English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Imagine for a moment that you might be wrong - that there is no God. Nothing happens for a reason, nothing is planned out ahead of time.

Is it still wrong to have an abortion in extreme cases like incest, rape, and when it would kill the mother to have the child? There is no God to send this future child, no God to have 'planned' the rape or incest that created it. It was just the action of a horrible person, and will result in the suffering of a woman or girl.

And don't give me the 'adoption, not abortion' crap - some of you don't seem to realize that adoption still involves HAVING the child, carrying it for 9 months, going through the hell of labor, missing school and work and who knows what else.

If there is no God, how can you say that a child should have to have a child?

2006-11-05 05:58:39 · 18 answers · asked by eri 7 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

18 answers

I’m agnostic and pro-life, but would not have abortion completely outlawed. Lt me say upfront that I do not judge or blame any individual for having an abortion, what ever the reason. Society has made it completely acceptable and it is the fault of all of us collectively, not the individual. Unfortunately, people use rare exceptions which end up making abortion common place and a method of birth control. How does that happen? Just like the rape and incest exceptions they also use abuse by a parent as a reason for not having parental notification. If you really want to think of all of the rare exceptions out there then there are just as many damaging one’s from making abortion easy as from outlawing or limiting it.

Starting with your example of a girl who is raped by her father, it could be traumatic for her to go on with a pregnancy, but if she doesn’t isn’t it more likely that her father will continue to rape her? If she were pregnant her father could be caught. If the evidence is destroyed he can continue to rape her. Also isn’t it at least as likely that a girl who was raped could be traumatized by the “decision” to kill the baby? Even if she isn’t at the time she makes the “decision” she could be at a later time. I’ve known many people (way too many) who have had abortions and most of them regret it to some degree or another. I’ve never known anyone who regretted having their child even the one’s who gave them up for adoption (they might regret that they gave them up, but not that they had them).

The abuse by a parent for the parental notification is another common exception people use to make abortion free and easy. People who use this exception don’t really understand abusive homes. I have had close friends who lived in extremely abusive homes to the point of being beaten to near death. The thing with an abusive parent is, it has nothing to do with what the child does. Anything and everything triggers the abuse. People, who think that the child gets beaten because of their actions, don’t understand abuse. If an abusive parent finds out about a pregnancy, will they most likely abuse? Yes. But they will find another reason if the child doesn’t get pregnant. Having an abortion will not stop a child from getting abused. In addition, it is very rare for both parents to be abusive and the non abusive one is usually very protective and even encourages the beatings to be transferred to them. The non abusive parent is the one the child would tell. In the extremely rare case where both parents are abusive, most parental notification laws give an exception for a judge to overrule the requirement.

I hope you don’t take offense to my answer and I hope it doesn’t come across as critical of you personally or of your intentions. I know this is a sensitive topic for people. I used to feel the same way as you do, until I had a child and felt the miracle of the whole process. It made me start questioning things more and not buy into the position being fed by the media and by pro-abortion groups that have a larger agenda than women’s rights.

2006-11-05 06:23:25 · answer #1 · answered by Nobody Girl 2 · 2 0

There is still a logical argument against abortion without involving religion. By aborting the product of rape, you are punishing the child for the actions of the father. Would you support the killing of all the children of rapists, regardless of age? Their fathers too are rapists.

As for adotpion and the "hell" of child bearing, why not carry the baby to term and let someone else take the baby who wants it? The pregnancy is a continuing result of the rape, just as if the woman received an STD from it. It's unfortunate and unfair, but that's how it is. Besides what's worse, the "hell" of missing school and labor, or a very invasive operation and the guilt of destroying a life? If pregnancy is such hell as you describe, the human species would be extinct, so it can't be all that bad.

2006-11-05 14:19:21 · answer #2 · answered by Spaghetti Cat 5 · 1 1

Interesting but flawed theoretical question. Legally, there have to be clear definitions, independent of a God or No God Argument.

Flaws:

1. Question precludes the existence of God in the answer.
2. Supporting questions imply that God planned the rape or incest, etc., or that all evil things happen for a reason that is controlled by God.
3. Nothing in the original question implies child having a child.

Fact is, most major legislative efforts I know of here in the US and most of the religions I know of have in their anti-abortion efforts an exception for rape and incest.

Another fact -- it isn't the baby's fault that it was conceived under adverse circumstances. So why should this tiny, arguably innocent being suffer the death penalty without limitations? Would it also be correct to practice infanticide on children conceived incestuously after birth? or put them to death in their childhood, or in their teens?

So what I can say is that rape and incest are not arguments which should be used to preserve and protect the right to universal abortion at any point up to birth.

2006-11-05 14:08:57 · answer #3 · answered by HeartSpeaker 3 · 1 2

It is simple, " Thau shalt not kill." is not a suggestion. It is a law. That includes the child in the womb. Keep in mind that in case of life of the mother is being endangered, the decision is wighted differently. Yes carrying the child for 9 mos and going through labor is still necessary, but calling it hell is not appropriate. Every women goes through labor pains and see the many children that are born, and the mothers that are rejoicing that a child was born. Someone will adopt the child, if the mother cannot keep it. God is, and is everywhere present, including with the mother that is having this child. May God Bless you and keep you. trust in Him

2006-11-05 14:15:58 · answer #4 · answered by pooterilgatto 7 · 1 1

Many of the anti-abortionists' arguments depend on the existence of a "soul". Since there is no such thing as a soul, those arguments are invalid.

It is the fact that anti-abortionists rely on those bad arguments that has led us to still have the abortion problem that we have. For example, the anti-abortion movement COULD have focused on reducing the need for abortions - on preventing unwanted pregnancy. The anti-abortion movement COULD have focused on preventing the late term abortions that essentially everyone agrees are a serious moral problem. Instead, because of the nonsensical reliance on "soul" arguments, they have tried to lump those abortions into the same category as first trimester abortions, and even morning-after pills, stem cell research, and even some contraception.

The reason we still have an abortion problem is that the anti-abortion movement has steadfastly insisted on prolonging it. They are the ones who bear the moral responsibility for the abortions performed in the last 30 or so years.

2006-11-05 14:09:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I don't think anyone could actually tell you that an abused child should have a child... but I'm sure people will try, belief in God not withstanding.

It's a supremely touchy subject, regardless of how we narrow or expand the scope of a given situation.

Brave question... I for one believe in god, but still see the necessity for the existence of abortion providers.

2006-11-05 14:07:39 · answer #6 · answered by Mikisew 6 · 3 0

What are God's thoughts, since we all were a thought before we were born.

What do you think God is thinking up in heaven, why are these people on earth killing these babies, sending my thoughts back to me. They want free will, but they cannot take care of their own responsibility's, and or figure out some kind of new red cross division to care for children, and charge the one responsible for the unwanted child, perhaps the raper to pay the raped woman for her time and pain, and pay to the red cross to raise the child or till they find a good family to care for it, instead they sin to pay back sin.
God is saying why do they blame me, perhaps they want to give up their free will, so I can run their life's.... Children are never happy, or believe, like the Jews I freed, and done miracles, and still they didn't believe.

2006-11-05 14:25:49 · answer #7 · answered by inteleyes 7 · 0 1

I think if the circumstances you pose were true, there being no God, then civilization would sink into an abysmal "death culture" where it would perceive it perfectly alright for a mother to abort her baby without guilt or conscience, then it won't stop there, for the seduction of murder and death will prevail in the post-birth period and mothers will continue to murder their young growing children with out a blink of an eye, for there would be no God in this scenario, and therefore no consequences to such daily diabolical acts. It will just become part of the accepted culture of death. Mother Theresa once said, “If we promote a culture of death where mothers abort their young, then it will not surprise me when one day mothers will kill their children.”

2006-11-05 14:19:10 · answer #8 · answered by . 5 · 1 1

the vast majority of abortions are merely self centered girls who don't want to be bothered. But killing of an animal of even a one minute old child is different. When a woman chooses to have unprotected sex and becomes pregnant the innocent life deserves a chance to live. Pro choicers claim to be compassionate in all other areas but they don't mind killing the most defenseless and innocent of all beings.

2006-11-05 14:12:43 · answer #9 · answered by carolinatinpan 5 · 0 1

I deleted my two questions on abortion because everyone was going nuts! I cant believe people would expect a 11 year old girl raped by her father to not get a abortion! That poor kid in a situation like that had gone through hell and shouldnt be judge if she wanted a abortion.

2006-11-05 14:03:31 · answer #10 · answered by daisy322_98 5 · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers