Im pro choice. if a women finds herself pregnant and doesn't want the baby then get rid of it. yes you could argue that it is alive and its against gods will but its not sentient. to me its no different that stepping on a spider! and it can't be a nice experience for the girl to have an abortion so it shouldn't be taken lightly.theres to many people on this planet anyway!
2007-06-03 20:48:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ivan R Don 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
Just think if religion prevailed in this debate and abortions became illegal. How many religions would jump up about forcing a woman to continue a pregnancy that would kill her, this actually happens, it's called an ectopic pregnancy and the 'baby' attachs to the phillopian tubes, it kills the mother usually around the 5 month pregnant mark if the 'baby' isn't removed.
Women who get abortions don't just use it as a birth control method, it's painful emotionally, physically and mentally. the unfortunate thing is that neglactful drugged or drunk women usually have the child and keep it.
So when you are all making judements about who does and doesn't and who should and shouldn't have abortions just remember the consequences of what could come if it WERE illegal. This debate needs a middle ground which the laws are the way they are but people shoudn't make judgements about things they know nothing about.
2007-06-03 22:49:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sandi S 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
I feel that abortion should be legal. It should particularly be legal in the first trimester of the pregnancy when the fetus is nowhere close to being a viable entity.
I think everyone can agree that it is sad when an abortion occurs. It is sad and difficult to imagine that being the choice that someone chooses to make. No one is 'pro-abortion.' But banning it completely is a terrible idea.
What about women who have been raped? How dare anyone tell a woman who has been so brutally victimized that she must further endure 9 more months of invasive exams, gaining weight, extreme fatigue, and face the possibility of dying while bringing a child into the world that was the result of such a horrible attack?
And what about that hypothetical innocent child? Should he or she be made to endure the guilt that would almost assuredly result when it is discovered how it was conceived?
I know everyone says "Adopt, Adopt, Adopt." Well, the adoption process does not work as easily as everyone thinks. There are plenty of babies who get passed through foster homes for the duration of their lives. Some 'life' we gave them.
Furthermore, because I am a man, I feel that I can only be pro-choice. It is my opinion that I have no right to tell a woman how and when to perform a biological function (giving birth) that I myself cannot do. I shouldn't be able to tell a woman what to do with her uterus, and she shouldn't be able to tell me what to do with my testicles. I think that when/if abortion bills come up for a vote in a legislature, the only members allowed to cast votes should be those that are women.
2007-06-03 21:25:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by alphadeltahotel 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
I am for abortions as long as they are done in the first 3 months. The only reason why I would agree with an abortion after 3 months is if it was medical related. It is a woman's right to choose what happens to her body. For those of you who say that the woman should just give the baby up for adoption after it is born, what about a single woman who works at a low paying job? How is she suppose to support herself those weeks that she can't work because she's giving birth? Are you going to pay her bills for her? For some reason pro-lifers think that just because a woman gets pregnant that she was being lazy for not using birth control. There are other circumstances for a woman getting pregnant other than not using birth control such as rape, being told that you are sterile(when you really are not), condoms breaking and birth control failing. Woman in these circumstances should not be forced to have a baby. My best friend wanted to be an arcitect ever since she was a kid,She graduated high school, started going to college and meet a guy that she fell in love with. She was a virgin and before she ever had sex with him, she went to the doctor and got a depo-provera shot. Guess what?! The idiot doctor gave it to her wrong and she ended up getting pregnant the very first time she ever had sex! She and the guy got married and she had the baby.
She is no longer in college, she is no longer married and he has NOTHING to do with their daughter.She did the right thing by all of the pro-lifers but where are they to help her?
2007-06-04 12:30:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by kittysoma27 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Ugh. THis is one of those issues that I can see logical answers to both sides. Im leaning towards abortion though.
From the point of society and family- it would a burden if the baby or the family is not ready to support it or when the baby grows up (due to some disorder). Yet if someone doesnt want a baby, they should really use birth control.
As far as rights goes - its where man defines where the child is a seperate being from the mother. I think that as long as the mother provides nutrients to it via cord, then it does not have rights.
Adoptions? What if the child had a disorder? I doubt many parents would want to adopt one, not saying there arent caring couples that do but what then?
2007-06-03 20:59:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by leikevy 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
I do not believe abortion should be illegal. Abortions have been going on since people understood where babies come from. If they are illegal, there will simply be illegal abortions that kill the women who get them. The baby will die regardless; at least a clean place and a knowlegable doctor will preserve the life of the mother.
2007-06-03 20:49:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
No it should not be illegal!
I think people like you should keep your noses out of other peoples decisions. You want to make them, but you don't have to live with the consequences! If you don't want one, don't get one.
Poor people are not baby factories for the rich! And quite frankly, after 16 years of investigating child abuse and seeing the number of unwanted and throw-away kids (the ones you wont support), quite frankly, in many cases I would even be for an abortion, though personally I am not. I am also not for dictating to others a decision that could ruin their lives forever, or even cost them their lives.
Keep you religion where it belongs! In church!
Let me guess, you are for the war, you are for capital punishment and you are against the state investigating child abuse!
2007-06-03 21:01:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by cantcu 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
First, its a woman's choice, and one that she and her spouse should be allowed to make on their own.
Second, I am glad to see that partial birth abortions are no illegal, but 1st and 2nd abortions should be allowed.
Third, I find it mildly amusing,that for the most part, the ones against abortion are those who are in favor of the death penalty, killing animals, and this travesty over in Iraq. Why? All I can surmise is that people dint mind adults or animals getting killed as long as it for food, or a trumped up cause.
For the record, I like to eat meat, but I only eat free-range meats. I am for the death penalty, but only in cases where DNA and several eye witnesses can prove that they did it, if not let their *** rot in jail. I am so against the war in Iraq, and have been form its conception. I am also for abortion, esp in cases of rape, incest, or the death of the mother could happen.
2007-06-03 21:07:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Paddington Bear 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
No.
The US is a nation that is supposed to be seperate from religion. As such, it must rely on science to answer its questions. And science says that a first trimester fetus does not display any of the signs of life, and is not a living thing. Thus, removing it does not end life.
The only refutation of that argument is religious, and thus must be thrown out because the US is a secular nation.
We are also a nation that promotes personal freedom, and it is wrong for us to try to control the bodies of others.
2007-06-03 20:44:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
So long as people murder thousands of animals that lived a tortured life for food that is only harmful to their diet and the ecosystem, it isn't a relative ethical dilemma that a bundle of cells without a nervous system is taken from a women's uterus because she chooses this. In the US, we enjoy lauding ourselves for our liberties and freedom, but if there's something some religious zealots don't agree with, people are all too eager to prohibit it.
2007-06-03 20:53:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Loves Papillons 3
·
0⤊
2⤋