Okay, tell me this...for those of you who believe it's a mother's choice...what is the difference between aborting 24 week fetus that is deformed and killing a severely mentally retarded child after that child is born? Both would have the same impact on a mother? Why do you feel it's okay to abort an unborn baby, but not destroy a child?
2007-03-20 16:45:48 · 23 answers · asked by Searcher 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Partial birth abortions allow abortions much later than most abortions.
2007-03-20 16:52:53 · update #1
It is not a mother's choice. We are talking about life. No mother has the right to kill her own baby. Remember that lady that killed 3 of her 4 children? Did she have the right to do so? She is arrested... so...
Why people say that the mother has the right to do whatever to her body or to her baby? Who can speak for the right of the innocent unborn, then? Where lies his rights?
Spiritually speaking, a woman that decides for abortion will have consequences. A baby conceived is a life made by God. Nobody can take a life away, only God. The baby's spirit will be linked to the mother forever.
I know of a couple of friends that went though abortion, and believe me, they regret and cry for what they did. Most of women decide for abortion because they dont have support from the partner and from parents, they are under stress and pressure, otherwise they wouldn't do that. Other women do that selfishly because of college or job.
If you dont want your baby, give him a chance to be wanted by someone else, but dont kill a baby that depends solely on you to be born. Give him a chance to be a mind that might change the world!
Yes for sexual education in schools
Yes for condoms in school
Yes for parents that take their daughters to the gynecologist early
Yes for psychological support
Yes for social support
Yes for adoption
Yes for parents that talk about sex to their daughters
Peace
2007-03-20 17:04:07 · answer #1 · answered by Janet Reincarnated 5 · 0⤊ 5⤋
Prior to birth, the fetus is dependent on the woman and therefore, the woman can choose whether to end that dependence or not. Choosing an abortion for a deformed fetus is actually the more compassionate option because it will mean that they will never feel pain, never know that they are not like everyone else, and never go through lengthy or painful therapies just to lead a semi-normal life.
Our rights to be protected under the law begin when we are no longer physically and symbiotically dependent upon another person's body. Killing a severely mentally retarded child after it is born is unlawful because they require only social dependence, not actual physical dependence. They aren't attached to anyone's body and anyone can care for them if the mother does not want to.
As to the impact on the mother, many women put in the horrible position of having to choose an abortion at 24 weeks do so because they don't want their children to suffer. It is usually seen as the best option so that their children never know pain. They may mourn for a while but the mourning period are no where near those that parents experience when they lose a child that has already been born, that they have had contact with and have bonded with.
I feel that it is okay to abort a fetus before it has the propensity to feel pain and you cannot feel pain without a central nervous system in place and sufficiently developed. However, a child that has already been born is already facing pain and everything should be done to aleviate their pain. I am a supporter of families making the best decisions for their children (and other family members) that medicine will allow. In many cases this includes peacefully letting people go so that they will not suffer anymore. Giving them pain killers so that they fall asleep and stay asleep until they do die is often preferable to watching them go through the pain associated with treatment and therapy.
We had to let my grandfather go after he had a stroke and I feel that we made the compassionate choice just as women who have an Unviable pregnancy or a deformed fetus make the compassionate decision to end a situation before it causes undue pain and suffering.
2007-03-21 00:03:00 · answer #2 · answered by jenn_smithson 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
An abortion is a very difficult decision to make, but aborting of a deformed fetus would be a very sensible thing to do. I cannot understand why you would want a severely mentally retarded child to be born in this world just to die. Chances are that with mental retardation also comes other problems. It would be most humane for both the mother to think very carefully about what she really wants for this child-severe mental retardation or what. If she chooses to have the child anyway, so be it. On the other hand, if she chooses to abort, so be it. Pro-choice to me isn't just about abortion, it's about a womans right to choose.
2007-03-20 23:55:58 · answer #3 · answered by Terry Z 4 · 6⤊ 0⤋
It's not the same thing. Once you people realize that, we'll be able to get along better. You're not supposed to abort a child after the 3rd month. That's 16 weeks, not 24. I had an abortion at 8 weeks, and I am better off for it. I work 2 jobs and go to school full time. With the amount of stress in my life, plus the fact my fiance lives in another country, I could have put a baby's life AND my own in danger just because of my high blood pressure. It is not okay to murder a child. Abortion is not murdering a child, it's aborting a fetus. An egg. Unless you've actually had to make the decision of having an abortion, you should not be making any statements about it. It's the hardest thing a woman will ever have to decide, and I am insulted by the fact you think you know my body better than I do.
Edit: and by the way, I did not have a surgical procedure. I took a pill. A simple pill. All it does is make the body naturally abort the fetus, just like a miscarriage.
2007-03-20 23:50:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 11⤊ 4⤋
Look, your comparing two very different issues. And once again we can look for the "right to life" folks to make the "pro choice" folks look like child killing creeps.
I believe that each and every woman has the right to make the abortion decision for herself. Regardless of my personal thoughts on the issue!
Again I ask, for all the people who are against abortion, what are you doing to help the unwanted children? Have you opened your arms & homes to them? Have you rescued an abused child? What have you done for the neglected little boy or girl that rides the bus with your child? What have you done for the "severely mentally retarded" children in your community? What about the babies born on crack? Or born with AIDS/HIV? I would rather a woman have an abortion and then take preventive measures for the future than have a single child chained to a bed or kept in a locked room starving or neglected, cold and hungry from lack of attention or food. Or worse yet, find a baby in a dumpster, left to die. Better to be with God than in hell here.
2007-03-21 00:01:53 · answer #5 · answered by Barbiq 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
24 week? The majority of abortions are performed within the first 12 weeks (1st trimester), only about 8% are performed in the 2nd trimester. I seriously doubt your claim that both would have the same impact on a mother. I know several woman who have had abortions and the impact from that is minimal.
2007-03-21 00:01:07 · answer #6 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I would challenge your assertion that impact is the same. How can you assume that? If the mother gives birth, there will be a much greater degree of expectation. She's finally reached the end, but wait, there's this. The other, while attached, is still in the middle and wouldn't have to bear process of watching her moving, crying baby taken away from her for good.
2007-03-21 05:05:25 · answer #7 · answered by Phil 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
oooo, ouch. If I said my true opinion on the matter, I just know I would have a deleted account a'la Laptop Jesus. My very dear friend just gave birth to a severely deformed child that required 14 surgeries in his fist two weeks of life. I thought to myself after seeing the boy, that if it were my child I would let him live naturally, without surgery, and I would let the child die naturally, with out surgery.
I will say that the difference to me is that; as long as a fetus can not live outside of it's mothers body, it is a part of her body. If I wanted to cut off my hand, or leg, it might not be understood by others, but it is my body. Really the only thing anyone truly owns is their own body.
If a child is viable outside of the womb, it is no longer a part of the mother's body, therefore she has no right to decide it's ultimate fate.
2007-03-20 23:54:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
I'm opposed to abortion after the first trimester, and almost no abortion is legal 24 weeks into the pregnancy unless it is a state of emergency for the mother or the fetus. Therefore, this question poses a non-dilemma.
2007-03-20 23:52:36 · answer #9 · answered by N 6 · 8⤊ 0⤋
The child is alive and capable of making descisions. Abortions take place in the first trimester for non-critical reasons, far before the fetus can even feel pain, much less attain consciousness.
2007-03-20 23:50:37 · answer #10 · answered by eri 7 · 8⤊ 1⤋