It's a slippery slope.
Let's go with your assertion that the fetus is it's own entity. Should a woman be prosecuted for doing ANYTHING that will bring harm to the baby? If we grant a fetus rights over the mother's wishes, will she be prosecuted for smoking? For riding a horse? For engaging in stressful activity against the doctor's orders? Will pre-natal pills and hospital births become mandatory?
The bottom line: A fetus is INSIDE a woman. It feeds of her nutrients and changes her body. It causes her to get sick in some cases and poses serious injury to a woman in others. There is no guarantee of viability before 20 or so weeks and natural miscarriages are common.
You are suggesting that a woman preserve life at any cost. Why impose a standard on women that we do not impose in general?
2007-05-31 10:19:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Athena 3
·
1⤊
3⤋
For starters, notice that you began your question with the words "I believe". That's your belief, but not everyone shares it.
Secondly, when a child is conceived, it doesn't have intentions. If left to its own devices maybe it will be born, and maybe not. The mother has to take care of it, go to regular doctors visits, maybe have a C-section, etc. etc. Basically the mother has to do a lot to make sure the embryo becomes a viable child.
When an embryo/fetus becomes a life is a very contentious issue. Some people like you believe it's as soon as the egg is fertilized. That's a slippery slope, because how then are sperm and eggs not potential lives also? It's a fine line. Some people believe it's in the 3rd trimester, when the fetus is sufficiently developed that it might be able to survive outside the womb. This is a more logical answer to me, and that's why I don't oppose 1st or 2nd trimester abortions.
2007-05-31 10:09:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dana1981 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
100 % right tha is ths science now dont forget a soal is given by God at conception.The emoational strain is so great an a young mother as well. She made her choice when she laied down . As for the rape victom, well lets start by saying they are less than 1 % and even less are reported to the cops. There are homes out there and many ways there women can receve help. A lot af adoption agenceyy pay far much more than the cost of havinh the baby and private ones even more.
2007-06-03 15:32:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by danceteacher5555 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
In the beginning, the fetus is a parasite. That is why women suffer from "morning" sickness. The body is trying to rid itself of the "foreign" object. However, as time passes, the body adjusts to the fetus and a child grows. I believe that a woman's body is her own and no one else. I personally do not believe in abortion, but it is not my place to tell someone else what to do. The back door abortions were not that long ago, when a woman would die at the hands of secret doctors. If we lose the right to abort (for whatever reason), we take a giant step back. And we really can't do that.
2007-05-31 10:14:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by FireBug 5
·
1⤊
3⤋
The same exact way it is legal to create embryos in a test tube, freeze said embryos and then toss them into the garbage when they are no longer wanted. Boy, if your concept is correct that would suck... I would much rather have had my short life mean something (ie, be donated to stem cell research and to possibly have contributed towards saving a life) more than to have ended up in a trash heap. I personally am pro-choice, but not neccessarily pro-abortion. I do feel the option should be there, but I also feel it is important for human beings to take a little procreative responsibility. Take away that right and every woman that becomes pregnant out of rape, incest, or a myriad of other unforseen reasons will be sentenced to bear the child of her molestor. Without this law, mother's whose life will be endangered by continuing a pregnancy will have no option. There are too many gray areas on this subject for myself to be swayed to a law that would totally irradicate abortion. Although I have seen MANY cases where I would have supported court ordered adult sterilization, but I guess that is another thread.
2007-05-31 10:21:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
A child... scarce 15... abused by a relative or seeking solace in sex... finds she is pregnant.
Deny her legitimate recourse to terminate the pregnancy. Deny her access to agencies that will nurse her through the pregnancy, help her deliver the child and then free her to live the rest of her life.
What is her recourse?
Back alley quacks who WILL endanger her life. I don't want to get too graphic here but there are cases of girls being subjected to unsterilised instruments being introduced into their bodies to scrape the child out of them.
How is that constitutional? How is that legal?
Will you force a baby to bear a baby just because it grows in her? Will you force a child to risk death because of a religious belief?
2007-05-31 10:42:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by rhapword 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
i agree, the fetus is not considered a body part because the DNA in the fetus is different from that of the mother
2007-05-31 10:07:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by charlesthesportsfan 2
·
3⤊
2⤋
There is nothing new under the sun, unfortunately abortion has been around for ever and is not going away, those who commit these MURDERS will answer for their crimes before GOD!!!!!
2007-05-31 10:28:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
What is this right to lifer nonsense doing as an OFF TOPIC POSTING in the Politics and Government string.
If you want responses from like minded people, then post this born again right to life nonsense in a RELIGIOUS string where it belongs instead of as an OFF TOPIC posting on a non-related string.
2007-05-31 10:10:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋