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

Do you? or should a person be allowed more than one in there life time??

2007-03-06 07:50:15 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

sorry can i just make it clear, i am not asking for personal issues, just wanted peoples opinions on such a contraversal topic

2007-03-06 08:07:52 · update #1

23 answers

i'd been doin this in RE lessons in school. i came to the conclusion that it should be allowed. obviously, if some1 wants an abortion they obviously have a reason for it, however little it is, and a foetus isn't classed as anythin until 120 days or something. I like to put it like this so that i can see the justification of it. In the animal knigdom, animals that cannot cope with their young end up eating their young after they've been born. this makes abortion seem like an easy way out in my opinion as its likely that a baby who was considered for abortion would likely grow up in less than ideal conditions

2007-03-06 08:01:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

No. I am a guy. The way I see it is this way. It is not the business or responsibility of anyone other than the pregnant mother. Why should another person have a legal right to make a decision for a pregnant woman or young girl? A woman should be allowed to have as many abortions as she sees necessary.

It is wrong to bring an innocent life into this world if it is not wanted or it is not going to get good guidance, support and love.
Life is tough under the best of circumstances much less if not in a loving environment.

The bottom line: People mind your own business.

2007-03-06 16:15:32 · answer #2 · answered by Kuntree 3 · 0 2

i don't know when and where people thought they have the right to tell other people what they can do about anything if it does not directly involve them. it is the woman's body not the neighbors or office worker only the woman at hand. her choice. if the male half of this child does not want the abortion and she does. then i would say the man should pay off the woman for her 9 months of child birth and take over full control of the baby. after all he wants she don't. can go either way. i also can't see why a father that did want and she didn't want the abortion, that he has to pay till 18yrs.
that's flat out b.s. when it comes to decision pay the 9 months.to put it another way "do you think wearing a seat belt is wrong?" who's choice hmmm not ours anymore that right is gone gone gone. thank you all concerned people for telling me what to do. if someone wants an abortion i say get it why you still can it won't be an issue very much longer. it will be dictated to you soon enough. sorry for the lengthy opinion, it is one of our only right left and it is getting cut off little by little too

2007-03-06 16:10:12 · answer #3 · answered by james 4 · 0 2

No it's not wrong. It's not murder like people say it is. When they do an abortion the fetus isn't even human it's just a ball of cells. However, I do think that instead of abortion people should have the baby and give it up for adoption because there are so many good and loving couples out there who can't conceive and would do anything to have a baby. Unless having a baby will be life threatening then adoption is the thing to do. But really it's the women's decision and no one elses.

2007-03-06 15:55:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

It's a catch 22. Abortion is probably wrong, so it should be prevented as much as possible through birth control and abstenence.

However punishing a woman for terminating her pregnancy reeks of government control over your body. If the world didn't have a historical tendancy to treat woman and their bodies like property, then I think there would be no issue, but unfortunately we have a dark history when it comes to exerting control over women and controlling their futures.

I think it's best to abstain from punishing a woman for making a decision like that and instead solve the problem of unwanted pregnancies from the PREVENTION angle.

I must say though the idea that "if you're old enough to have sex you're old enough to raise the child" is preposterous, unrealistic, and stupid. Some girls hit puberty at 11 or 12 years old.

2007-03-06 15:59:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I believe it is dead wrong (pun DEFINITELY intended) for a number of reasons. For starters, pregnancy can be prevented in almost all cases if the parties involved take precautions. Secondly, it promotes lack of responsibility and accountability -- if you're old enough to screw then you're old enough to raise the child (and that applies equally to father and mother). Third, it's just one more way that life becomes a throwaway commodity that has no value, and people wonder why the murder rate has gone up so much in the past 30 years...Finally, when the Founding Fathers wrote the Declaration of Independence, what was the first inalienable human right they mentioned? LIFE. Everyone, including an unborn child, has the right to life. When a person arbitrarily takes that right away from someone else he/she is putting himself/herself in the position of God; deciding who lives and who dies. People like that represent a threat to a peaceful, civilized society, and those people need to be reminded that they are every bit as mortal as the one they killed. Yes, God commanded "Thou shalt not kill," but He also prescribed a penalty for those who did. "If any man taketh the life of another man, then by man shall his life be taken." Exodus 21:12. BOTTOM LINE: No one should even be allowed one abortion unless her life is at risk due to the pregnancy or if the child is the product of rape/incest (but we all know how the number of reported rapes would skyrocket if THAT rule were established...)

2007-03-06 15:59:10 · answer #6 · answered by sarge927 7 · 3 2

The taking of an innocent life is called murder. The taking of that life for the convenience of another is called abortion.

And if abortion isn't murder because the fetus isn't human then why do pro-choice advocates get so upset at posters with pictures of aborted fetus'? Is it because the fingers, feet and even the face can be clearly seen amid all of the blood and guts resulting from this "procedure". It has progressed to the point where abortions can take place after the baby's body is outside the mother's body with it's arms and legs flailing around because it can't breath. Then a scalpel is inserted into the baby's skull and the brains are chopped up and sucked out. Imagine that!! You are holding a baby with it's arms and legs, even it's body moving around. Then the doctor just kills it. It's called partial birth abortion done during the later part of the pregnancy.

What future awaits a people who kill their own children to satisfy their own comforts. What a future indeed.

2007-03-06 15:55:54 · answer #7 · answered by Bud 5 · 2 4

I consider it wrong, as the pregnancy would likely yield birth to a healthy baby if allowed to continue. Given the multiple methods of contraception, I find it surprising that so many abortions are needed.

2007-03-06 16:13:10 · answer #8 · answered by Wee Bit Naughty 3 · 1 1

I think that abortion is wrong. If you can have sex then you SHOULD be old enough and responsible enough to have a baby?
But on some conditions abortion should be allowed, like if someone was raped or forced and that led them pregnant.

2007-03-06 15:53:31 · answer #9 · answered by sabrinashakedownn 2 · 1 1

I think abortion is used as a birth control pill that cost more which is not what i think it should be use fr I think the only time abortion is an option should be after you been raped and now your pregant with the rapper child.

2007-03-06 16:04:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers