hey,lol, i just asked a question like this, could I get some answers too, I feel all jealous
2007-04-06 00:46:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by clown(s) around 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
I would permit abortion in case of rape or incest or if the mothers life would be endangered by giving birth. I would permit abortion if the baby would be born deformed in mind or body. I would permit the morning after pill. In all other cases I believe abortion is an act of cold blooded murder of a helpless innocent child. I believe a woman's right to choose should end with her choice not to make him us a condom when she decides to have sex. Sure forcing a woman to have an unwanted child could lead to problems for the child. But had you rather have problems which can be overcome or death? I'm happy my mother didn't decide on an abortion. There is not a healthy child born that doesn't have someone wanting to adopt. This is just my personal feelings. I'm not picketing any birth control clinics.
2007-04-06 00:58:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Danger to the life of the mother. Those situations in which pregnancy seriously threatens the life of the mother raise a particular ethical dilemma for Christians who value the lives of both mother and child. If responsible diagnoses confirm that childbirth is likely to result in the death of the mother, historic Christian faith usually has favored the life of the mother above that of the unborn child since the mother is a mature person with established family and societal relationships and responsibilities. However, vague threats to the mother’s physical or emotional health must not become an excuse to place the child at risk. Any intervention required must have the intent of saving the mother’s life, not the prior intent of causing death to the child. As in any emergency, in such times God’s children ought to fervently and earnestly pray for divine intervention. In doing so, the persons involved must prayerfully evaluate the medical diagnoses with the assistance of humane physicians and godly leaders and make, responsibly and with a clear conscience, what may well be a very painful decision.
2007-04-06 00:49:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I am basically anti-abortion mostly because I think it is way over-used. But there are times when there's really nothing else that will do, as when a woman gets pregnant as a result of rape or incest. In that case, carrying the child to term is just more than it is reasonable to ask of anyone. The child seems a horrible monster growing in her body, and she will be driven mad if she has to carry it to term.
If the father does not want it done, but the mother does, I think she needs to give him every opportunity to persuade her it will be worthwhile to keep the child. Ultimately, though, it is her body.
I am anti-abortion on principle, but equally anti-laws against abortion. I believe it is necessarily a private decision which no one but the pregnant woman can make. To force her to carry the child she does not want is as cruel as to force her to abort the child she does want. The issue is hers to decide, and to live with the consequences of her decision.
2007-04-06 00:48:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by auntb93 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well, since you asked...I am very aggressively pro-life and the only circumstances under which I think it may be acceptable are thoose rare instances in which the pregnancy may result in the death of the mother. I do not think it is ok to terminate because of downs or any other birth/genetic defect, unless it there is something so wrong with the fetus that it will not survive more than a few hours after birth.
2007-04-06 00:47:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Anti-abortion is hypocritical when the Earth is getting overpopulated. If we were down to say, 100 people and had to repopulate the Earth, this would not be an issue.
The bottom line is OUR OWN MORALS change in a crisis. Am I supposed to hope for a crisis just so people stop complaining about things like this? We need to worry about saving the planet and stopping war. Those are more immediate threats.
2007-04-06 01:14:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Your Uncle Dodge! 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I am peronally anti-abortion.
Abortion should be permitted whenever the mother wants one within the first trimester before the fetus is sustainable.
the main objective in the abortion fight should not be removing the needed surgery.
It should be slowing and stopping unwanted pregnancy. Forcing a mother to carry an unwanted baby will lead to problems for the child. Teaching children self-respect and self-restraint as well as forms of protection that work will reduce the unwanted pregnancy and give loving children to wanting parents.
As a health issue unprotected sex leads to STDs and other problems besides children.
EDUCATE BEFORE PROCREATE!
2007-04-06 00:55:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think people should have to qualify to have children, give excruciating psychological and physiological tests when they reach the age of 16, and if they pass be given permission to breed, those who fail should be sterilized..if some teenagers get pregnant before these tests and have an abortion somehow they both should automatically be sterilized as punishment. This is not cruel, it would solve many problems, first it would help decrease the surplus population, second, there would be little if no children in foster homes, and third, it would improve humankind as only people with good genes (not necessarily good looks) will be allowed to breed. Those are my thoughts.
2007-04-06 01:08:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Diana 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
Everyone uses rape pregnancy as the number one answer for abortion. I am Anti-abortion, but could never answer that question inside myself. A bastard child because of a jack*sses sick fantasy isnt at all right, but i am a believer of a purpose for everything. Im kinda stuck....
2007-04-06 00:46:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by atlazdrama 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I would say I am anty abortion. but I do think in times where the mother is to young or where mother and baby are in danger that abortion may be acceptable.
2007-04-06 00:46:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Women had always had abortions and will continue to do so, irrespective of prevailing laws, religious proscriptions and social norms. Although the ethical debate over abortions continues, the public-health racord is clear and incontrovertible: Access to safe, legal abortions on request improves health.
2007-04-06 00:53:43
·
answer #11
·
answered by emiliosailez 6
·
3⤊
0⤋