Is anyone else conflicted on the abortion debate?

Question

I've heard a lot of glib answers and leading questions this morning. Has everyone closed their minds to the "other side" on this issue?

Answer 1

I haven't closed my mind. On the one hand, I am pro-choice. On the other hand, I do think it is killing. "Murder" is a loaded word, implying a moral judgement. I'm not into judging. But these cells are alive, and then they die because of another's actions, which means they are killed.

I think it's ridiculous to define when a foetus becomes a person. Some pro-choice people have tried to make it look like there's a scientific fact of the matter, but there is none. It's all subjective. One person could say life begins when the brain is formed, another when the gender is established, etc. The fact is, there is no objective basis by which to determine when a foetus becomes a person. In the absence of an objective standard, there are two choices: pick a subjective standard and admit it's subjective, or refuse any standard on the grounds of its subjectivity. Myself, I choose the latter. In the absence of an objective standard, I think we have to call the foetus a person from the moment of conception.

Not that that clears the whole thing up. To admit that there is killing involved in abortion is by no means the end of the issue. I remain pro-choice. But I'm not sure how to reconcile it philosophically. One possibility is that we try to have a collective sense of honoring the life that has been taken. In Japan, where abortions have been conducted since feudal times, I remember reading about gardens full of little stone totems to commemorate the dead, where mothers could go and grieve.

Anyway, I'm conflicted, yeah.

Answer 2

There seems to be alot of abortion questions. This must be a topic everyone cares about deeply... I think people know it is wrong deep down, they just want to do what they want to do nomatter how it affects another being because they are selfish or afraid. Can there be any greater sins than these?! I'm beginning to wonder. But these things don't even work for the person sinning! At least in the long run. Abortion seems to be an act of omission not just of comission: Something that is NOT done to preserve a greater good, out of love or self-sacrifice.
Just about everyone of us I think, wants goodness in our lives and for those around us.... as long as it doesn't cost us too much... but we are all part of a whole! Sometimes it takes self sacrifice to see the greatest good flourish.
Generally, it seems that so many people are very confused on when life begins. Well, the fact is that anything that grows is alive and has the ability to act, even if on a very rudimentary level. Whether or not to kill or stop the growth of that which is alive is a matter of choice. So this poses a decision. Is it right to kill (for example) a plant or a chicken so that you can eat it? Sure. I think a lot of people would say yes, at least to the plant being killed. The fact is that one must eat to survive. It is about life! To those that say that life does not begin at conception, I would say; (hoping that the reader is not a vegetarian) “Would you eat a chicken egg, which when you cracked it open, revealed that it had accidentally been fertilized? Marked by a bloody yolk and the early beginnings of a chick within? If not, then why? The chick was not even anywhere near formed enough to survive outside the egg. So it should not be considered a chick or even part of a chick, right? Just an egg…would you buy that? I sure wouldn’t, and I wouldn’t eat it. (This is not an issue of weather or not eating a dead chick is right, this was illustrated to show when life begins).
Then one might ask: o.k. how about a rape case or a pregnancy that took place in a fallopian tube? (Which is a spot where the baby cannot grow and can be fatal for both mother and child) To the second scenario I would say, nothing as far as I know, can be done to save the baby. And abortion may be necessary. Maybe a surgery or something could be done, which would be very risky for the mother and the child both, and may not be wise... although dangerous surgeries have been performed for much more shallow reasons. Yet, if the intention is literally to save at least one life, then that is the right thing to do.
Rape on the other hand is something that is so much more traumatic and yet also carries a choice: whether to abort baby or to save him/her. There are many things in life that seem out of our hands, outside of our control and even against our will. But even of this, so much good can arise and sometimes strangely enough, only by that. We live in a world that seems to take, take, take and very little give. This makes us feel threatened, sometimes fearful too and so we try to take more, things that we believe that we deserve and take back what we can, even though it seems like no matter what we do, we cannot get enough or get much back. It’s like spilling a bucket of fresh water accidentally into the sea and trying to get the fresh water back again. In other words, personal problems in someone's life cannot be fixed by having an abortion, (quite the contrary) and therefore it is generally not the right thing to do both for the baby AND for the one contemplaing abortion.

Answer 3

Your college is assigning people to shield abortion in spite of ideals? super college... And if I have been to %., i might rather take my danger at being positioned up for adoption and having the possibility of abusive mothers and dads then no longer having a danger at existence in any respect. And what guilt will a female have for bringing a sparkling existence into the worldwide and putting it up for adoption? it might desire to be me, yet as quickly as back, ending a existence might reason extra guilt. And in simple terms because of the fact a female substitute into raped, why does that propose she would be in a position to end the existence? in simple terms because of the fact she substitute into raped, it does not make the youngster "trash", that's precisely what the abortionists cope with them like. a female could have not have been given any concern giving beginning to a newborn subsequently of a rape, what form of shame is on her? there's no way she would be in a position to lose her "purity" if she is raped, until she deep down embraced it.

Answer 4

Neither side is right! There are some good reasons for abortion and it should be freely available to deal with them. That said abortion nowadays seems to be birth control on demand and wholly unacceptable!!

Simple answer - any abortion not for real life threatening or medical reasons or because of rape should be a hysterectomy so that it cannot happen again.

Time to polarise here - Abortion for proper reasons and banned fro the convenience freaks!!

Answer 5

Havn't closed my mind but murder to me is too strong of a word to use. Also I don't think the people who blow up abortion clinics should be allowed into Heaven b/c technically they are commiting murder themselves.
But anyway taking out the egg doesn't harm me none but the other kind of abortion(I forget what it's called) should never be allowed of course if it will save a person's life then I'm okay with it.
As a woman I also don't like the idea of having laws governing on what I can/can't do with my body. It sounds scary.

Answer 6

Conflicted, no.
I think that abortions performed in the first trimester remain the preserve of the woman.
Second trimester abortions are medically complicated, and third trimester abortions, unless absolutely necessary; a life saving procedure, are like plastic surgery. A wholly unnecessary medical procedure to make the wealthy feel good about themselves.
I understand that there are people who oppose abortion. That is their choice.
I choose to stand by my partner, and their decision, should it ever arise.

Answer 7

And so empowerment of debate...there are sides...usually, the Pro-lifers have never experienced what they rant about and cannot come up with a better way....the Pro-Abortionists have probably experienced, yet have not gathered to come up with a better way...and the mid-group, the Pro-Choicers, simply like having a choice in the matter, and move on once it's made.

Silly humans, aren't we? But we love debating, we love a good battle...notice our history...Give us free-will choice, and let's see what argument we can make of it...I guess it truly pays to have a good sense of humor while here...LOL

Answer 8

I would say there are plenty of pro-choice-ers who are conflicted. I am definitely pro-choice but, if the pregnancy is a healthy one, I would pressure the mother to carry it full-term. But, I'm not so naive as to think everyone thinks or sees the same way I do or has a similar situation. To me, anyone who claims 'pro-life' is being prejudiced and not considering the multitude of reasons for considering one. They all seem to be under the delusion that it's a form of birth control. Only.

Answer 9

Yes, I'm conflicted.

Answer 10

I'm very conflicted. I can see both sides of the issue.