How would you even identify those who are unwillingly pregnant when they know that if detected, they'd be forced to endure the entire pregnancy?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AjcLI8zHgcFukEnqQaPau3Psy6IX?qid=20060914042708AAd5Ac2
2006-09-14 00:59:01 · 9 answers · asked by bobkgins_sock_puppet_2 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Why would anybody need to identify somebody who was unwillingly pregnant?
2006-09-14 01:02:23 · answer #1 · answered by stafflers.t21@btinternet.com 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, being pregnant would be a definate reason to commit suicide, NOT. First off, these woman have birth control pills, which most are simply too stupid to remember to take, condoms, which they're too stupid to use, and now there's the morning after pill, which I assume they're too stupid to go pick up. In theory, it would be better off if they don't give birth, they're not exactly helping the gene pool, but again, its not their body their destroying by getting abortions, therefore, it can't really be said, "my body". Its not their body, its the babies body they're killing. Of course, I'm sure anyone too stupid to use birth control might have a difficult time figuring that out, but its a fact. These women aren't gonna die if they go thru pregnancy and give birth. They can give the baby up for adoption, go on with their lives, and maybe learn to use birth control in the future.
In the U.S., there will never be an end to abortion, no "forcing unwilling women to give birth" will ever happen here. This is a land of convenience, and its just easier for them to kill their babies, just like they're doing now, and the liberals (I am one by the way, but unlike most liberals, I make individual choices about each decision), who all flock together without any individual thought. These liberals will lump gay marriage and abortion in the same category. They don't even realize how many gay couples would like to adopt those inconvenient babies, but to be pro-life would take away their liberal status, and sometimes the status is more important to people than right and wrong.
2006-09-14 01:35:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you ban legal abortion all you do is open a market for illegal unsupervised abortion. You increase the number of suicides also. You end up with women using coat hangers and getting infections. So now not only does the baby die but also the mother runs a higher risk of the same. It's a personal choice and should be kept as such. Maybe offer more counseling to the woman before the abortion.
Love & Light
Sharon
One Planet = One People
2006-09-14 01:07:05 · answer #3 · answered by Soul 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Any Pro-lifer will tell you. We are not against the Mother we are for the baby. We are here to support the Mother the best we can financially/emotionally.
Pro-Lifers see the baby as the innocent victim, we also work with ALL mothers especially those who have been themselves victimized which accounts for less than 1% of the abortion rate. The majority is used for birth control/inconvenience.
2006-09-14 01:14:49 · answer #4 · answered by williamzo 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They are trying to make abortion clinics illegal, so that pregnant women can't find an abortion doctor and have to carry the baby to term. Of course, this will only force abortion doctors underground and increase the number of women who mutilate themselves to avoid carrying a pregnancy to term.
Religion likes to justify its arbitrary moral tenets on others by forcing others to follow them. That way they can feel good about their superstition and superior to those they are "helping". People with valid moral frameworks that are different than theirs are a threat to them. They cannot allow anybody to live in peace unless they follow their arbitrary moral tenets. That way they can show that only their moral tenets allow people to live in peace. Having another group living peaceably together with morals different than them undercuts the arguments for pushing their arbitrary morality.
2006-09-14 01:01:35 · answer #5 · answered by nondescript 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If they are not willing to be pregnant then they should not be willing to have sex in the first place. In the case of incest or rape, it is obviously a personal call. Or if to carry the baby to term would harm the mother or the baby. That is why abortion is a gray area for me. It has it's time and place but should not be looked upon as a method of birth control as it has been more and more lately.
2006-09-14 01:04:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Luckily the morning after pill is here to help! Also, lets not forget all the vacumn manufactures who would be put out of business. Seriously, it's a woman's body - she has a choice. No one should tell a woman what to do with her body, unless she is a collared sub and needs a little spanking. Another part of the Christian terorists trying to impose their false God's will on society and then they whine that they get picked on....
2006-09-14 01:12:36 · answer #7 · answered by rab2344 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Take a look at the law they just passed in Michigan. It is now mandatory that all females entering the 6th grade must be immunized with a shot that they say prevents STD's. What the phuck is happening to this country?
2006-09-14 05:13:59 · answer #8 · answered by Justa_Honay_Guy 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
if legal abortions are banned things will be worse...yes people have unprotected sex and they know the risks but i feel as though if your not in that persons situation how are you going to tell them what to do with their body...unless they are underage
2006-09-14 01:24:06 · answer #9 · answered by Pepperpaige 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋