Serious question about abortion.?

Question

Here are my main points on why abortion is wrong and I would like a pro-choice to give his/her point of view on why they think I am wrong. This is a huge concern of mine.
Abortion is wrong because...

You are killing an innocent life, how can you be against a war because of all the killing when you think an INNOCENT life isn't worth saving. (only if you feel this way about war.)

How many choices does a woman need before we allow her to kill a baby. 1= sex or no sex 2 = protection or no protection.

What do you consider the thing inside a woman if it is not a person yet. My response is that if it is anything else than a person then it would be a parasite. Which would mean that every "parasite" should be killed.

No death penalty yet killing an innocent life o.k.? (only if against death penalty)

Its not the mothers body that she is harming with her "choice".... its another human's body.

continuation...
To the people that say a woman should be allowed to do whatever she wants to her body.... shes eating for two.

How can people be charged with killing an unborn baby in a car accident yet mothers are not charged with murder in abortion.

10 points to best rebuttle.

Answer 1

Only thing I can say is it's the "easy way out". I'm personally pro-choice, just so you know. But I think that there are certain sides that some people don't like to look at. Like say some silly 12 year old makes a bad decision and gets pregnant. Her body isn't developed enough to carry a child. She could end up dying HERSELF in the process. Then she loses the baby AND her entire family and friends lose HER too. I think that there's so much focus put on the "innocent" life and all that we sometimes forget about the already living, breathing humanbeing before us.

What if she has cancer or some other terminal illness. You can't tell a sick woman that she can't be intimate with her husband because she's sick. She would most certainly die while carrying or delivering the child.

There's the obvious case of rape which I don't think should ever be regulated. To me that is just sooo cruel on the poor woman. It's a constant reminder every single day for 9 horrible months of that terrible situation. She's so emotionally scarred already and then for someone to expect her to go on and deliver this child which is the result of something so heinous as rape, is just cruel. Some people are sooo unaware of how rape can affect women. I would have a hard enough time accepting that I was raped and would need my own help, support, and counselling, but then to also try and eat for two and keep it alive because of some criminal, I don't know if I'd be able to handle that.

Another case is if the woman is mentally unstable. She could get pregnant for any number of reasons (rape, sexual molestation, illucid moments where she thinks she can make the right decision about sex, etc). But then how do you expect her to take care of herself and nurture the child inside of her. What if she is psychopathic, or mentally challenged. She wouldn't know what to do and would just end up hurting the baby AND herself.

What if a woman gets pregnant by accident (it happens) because she made poor decisions. Should she be punished with possibly losing her job, her career, her schooling and more? It's not like she can just carry it for 9 months, pop it out and go on her way. She needs to make scheduled appointments to check her health, do all kinds of tests, see different doctors, take off a couple weeks or months from work for maternity leave, and more. And she would have to pay for all that out of her own pocket. So then what becomes of her mortgage payments, her car payments, her other child(ren), her college tuition, etc.? No one would be willing to help her, because society would see her as "just another unfit mother".

What if she is a young woman (still lives with parents) and happens to make a poor choice, or is in bad situations some other way (prostitution, etc)? What if her parents are abusive and punish her for it? Is the life of the baby worth the life of the girl?

I DO NOT however believe that it should ever be used as a type of "birth control". Like with the mindset of "Oh, I'll just have sex tonight and if I get pregnant I'll just get that taken care of next week". Because no woman would willing WANT to go through that. Abortions can be so dangerous for the woman and bring up so many health conditions in the future, and even jeopardize future pregnancies for when she IS planning for a family. I honestly believe that every woman that gets an abortion has some kind of honest reason that people just don't want to hear. Anti-abortion rioters and others need to open their minds sometimes and think "there MUST be a reason". But they don't. They automatically assume that she's a horrible person and should be shunned from society. And that's not the way to go about it. She has enough going on emotionally, physically and mentally, she doesn't need people throwing eggs at her and making signs about it.

And what about all the abortion doctors that have been killed by anti-abortion rioters? Is that fair? He helps women return to their daily lives and tries to do what he can for their health or any other reason there might be. But in return he is killed, leaving his wife and kids to fend for themselves. Isn't that not murder as well? But people see it as "good in the long run". Killing him now will save thousands of babies in the future. No, the women will just go somewhere else.

I think if there was more SUPPORT out there for pregnant women and teens, we wouldn't have this type of problem today. Go into any supermarket. Look for a pregnant 15 or 16 year old and listen to what the people around her say. She's a whore, she's stupid, she's going to mess up her life, she's not going to amount to anything, etc. Don't you think she would resent all that and might consider abortion just to escape the criticisms of an extremely cruel society? But maybe if someone walks up to her, hugs her, and says "you're brave, I know you can do this", she would consider keeping it or putting it up for adoption. But society isn't like that. It's so sad sometimes.

Speaking of adoption, I know many adopted children as well. Some realize that they're parents just wanted a better life for them, but yet others hurt themselves every day (physically or mentally) telling themselves that their parents didn't love them and didn't want them. They feel foresaken by the ones that were SUPPOSED to care and really can't relate to it. Which brings about the lack of good adoption clinics and foster homes in the world. I know one boy that was left on an orphanage's steps in Korea before being adopted by an American family. But in the meantime he lived a horrible life in that orphanage and punishes himself everyday because he blames himself for his parents not wanting to keep him and love him. He's had quite a bit of counseling, but I don't think he'll ever truly be able to understand or accept it.

I know many teens that have babies, and it's so so hard for them. They tell me how they cry themselves to sleep at night because of the things they hear people whisper about them, and THAT'S the reason that abortion rates slowly escalate. Women want to just pretend it never happened and try to maintain their respectable life. But instead they are punished, scarred, and spat upon by the things we say and the looks we give.



I know you probably don't agree with many of the things I may have said, but I think that's a pretty decent rebuttle. Especially that last paragraph. I appreciate the fact that you asked the question the way you did and avoided name-calling and didn't bring lack of intelligence or education into it. But just remember that society has a long way to go before anyone even begins to understand others around them.

Answer 2

Actually it is simple. Until it reaches a point where it can survive on its own, I don't consider it a living being (and in most states it is illegal to have an abortion in the third trimester except when the mother's life is threatened.

More than 25% of pregnancies end in miscarriage, thus a cluster of cells is not a life? If life begins at the moment of conception then why is it that more than 50% of fertilized eggs don't lead to pregnancy? What about ectopic pregnancy - is having that removed destroying life? What about children who will be born in a vegetative state?

Finally, if the death penalty results in the killing of an innocent person, who is responsible? Some people who are against abortion want to speed up the processing of the death penalty - thus removing some of the steps in the appeal process, which - considering in Illinois alone, 12 innocent people were on death row - could result in the death of an innocent person. Would you condone that?

I have a much easier time with people who are anti-abortion, anti-death penalty, and anti-war, than I do people who are anti-abortion but seem not to care at all about the innocent women and children being killed in war. And like I said, until it can survive outside the woman, it has only the potential for life as a good percentage of pregnancies never come to term anyway.

Answer 3

Since I just answered this question about 2 seconds ago on another post, here you go:

I'm a liberal and I'm going to give you a real answer. This is how I feel about abortion:

**I'm against abortion as a form of birth control. I don't think people who get pregnant because they failed to properly protect themselves should not get abortions. But is that their call or mine?

**I believe children who are victims of rape/incest should be allowed the choice of an abortion. After being raped (sometimes by a father or other family member), I don't think it is morally right to force an underage female to carry a child that resulted from such.

**I believe women who are victims of rape should be allowed the choice of an abortion. Although I'm not personally sure if I would chose abortion, I've seen enough victims to know that the mental and physical stress of carrying a child that resulted from rape is pretty severe.

**I believe a woman should be allowed the choice of an abortion in the instance that her life is put in jeopardy by birthing the baby.

The problem with banning abortion, but allowing exceptions in the above circumstances is that I have not heard any realistic way to do it. How do you prove that is the reason? What if a young woman is date raped and finds she is pregnant and decides she doesn't want the baby? A lot of those cases are he said/she said. What if he says, "I didn't do it?" Does she have to carry the baby? There are just too many issues. And then you will have women saying they were raped so they can get abortions. That opens up a whole new can of worms. Do you hold that against women with legitimate cases?

I think it's a decision that's very hard to make. Until someone can convince me that all these problems can be addressed, I can't agree to ban abortion.

And wow, the "rape card?" (above comment) I have never heard it put that way and hope to never hear or see it put that way again. And liberals are unfeeling?

I have another comment, too, which is by no means an argument, but...I have personally known of two instances (a couple of years apart) in which male Republicans, staunch pro-lifers, got women pregnant. The first guy got his girlfriend pregnant. They had no marriage plans and he was thinking of breaking up with her anyway. His first question was, "Is it mine?" (Yeah, that's going to make you want his baby.) His second question was, "What are YOU going to do with IT?" She got an abortion. Second situation was a casual relationship. The same two questions were asked. She had the baby, but the guy is nowhere to be seen. So, a lot of people (men in particular) are all cheerful about being pro-lifers until faced with an actual situation. Then all of a sudden, the baby becomes "it" and becomes the woman's problem.

Answer 4

I am not a pro choice advocate but I will gladly step up to the mike.

Let us start with the "innocent" argument. I am presuming you hold to the theory that it is better to let a guilty person go free than put a innocent person be put to death. That argument is derived from the days of torture that used to be used to abstract a confession from an accused person. But nobody is being tortured here, so let's just jump straight to the killing. Does it matter whether the person you are killing is innocent? Does it make it any the less wrong to kill a guilty person? And, what are they guilty of? Murder? Yours or somebody elses?

I get the eye for an eye thing. If you accidentally wound a person you are to pay them in kind. It doesn't say anything about accidentally killing a person. No killing is pretty much wrong no matter how you slice it. Innocent, guilty, it doesn't matter.

Doesn't sound like I am going anywhere quickly. I'm not.

You argue that women have too many bites at the apple of choice. That is too easy to shoot down. Think incest, rape, and troubled pregnancies. There is only one bite of the apple there, so if we are going to accept that these are exceptions to your rule, then your rule has to go. Mine doesn't. Killing is wrong.

I'm going to divert my argument for a moment here to bring up a concept you ignored "time". What role does time play in all of this? Considerable. Kill something one way and it is self defense, another and it is murder. Timing is everything. At least legally speaking. Killed in the womb it is legal. Out of the womb it is illegal. First trimester no question. Last trimester big question.Why is this so? Most think it is, because; the fetus is possibly viable, able to live on its own, it also has something to do with premeditation. The longer one is pregnant the more it seems that they are committed to that pregnancy, and maybe they are, so; why would they abort? More to the point why would you perform the abortion for them? The answer is supposed to be that the pregnancy will cause them mental or physical harm if allowed to go to term. I don't make that up. Read Roe v. Wade and you will find that this thought is in the decision as it stands.

This brings me back to your next argument, first raised by Plato in the "Republic", the wax allegory. Is a fetus a person? Legally, "No". That is where the viability argument comes into play. A fetus, supposedly, can't live on it's own. That is logical, but; then again neither can a person on a respirator or on dialysis. I give you kudos on the person argument. The viability argument holds that you are right as well but it comes back to the chicken or the egg with viability. A chicken is a chicken. An egg is a potential chicken. The law is there for the chickens, not the potential chickens. And, No, a fetus is not considered a parasitic organism, so I don't think we should go there, because a baby on its mother's breast is a parasitic organism and nobody is arguing let's kill all the babies as well.

Death penalty, this is where you are grasping at straws. You have gone from the completely innocent to the completely guilty. I am guessing you are against the death penalty. Can't say i support it much myself. But I will say this on its behalf: the death penalty is there to protect the innocent from the found guilty who have been presumed to be a threat to kill again. This is a case of the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the one or the few. How many people will that person kill if that person is released versus killing that person alone. I think of this as the Dracula argument. Would you stake a person if you thought he was Dracula? Odd are you would. With pregnancies we are normally dealing with only a one on one situation. Multiple offsprings makes it slightly different. I bring you back to time, however. If a woman aborts three children when she is 18 what says that she can't have thirty children by the time she is age 36? Suddenly you have a three on thirty one argument. Do you save the three or the thirty one?

And that brings us back to choice and your last point, the mother's body. It is the mother's body that is the host for all this going on. You can't get to the baby without going through the mother. So, why shouldn't it be her decision and not yours or mine? Women die having abortions. People die having their nails cut, I know. I have had to say good bye to a couple of them. This is a life or death question for the mother regardless of the child. And sadly, she has to make the decision for everyone. Do you want to be the person who has to make the decision for some one else and then have them die later on. Do you want to be the one who creates the next Andrea Yates? Do you want to sit there and watch as she gets put to death because she couldn't think straight anymore? Tell me. Do you want to play god with other people's lives? That is your choice, play God or don't.

My rule holds steady, "Don't kill."

Between you and the mother of the child, if you make the decision and she dies or goes insane and kills somebody, I would expect that you would be guilty of at least solicitation to do murder which is a felony in every state in this country. Is that what you want?

"Don't kill."

You aren't protecting yourself. It is not self defense, as if that matters. It is her decision no matter when she makes it. She will pay the price if there is a price to be paid, not you.

Be smart and "Don't Kill."

Answer 5

Hmm...my pro-choice argument.

Firstly, you say it is an Innocent Life. Is an unborn foetus, a collection of growing cells, a human life? Is it sentinent, does it think? I dont see the unborn foetus as a'child' as such, at least not early on in the pregnancy. Sure, later on it becomes a child but for the first 5 months, no. A collection of cells, yes, but not a human life.

Secondly, a woman has the right to choose regardless of wether she has the other choices. Are you saying women should be forced to bare the children in their womb wether they like it or not? Again, consider the choice, it is not yours or mine to make, it is the womans personal choice. I think when it comes to rights here, she is in the clear.

Thirdly, i have already stated my argument for that..a foetus is technically a parasite, yes, one that will become a human being but isnt yet. I go back to the sentinence argument.

I am strictly against killing in all forms, i just dont see it as 'killing'. How do you kill something that is not truely alive? Talk of killing inflames the argument.

Lastly, the mother has a sovereign right to choose. It is her body that must bare the child and struggle with it, so i say the buck stops with her.

Hows that for a counter-argument? I keen to stress i respect your view entierly and you seem open to at least debate the issue. Good to see someone willing to try and understand us pro-choicers :)

Answer 6

Would you rather this innocent life grow up in poverty, never knowing what a full belly is, or love because the mother never loved or wanted that child. You would say adoption then, truly how many children get adopted, instead of living in foster care, in a system that cannot and does not love the children that are in it. Would you rather a child suffer in a foster home, only to get beat or starved by a foster parent only interested in collected some more money from the federal government. Granted, abortion should not be used as birth control, but to survivors of rape, incest, or people with no place to go, it should be available.

Answer 7

I think that abortion is both right and wrong. Sometimes there are situations where a baby isn't needed. For example, if the mother was a drug abusing prostitute and the father was an abusive alcoholic. The child would be better off unborn. Because the world is too corrrupt and bringing an innocent life into it sometimes wouldnt be the best of situations.

Answer 8

Im pro life and would like to respond to some of the answers ive seen..

First the argument about the child comming into a world not loved, unwanted, the mother a prostitute etc argument..
You think that the unborn child (if they had a voice) would say your right? i dont want to live like that?.. who are you to make that decision for everyone?

second the argument of that child wouldnt be able to live outside me so its my body argument. Your right the child can not life without you and is a part of you.. so you want to kill a part of yourself for convienience sake? and even though the baby needs its mother does not equal the baby IS its mother.. they are separate in many ways,.. especially in the way that makes the baby a separate person

and finally to the person that said what makes you think that a fetus is a person? i ask you the same question just reversed.. what makes you think that the fetus is not a person?

also the one ive not heard yet is what if the mothers life is in danger.. well this is pretty much a no brainer for me. Mothers life in danger. child can not live without mother.. need to save someone.. child has to go. its sad but needed

Answer 9

Deep inside me, probably in my soul, I cannot condone any killing. That would include in war, a death penalty and yes, abortion.
However, our government which is responsible for killing people in battle and in criminal death sentences, is nothing more than hypocritical if they believe they can tell women not to have abortions. Imagine, the other killing mentioned is O.K. but not fetuses.

Answer 10

First off you are not alive until you take your first breath! Second you cannot expect everyone to be abstinent and birth control isn't 100%! Do you think it's better to have a child abused, neglected or murdered (after they are actually alive)? Or sitting in some orphanage feeling like damaged goods because nobody wants them? I would rather have never existed than to go through that!

Answer 11

Your entire line of argument fails. Abortion is about who your God is and not about what your politics are. You have clearly been brainwashed and are unable to think clearly. MY God is a loving and all powerful God with power over life and death. My God loves life so much that he never allows a death unless by his will. In fact my God offers eternal life to all humans simply for the asking.
MY God invented abortion in the form of miscarriage and uses it every day. My God does not kill in abortion, my God instead offers eternal life. My God is powerful enough to know the future and to use his powers to stop the suffering of children before it happens. He sometimes uses abortion (with no death) to keep a child from suffering.
There is another god. That god is the god of the pro life movement. That movement uses their god to kill fetuses and doctors. That god bombs clinics and harasses women. Their god is an evil and jealous god. But he has no power other than deceit.
The Good News is that you do not have to believe the god of the pro life movement. You may believe in any God you want. I hope you will choose carefully.
All of your points fail in the true light of Christ, our loving father. He knows that you wish to do good. Now that you know the truth you should pray to God and ask for forgiveness.