Before abortions were legal and available in clinics, women were often forced to seek illegal abortions in unsafe, unsanitary conditions. Instruments like clothes hangers and lye douches(!) were sometimes used. Often not only would the fetuses die, but the mothers would, as well. Some may argue that these women brought the situation upon themselves, but sometimes these women were rape victims. Sometimes they were frightened, confused teenagers who were afraid of telling their parents they were pregnant. Sometimes these women were single and lived in a time and place in which single motherhood was frowned upon. The situations vary. But either way, doesn't it make more sense to pass legislation that would at least protect the health and safety of the women who seek abortions, rather than allowing not only the fetuses, but also their mothers, to die?
2006-10-24 04:07:28 · 30 answers · asked by tangerine 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I agree with your point. I also agree with those who say it shouldn't be a form of birth control, either.
The government is trying to promote abstinence and outlaw abortion. That's not going to happen. You need to have the kind of law, that you state, to protect young mothers' lives... AND educate people (especially teens) better allowing them access to birth control, condoms, etc. Preaching abstinence is not logical. Maybe in theory, but not practice. We all know that.
According to an 8 year study, "American teenagers who take 'virginity' pledges wind up with just as many STDs as the other kids do. But that's not all - taking the pledge also makes a teenage gir six time more likely to perform oral sex and four times more likely to allow anal". (New Rules, by Bill Maher).
2006-10-24 13:28:55 · answer #1 · answered by MoMoney23 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I totally agree with you on the point that it should never have to come to the "back alley" abortions ever again. I do however feel that too many people are taking advantage of abortions and using them as if it were a form of birth control. THAT really disgusts me. I firmly believe that women who were raped, were victims of incest or have health issues (where their life is in danger if they proceed with the pregnancy) should have abortions readily available to them. I know many will say adoption is a way out, but to force a woman to carry a baby for 9 months that was a product of a rape is a pretty hideous thing to do to a woman. As far as teenagers go, they should have been using protection in the first place if they choose to engage in adult activities such as sexual intercourse. I have no tolerance for girls that "get" pregnant and have had several abortions, oh and they are out there. So in general, yes, I believe they should be legal, but I think they should be closely monitored and if you have a teenage girl that is abusing the right to have an abortion, than by all means her parents should definitely be notified of the situation.
2006-10-24 11:15:20 · answer #2 · answered by Michele A 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Personally I think legalizing abortion saved many women's lives. But on the other side of that coin Abortion has been used as a birth control. This is where I have my problem with abortions. There needs to be a balance somewhere. I'm not sure of the answer. The good news is that the young people are choosing to give birth, the bad news is almost none of them are married, not of age, nor able to care for these births. Thus they are creating a welfare state at an early age.
2006-10-24 11:11:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I personally believe in strictly limiting when abortions can be done. Rape, incest, life of the mother. There are some (not all) that use it has a form of birth control and that's just plain wrong.
Bottom line though is that it's about choice. I would NEVER inflict my will upon another human being (mother or child). Who am I to tell another person that they have to live a certain way for the next 9 months of their life? And then go through child birth never to see a living being that is a part of them? Not to mention if the pregnancy involved rape some would have the woman carry the child to term? How is that beneficial to the woman OR the child? I certainly wouldn't want any one (government or otherwise) telling me what to do with my body.
2006-10-24 11:14:44 · answer #4 · answered by Scotsman 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Abortion is a highly sensitive and ethical issue. I believe that it is the choice of the woman involved and no one else. There is no sense in outlawing abortion because, as you say, it will only revive the 'black market' for illegal practices. As with every decision in life, abortion can only be decided upon as a true answer for the 'problem' in hand by the woman concerned. Forced pregnancy should have be abolished long ago and the same applies to forced abortion. Those around the woman should be supportive and understanding, remembering that their beliefs are maybe not the same as the woman who needs their help. So, no, abortion should not be outlawed.
xxx
2006-10-24 11:14:45 · answer #5 · answered by moominjen 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
For the reasons that you state it is a really bad idea to outlaw abortion.
Below is a link to opinions about diy abortion which give some good reasons why abortion is better undertaken in a caring environment - although one can see situations where a 13 year old girl might prefer to be discreet, she would certainly be better off with properly trained help.
2006-10-24 11:27:27 · answer #6 · answered by Aspphire 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Before abortions were legal and available in clinics, women were often forced to seek illegal abortions in unsafe, unsanitary conditions. Instruments like clothes hangers and lye douches(!) were sometimes used"
You have fallen for a major myth. Dr. Bernard Nathanson was one of those who pushed this myth, among others, and years later admitted that it was totally made up, a fabrication, to get people to sympathize with the abortion movement. Women simply went to doctors' office in safe and clean conditions. Such doctors simply broke the law and took money under the table.
Even if women did harm themselves during a self-imposed abortion, the law is not meant to protect people from doing stupid things to themselves. Using this logic, one should equip bank robbers with bullet proof vests in case they get shot. After all, bank robberies will always occur anyway.
____
Fascinating the number of people who resort to slogans and euphemisms here. You can't even describe the very procedure you claim to support.
2006-10-24 11:16:22 · answer #7 · answered by C = JD 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I always have conflicting thoughts on abortion rights. The major problem I have with it is people that use abortion as birth control. I can sometimes understand in extreme circumstances such as rape. But I know of people having multiple abortions just because they didn't plan on getting pregnant, and that should not be allowed. Something needs to be done.
2006-10-24 11:13:48 · answer #8 · answered by tmac 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Abortion should never be outlawed, but in fact the government should encourage hospitals to offer them. Having a baby can create a lot of financial problems in a family, and they will either have to stay for the rest of their lives working two jobs and caring for a baby, or unload it upon an orphanage that already has enough problems. It is best that the baby be released from the world before it arrives and begins conscious thought, than to let it suffer through its years of poverty and malnourishment.
2006-10-24 11:43:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
A full non exception ban on abortion would be very stupid. I personally angainst abortion, but I think that there should be some limits. Such as the father's rights, the father should always be notified before an abortion is performed, unless in cases of rape,incest and other issues.
2006-10-24 11:19:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋