2006-07-11 03:09:04 · 12 answers · asked by sammy s 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The reason people are pro life is they think the unborn human baby should have every right to life as any other human being. That's the real issue. It's legalized murder.
2006-07-11 04:06:33 · answer #1 · answered by irishharpist 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The thing about the abortion debate is that the two sides are arguing entirely unrelated issues. Pro-life people say "abortion is bad". Pro-choice advocates say "The government should be making personal decisions that like". It's not about abortion. It's about who gets to make the decisions.
The question distills down to this: someone is going to choose. It's either going to be the individual, or it's going to be the majority (through enacted laws). If the majority gets to choose, then they are effectively imposing their belief system -- which is almost always religiously-based -- on everyone. If the individual gets to choose, then it allows for those people who happen to belief that a 6-week old collection of cells is not yet a person, as well as those who believe it is.
But if the Supreme Court decides that reproductive rights are not fundamental rights, if women lose the individual right to choose, and the government makes all the decisions. Try to imagine what could happen, if all reproductive rights are now subject to state control.
New York or Florida could pass a law saying that anyone making less than $30K per year cannot have children, and must abort any pregnancy, because they obviously cannot support them financially. No constitutional challenge, because reproductive rights are no longer nationally protected. It's up to the states to decide.
Or North Carolina or Texas decides that convicted felons should never have children, and starts imposing mandatory sterilization as part of criminal sentences. No constitutional challenge, because reproductive rights are no longer nationally protected. Let the states decide. Right?
South Dakota has already outlawed abortion, even in the case of rape or incest or permanent harm to the mother. Then, they decide that they have too little population, and require every female under the age of 28 who is not celibate to have at least one child. Or mandating that women serve as surrogates. No constitutional challenge, because reproductive rights are no longer nationally protected. Let the states decide? When the states can't even follow the existing rules of law?
Once the right to reproductive privacy is taken away by the court, it will be decades before it can be reestablished. Conservatives better start praying, if they get their wish, that during that time they don't become the minority under a legislation that decides to require abortions. Because, once that right to personal choice is lost, the government will always be able to decide whether you can have children or not.
Do you really want to abdicate that much of your personal freedom and choice to a group of politicians? Do people really want to live in a country where state legislatures can decide who can be pregnant, and who cannot, and who must? Do people really have that much trust and faith in government that they think the legislature will always make the right choices? Because we'll be stuck with those decisions.
The concept of reproductive freedoms is not whether you agree with the individual choices being made. It's whether you think the government should have the right to take away and mandate those choices.
Why can't people understand that freedom of choice is not a minority value, even if the majority happens to disagree with the minority's choice?
2006-07-11 10:25:30 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Cons first:
It will encourage the act of abortion, increasing the incidence rate.
It violates one basic right, "the right to live". That's why it is also considered as an act of murder because by committing the act of abortion, the life of the fetus is taken away from him. And don't dare say that a fetus doesn't have a life yet because common sense dictates that everything that is capable of evolution HAS LIFE, and the fetus, being capable of developing or evolving from a compound cell to a more structurally complex form, definitely have a life!
Pros: practical purposes for some women, case-to-case basis.
2006-07-11 10:22:28 · answer #3 · answered by gameplan_xtreme 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
God invented abortion. And for good reasons. God knows: Will the baby be loved or abused; is the baby healthy; will the baby be healthy all his life; will it affect the life of the mother; will it be educated properly; are the parents married; will the baby suffer an unknown fate and on and on. God has an unlimited number of reasons that abortion is the best thing in some cases. All a mother has to do is pray and ask for God's advice. And if God says that abortion is right (as he sometimes does when he uses miscarriage) then who can claim he is wrong.
The pro life movement wants to put God in a box and say that God allows murder. I don't believe that is true. MY God is opposed to killing doctors, bombing clinics, harassing women and killing in abortion. MY God takes the life of the fetus and protects it in abortion. He transfers that life to another soul. He does not kill.
2006-07-13 22:45:56 · answer #4 · answered by Give me Liberty 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pros? None whatsoever.
Cons? Well, abortion is murdering babies, slashing our population and undermining the social security system, vandalizing and minimalizing women, and giving America a shameful history.
To all those who say making it illegal won't stop it: it will reduce it, and do you think the same about murder or theft? Back alley abortions are still happening. We have not stopped anything. Just encouraged it.
2006-07-16 22:48:55 · answer #5 · answered by aeiou12 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Abortion IS legal.
2006-07-11 10:19:38 · answer #6 · answered by lighthouse 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Abortion is nothing but MURDER. These people who lay down and have sex ,should use something to protect ther selfes.Why should these babies die just because there are stooped people out there ?If these people dont want the baby ,why dont thay put it up for adoption,and let someone have it who Really wants kids and give them a full life just like thay have?
2006-07-11 10:21:24 · answer #7 · answered by GLORIA S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Arguments for and against abortion compared:
http://www.deathroe.com/Pro-life_Answers/
http://www.pregnantpause.org/abort/choicarg.htm
2006-07-18 13:42:10 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i cant think of a pro.
women have been purposefuly aborting their babies for eons. you cant stop someone from ending their pregnancy if they truely want to.
why do we need to make it legal?
life if life, children dont decide to be concieved, theyre totally dependant on their mothers.
2006-07-11 10:12:56 · answer #9 · answered by amosunknown 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's already legal.
2006-07-11 10:13:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋