How do YOU justify abortion?

Question

Is it a life at birth? At the second trimester? At viability? At conception? When is abortion justifiable? BEfore implantation? Before viability? Anytime? Or are you against abortion because you believe that all of it is murder?

sway, nothing personal here. Care to answer the question?

mustagme, OK to murder if she is in trouble?

feo, OK to murder if the mom was raped?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqIOoPHJAmHVNg6Nj3oFU6nsy6IX?qid=20070611092017AAcJ5Jl
Sway, now that you know that Plan B stops implantation, NOT conception, do you want to change your mind on when you justify it? Because you justify it before implantation, according to your answers...

killer B, over 30 challenges to Roe in the past 31 years...it has been challenged, and upheld, by the same conservative courts

lol, Michael, lok up the definition of aborting pregnancy, and you may just find out how that is different than the murder you are condoning.

Answer 1

I justify it as not allowing the government to dictate private medical procedures.

Weather or not I am personally for or against it is irrelevant as this is the land of the free.

Neither you, I nor anyone else including the government has the right to say what we can and cannot do with our own bodies.

Answer 2

Biologicallly, an individual human organism's life begins at conception. That doesn't necessarily mean that the ethical definition of life must begin at that same point, but I don't see any reason why not.

I don't justify abortion, but neither can I justify initiating force against a woman to compel her to carry her baby to full term. If an 8-year-old child needed a kidney transplant to survive and the only possible donor was the mother, I would not force the mother to give up her kidney (although I would hope she would donate it voluntarily). By the same reasoning, I will not confiscate a woman's womb nor compel her to perform involuntary labor.

Many people do believe that abortion is murder. Those people should not be forced to pay taxes to finance what they believe is murder. (I don't think anybody should be forced to pay taxes, because I believe taxes are theft.)

Roe vs Wade was a flawed decision. If there was an "implied right to privacy," why doesn't it apply to all vicitmless crimes, such as drug use, gamblling, and prostitution? I wish there was an explicit right to privacy in the Constitution, but there isn't. The Constitution and its amendments all had, at least at one time, the approval of three-fourths of the country. The whole Constitution is undermined by made-up rights that have never been supported by more than a slim majority.

Anybody who really cares about saving unborn babies will focus their efforts on helping poor mothers with the financial burdens of childbirth and child-rearing. One person's political efforts will never save even one unborn baby, but one person's efforts to help poor mothers can save many unborn babies.

I think some "pro-lifers" are really just "pro-punishment." They don't really care about saving unborn babies; they just want to punish women for having sex.

I think some "pro-choicers" are reallly "anti-life." Their real motive is "population control." They only care about defending the choice to kill unborn babies. They don't support the choice to give birth and raise children.

Real "pro-llifers" and real "pro-choicers" should be allies who will work together to help women who choose to have and keep their babies.

Answer 3

Personally, I look at it as a question of a woman's right vs a fetus's rights. and as such it has to be a consistent position, the standpoint of no abortion except in incest or rape is crap. That is a political stance, fence sitting and defends neither one side nor the other. If you're pro-life then be so, 100% of the time, no exceptions no cop outs, the fetus had no control over the method of conception and therefore one fetus cannot be deemed more or less valuable than another. Sitting on the fence trying to have the best of both sides isn't a position at all, it's BS and only serves to make the person doing it feel good about not having enough conviction to truly pick one side or the other.
I'm pro-choice, for whatever reason a woman may choose to have an abortion, it's her choice and one she will have to live with as well as account for on judgement day. Additionally, I see no reason to hand over our reproductive rights to the government.

Answer 4

I see Abortion as one of the great "Gray Areas" of this world.

The Real question is, When >EXACTLY< is a life..a "Life"?, and when is it "just" a group of cells?

If it's just a group of cells, then it's just a part of "A" body. If, on the other hand, it's a "Life", well then, it's a whole different ballgame....with a whole different set of rules.

My personal beliefs are that it becomes a "Life" as soon as there is brain activity....

To me, Our brains, operating on their own...are what set us apart from "Just a group of cells".

I oppose the "It's My Body, I'll do whatever I want to with it!" mentality, I guess it's defensable......up to this point. After that, Sorry Sister!, you are now in for the "Long Haul!". Have the kid, give it up for adoption if you don't want it, tie your tubes (If you don't want kids, but can't stop having unprotected sex!)....and move on...hopefully with a well learned lesson on "Things I would not like to do again!"

I'm also disgusted by the "Abortion as Birth Control" crowd....Geesh! Come on! Have a little self restraint People!
By a few condoms, or go where ever they're giving them away...for gosh sakes!

T.S.

Answer 5

Abortion is only permissable if there is clear evidence of the mother dying from childbirth. Abortion is not permissable under any other circumstance.

Why? Since we can't define when humanity begins, and hence when it is murder to destroy it, being civilized human beings, we have to defer to the earliest point in life. This means that we have to assume that the humanity starts at conception, because we can't risk committing murder only for convenience.

It's not really that far of a leap to make. If, say, you define humanity as beginning at the second trimester, then can you really say that the child wasn't human a microsecond before the second trimester began? What about 2 seconds? What about a minute? How about 10 minutes? 20 days? Do you see what I'm getting at?

If we are to be responsible, we have to assume that a fertilized egg is a human at it's earliest stage of development. We can't afford to assume anything else, lest we risk committing murder. It's not a potential human. It's a potential adult.

Answer 6

It's a tough question, and it is a moral question and a legal question, not just a health care question as some far-left wingers try to assert. The majority of Americans disagree with abortion after the first trimester. The justification that the Supreme Court has ruled, and therefore it is unchangable law is a very sad excuse for an argument. This is the same court that ruled pro-slavery and pro-segregation in such cases as Plessey v. Ferguson and the Dred Scott case. If the law, the Constitution, and the Supreme court had never been challenged, we would live in a very backward country indeed... I also think it's crap about personal opposition and legal support by those who think it's killing but don't want to rock the boat, or they just want to straddle the line and appeal to more voters... That would be the same as saying you are personally opposed to murdering an adult but think it's none of your business and not a legal matter.

Answer 7

I justify it by accepting the harsh reality that this issue is not really topic that can be debated. Once the anti/abortionist concedes and accepts the truth, which is until we as nation are seriously ready to face the impact of taking away woman's right to choose, and the outcome it will bring. Is this country ready for the sheltering of the millions of unwanted babies born every year. Or the increase and demand for more money to fund the welfare systems. The millions of children who will be raised in foster care and state facilities. The government will lose millions a year on medical care needed to care for babies born with aids, learning disabilities occurring as an result of the birth defects, and drug withdrawal symptoms, and behavioral problems. The public school system will suffer the consequences of overcrowding, lack of staff, and special education will always lack enough funding to meet the needs of every child. As I said its not a worthy of debate, so how can you justify eliminating a woman's choice?

Answer 8

Life begins at birth. That is what I was taught.

That however doesn't justify irresponsibility and wanton use of abortion as birth control. You want to do the deed, then use contraceptives, and if there's an accident,.. that's what Plan B is for. Abortion as a last resort when all other prevention methods have failed.

I don't choose it for myself. But I don't preach; I leave it up to an individuals conscience to make the call.

The only ones entitled to an abortion WITHOUT QUESTION are women who are raped or molested. They didn't willingly subject themselves to such dehumanization, so why should they carry the product of violence?

Answer 9

I aborted my first child. I lost my second child. My third child was born at 23 wks and is well. My fourth was born at 26 wks and is fine.
The abortion damaged my womb that is why my children came so early.

As for as what is life.....look at the number of weeks my children were before birth. They were in the hospital for some time but now they are both intelligent 17 and 15 yr old.

Answer 10

Abortion doesn't require justification - and shouldn't require justification in a civilized society that promotes itself as intelligent and sentient.

Abortion isn't murder - it is a medical procedure - a choice a woman in the United States can make without fear of reprisal. It should be against the law for people to lambaste women for making the decision to have an abortion - when they're giving their teenagers silicone implants for high school graduation gifts.

A non-viable fetus cannot live outside the mother's womb. This country spends a great deal of money on infants born prematurely, infants that go on to suffer a great many ills in life. With the human population growing exponentially on this planet - for anyone to determine that abortion is a harmful or ill-advised thing is absolutely insane. Children die left and right - they starve, they die of preventable disease, they are neglected and unwanted - yet people feel the need to press women into having more children .. for what purpose?

I don't understand "right-to-lifers". I never will. I have yet to meet ONE who's taken in a third world child into their family or fosters children who are wards of the state.

Why are there orphanages in this country?

Answer 11

As a person of conscience I could never justify abortion. I believe only in allowing the mother to make the choice when her life is in danger, because I wouldn't feel right in taking that option away from her. Other than that I believe all abortion is unethical.