Why should the American people allow an abortion for a woman who got pregnany and?

Question

then decided that she did not want the child? I am not discussing rape, incest, or when her life is in jeopardy.

Why is it that someone can feel they should be able to have sex whenever they want and not have to live with the consequences?

After all, sex is to have children. If you do not want a child, do not have sex. Can we fairly say that this is another example of how government is allowing people to not take personal responsibility for their behavior?

Save the it is her body and it is none of anyone's business lines. Those do not answer the question.

Nature made it so that the only way to have a child and reproduce is to have sex. So sex is here to reproduce. I clearly have to clarify this for the pro abortion people here. Sex is enjoyable so we have an incentive to have it.

Answer 1

The liberals tend to view life on the basis of worth. A fetus isn't worth anything, so why let it become a burden on me? This is the way the evils of nazism began. Simple violations of human rights, disguised as benifiting the people, and soon they were carried down the slippery slope that is liberalism. I know many will say "But wait Alex, nazi germany was in no way liberal, it was facist." I would reply that their understandings of facism and liberalism are incorrect then. I shalnt go over the similarities further here, as I'm sure you are aware of them (for instance, the insistance on a stronger government and its interferance in our lives by removal of religion from society and taxation to employ social changes [smoking, transfatty foods and the like]). Anyway, I've diverted from the subject at hand. The point i was making is that once abortion is universally accepted as the ultimate in comfort and ease in life, then what is to stop the next steps, such as euthinasia of the elderly, the homeless, the mentally and physically handicapped, born and yet to be born, and so on and so forth until we are genetically enegering designer babies in the womb! The real threat is not really abortion in itself, but the threat of abortion becoming lax and accepted, and what that could lead to. Nature and norms as we know it are threatened if these liberal agendas are allowed to continue.

Answer 2

Rather than get at your question head on (and since I am gay, I'll confirm what some of the libs here say which is that human beings do indeed "have sex for fun.") I have some more info to add into this debate.

Even Alan Dershowitz has been saying lately that the Court's decision in Roe v. Wade was wrong. He says that, not because he has stopped being "pro choice." He still supports the idea that, as a matter of whether or not a legislature should ban abortion, he is against legislatures doing so. Rather, Roe was wrong because it was not a correct interpretation of the Constitution.

Here is something else Dershowitz said,

"Moreover, the nation was -- and remains -- closely divided about the morality of abortion, both in the abstract and under various circumstances. Advocates of a woman's right to choose abortion could have organized politically to win that right (at least for most women under most circumstances) in the elected branches of government. According to the American Civil Liberties Union: 'Between 1967 and 1971, under mounting pressure from the women's rights movement, 17 states decriminalized abortion. Public opinion also shifted during this period. In 1968, only 15 percent of Americans favored legal abortions; by 1972, 64 percent did. When the Court announced its landmark 1973 ruling leglazing abortion in Roe v. Wade, it was marching in step with public opinion.' ("ACLU Position Paper: The Right to Choose" fall 2000.)
"But it is not the proper role of the Supreme Court to march in step with public opinion. That is the role of the elected branches of government. ... Courts ought not to jump into controversies that are political in nature and are capable of being resolved -- even if not smoothly or expeditiously -- by the popular branches of government. ... Absent clear governing constitutional principles (which are not present in [this] case), these are precisely the sorts of issues that should be left to the rough-and-tumble of politics. ..."

Answer 3

Because it's not the secular government's job to uphold Christianity. That's why.

The only people who use abortion as a form of birth control are the very poor and teenage girls. The rest are rape victims, or people who's birth control failed. Do you think most American women are like "hmm let's have sex without any protection and who cares if I get pregnant I'll just have an abortion"?! That's idiotic. Abortions aren't fun.

If this is about responsibility, let individuals pay for their abortions. What you choose to do with the very poor women who come in is up to you, but last time I checked, wellfare checks for new poor babies cost the government more than abortions.

And if we're talking about the "right to life", then you get into the whole when does life begin fight. I personally believe that life does not begin at conception. A woman is not even considered pregnant until implantation happens, which is several days after conception by the way. At some point, a potential life does become a life but that point is up to debate.

So why can't the government outlaw abortion? Because it is unclear when a ball of cells becomes a baby and to make things easier the government draws the line at a very clear point in development: Birth.

Furthermore, get with the times. Sex is not for the sole purpose of baby making. It is FUN. At least last time I checked. I'll check again later tonight with my boyfriend. If you want to limit your sexual activity to the times in your life when you have the intention of creating a little person, you do that. But the rest of us enjoy having sex and don't necessarily want to participate in reproduction.

So yes, use condoms or birth control or whatever. I get that. But abortions are still necessary and thank God this country isn't run by the Pope.

Answer 4

First of all, if sex were just for procreation, why is it so pleasureable? Secondly, have you ever once in your life had a ****? Come on, if you answer 'no' to that you are a) lying or b) very frustrated! You'll notice when you masturbate you just wipe it away! Hurrah! No babies there!

But seriously, I agree with most answerers here: Most abortions are necessary, whether it be for rape or incest victims, or because the mother's health or life might be in danger, should the birth proceed.

Come join us in the 21st century, will ya?

Answer 5

I feel strongly that abortion should never be used purely for purposes of contraception, but I also believe that there is a fine line between well-meant guidance and all-out tyranny.

Some people have no moral fibre because they've been raised to disregard it, others think that it's uncool to be a person of integrity.

Sex is also for pleasure, but there is quite a significant chance of becoming pregnant if one doesn't take the proper precautions. Note the *pre* part... that means NOT using abortion as a form of birth control.

I do, however, agree with you that people are becoming increasingly irresponsible and expect the government to pick up the pieces. And it *is* people's business... including the baby and the father.

Good question.

Answer 6

People do need to take responsibility for there own actions. There are ways to prevent pregnancy...for example: dont have sex, condoms, birth control. Would a someone kill another person for changing there life (firing them from a job, making them have a car wreck, failing them in a class.....) then way would they kill an unborn baby that has done nothing to them? People need to learn to take responsibility, if they don't want to get fat, they don't eat fattening thing, if you don't want a baby dont have sex.

Answer 7

You cannot tell a human being not to have sex. It is a natural desire in all of us, but the desire to support a child is not quite with every single human on this planet. Abortion like that is, subtly, a form of irresponsibility, but then, so is driving a car, or going to war, or clear cutting a forest, or beating a woman for her purse. You cannot tell a human to fit into your perfect little world. It is not possible. There will always be someone out there who is in need of a new opinion, and opinion that differs from your own. Do not tell us how we are or are not allowed to answer the question. There are millions of answers that could come to this, and some of them will be to your dislike, whether you want it to be that way or not. We are human beings, for God's sake. We have never been perfect, and never will be.

Answer 8

OMG! Your question and some of these answers...I can literally feel the sexual frustration coming from your question.

People do have sex not just to procreate, and there is NOTHING wrong with that. You really need to let go of the brainwashing you got in your grade school abstinence training and maybe think things through.

Answer 9

After saying that "sex is to have children. If you do not want a child, do not have sex" you do not deserve an answer for this question.

Humans, singular in their behaviors to other species in many ways, often have sex "just for the fun of it" believe it or not.

Should I have not had sex with my husband the thousands of times we have had sex because I don't want a THOUSAND babies?!?

Abstinence is not the only way to avoid pregnancy. It just isn't natural for human beings. We want sex, and you can have sex with condoms and birth control to prevent pregnancy.

Answer 10

I have answered similar questions here many times.

Most anti-abortion men hate women and fear their sexuality. The women hate themselves and are disgusted with their sexuality.

I have had many very long arguments with these people, and I've found that if you keep the argument going long enough, the person will always say: If women want to choose, they should choose to keep their legs closed."

And that's what it's all about. And also shows their limited knowledge of sex positions.