they are a miracle of life, little people...you, me, and everyone reading this.
2006-07-04 21:19:49 · answer #2 · answered by Needstoknow 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Abortion cannot be the cure for unborn fetuses. After all, abortion kills them. You may have meant abortion is the cure for unwanted pregnancies. (Sorry for the sass, can't resist) =)
Seriously though, I personally don't believe abortion is the right way. After all, there is such a thing as family planning or preventive measures (pills, condoms, sponge, diaphragm, etc). And I don't believe that unborn fetuses are evolved viruses or parasites, either. If such is the case, are we then who managed to get born, just a more evolved/developed form of this virus?
But hey, that's just me. I've always maintained that the way you see things would depend on the theory (or yardstick) you are using.
2006-07-05 00:14:49 · answer #3 · answered by jinky 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your logic is flawed and the analogy is incorrect. Typical of crap madfe up by women hating religious extremists. While the relationship between a fetus and it's host is similar to that of a parasite and its host, the key differences lie in the damage a fetus does to the host - generally none, unless stretch marks and being ripped to shreds count - and a parasite - which, if efficient, will live off the host as long as possible, generally resulting in damage to the host all the way up to death. Additionally, a difference lies with the desireability of playing host to a fetus. No rational person desires to host a parasite. Parasites serve their own needs, not those of the host. A fetus, if allowed to continue to viability and eventual birth as a baby, allows the host to fulfill its purpose in perpetuating the species by continuing it's DNA. Parasites don't do that at all.
The real question should be why anti-choice people hate women so much that they feel they shouldn't be allowed to control their own bodies and make their own decisions regarding their ability to reproduce. I mean, really, if you "people" actually cared about life you'd spend more time trying to prevent war, poverty, starvation, and disease - things that make life intolerable for people already here - instead of enslaving women and making them baby making machines.
2006-07-05 04:07:28 · answer #4 · answered by eljonez 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've seen what embryos and fetuses actually look like at each stage of development during the plastination exhibition in Philli and I apologize if this sounds crude, but an embryo actually looks like a piece of snot. Sorry.
Thing about pro-choice is not to confuse it with pro-abortion. All pro choice is, is to let the woman and man involved decide whether they want to have a child or not. No pro-choicer will say to a pregnant woman: go have an abortion.
But I have seen, with my ex-sister in law, that pro-lifers will tell women not to have an abortion and then turn their backs when the child is born and the trouble starts (financial and otherwise).
2006-07-04 22:01:00 · answer #5 · answered by scubalady01 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, a foetus is technically a parasite.
No, being a parasite is not equivalent to being detrimental. There are thousands of bacteria living in our gastro-intestinal tract, many of which may well be parasitic, but all of which are crucial to our digestive processes, for example.
There are 'good' parasites and 'bad' parasites - parasitism merely describes a method by which an organism gets its nutrition.
As such, abortion is not a 'cure' for anything, because there is nothing involved that needs curing.
Hope that this helps dispel your obvious confusion.
2006-07-04 21:35:11 · answer #6 · answered by rei_t_ex 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is... a complex subject, to say the least. You present only one side of the argument.
What if the fetus was born into a familoy with no money? It would die a painful, starving death in it's youth. Nobody's sure that abortion is painless, but it is fast, which is better than a slow, painful death.
Or, would you perhaps have the woman put her child up for adoption? In a cramped, overcrowded orphanage where the child might not die, just suffer to no end until being adopted, and that might not even work out.
There are many reasons for abortion. Unfortunately, people don't often see them all.
2006-07-04 21:10:03 · answer #7 · answered by buster_wilde3 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Pro-Choicers sound crazy but think about this. Whenever a girl has her period then that baby isn't being born either. Sure it is a little different because sex is so that babies could be born let's face it. We are at a point in time when people no longer do it for that use. It isn't like that baby feels pain when it is being aborted. Are you going to propose that whenever a girl is getting close to that "time of the month" she must get pregnant? Abortion or period a baby won't be born.
2006-07-04 21:48:35 · answer #8 · answered by Just another girl. 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The cure is not to get pregnant in the first place. There are to many way to keep from becoming pregnant. If you are stupid enough to get pregnant when you clearly do not wish to be then you have the choice to do what you will and you will have to live with that choice every day of your life.
2006-07-05 03:43:16 · answer #9 · answered by thewindcries 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think people have sex thinking "I wanna have a baby right now." They should use contraseptives but things do happen.
It is a woman's choice what she does. But she should make sure to use caution before getting into bed.
2006-07-04 21:30:41 · answer #10 · answered by Adam 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋