This is a real perplexing topic to many, and I think it would be hard for anyone to justify abortion. I believe that our constitution gave everyone rights, and to deny the fetus(a living entity) rights would be to spit in the face of everything we believe in
2007-08-04 07:12:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by UTLonghorn(Pre-Med) 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
An excellent question. Abortion being okay doesn't have to do with a woman "having rights over her own body" because we all know it's not her own body, it's the body and life of her child. It's a very twisted system that thinks it's okay for partial birth abortion(when a woman is giving birth, just before the head of the baby comes out, the doctor inserts a syringe into the baby's head and sucks out the brain killing it instantly. seriously I am NOT making this up) but yet will imprison a woman (or a doctor for that matter) for killing a baby minutes after it is born.
Look, there are NO justifications for this. They ARE babies in the mother, human beings, not blobs of tissue, as people know,(as you mentioned about the mother ending her own pregnancy, and double counts of homicide proves this), yet on the other hand they don't acknowledge it when the baby is "unwanted" or came at the "wrong time".
Did you know that a baby is fully formed(all its organs are formed, though maybe not completely), before the mother even shows in any bulging in her belly? Amazing isn't it?
I am pro choice, I believe the baby should have a choice. :) If the baby wants to "abort" let him do so himself!!!!
2007-08-04 07:17:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by carmisrael 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
First, I would like to begin with addressing the illegality of suicide. An attempted suicided does not result in the common criminal punishment, instead the government deems that the individual is not sane enough to continue governing themselves, and places then in a mental institution. (Contrary to a mental institution, the prison institution does not evaluate sanity, but ability to choose between the societal conditions of right and wrong)
The modern institutions of prison and sanity began in the 17th century as a method to segregate the "mad" from the rest. One original incarnation was rounding up the beggers throughout Paris and putting them in forced work conditions. Over time, institutions have segregated and redefined those who don't "contribute to society" differently. There are those who don't work, those who differ in their conduct, and those who are unable to govern themselves.
The latter group is who we today recognize as the mentally ill. They have been psychologically categorized as a group in need of treatment, and legally recognized as such. By making suicided illegal, it guarantees some form of treatment for the individual. Therefore, suicide results in government intervention.
In contrast, abortion recognizes the various strains a child puts on an individual and on society. Although many can say that in their own beliefs, a baby is a gift from god, the separation of Church and State guaranteed in the United States Constitution disallows this sentiment from being legally recognized. Instead, the government recognizes the responsibility of a child.
In allowing abortion, the government also recognizes that there are superior times to have a child. Such as when an individual or couple is financially or emotionally stable, guaranteeing a more fruitful experience for the child. Also the pregnancy could have been unwanted or unplanned, despite use of contraceptives, and therefore be unwelcome.
Sex happens, and as a result, pregnancy can happen. The logic behind abortion is that a happier child is a planned child, and thus affords that choice as to when to have a child to the mother.
2007-08-04 07:35:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by blindcuriosity 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Did I understand you correctly.... you think abortion should be legal and suicide should be illegal?
People who successfully commit suicide can't get arrested for doing something illegal. The people who fail in their suicide attempts get help (mental hospital). JUSTIFIED
Women who have an abortion have to live with that decision for the rest of their lives. That's enough punishment. So far as the pro-life decisions we call those women Mom. JUSTIFIED
2007-08-04 07:21:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by Miz D 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hmmm...
Each state sets up its own guidelines regarding abortion of a fetus. Some states may determine that "up to the 19th week" is okay to perform an abortion, other states (such as Florida) determine that abortions can be performed "up to the 27th week" which is a week shy of 7 months of pregnancy.
You are straddling the fence. You are either Pro Choice or Pro Life, not both. If you can "understand" both sides of the issue, but don't take sides, then you are neutral.
A woman may "decide" that she has "rights over her own body" but she doesn't have rights over that other little body growing inside of her.
A person that believes that he or she has "rights over their own body" can also believe that he or she has the right to terminate his or her life - suicide.
A successful suicide cannot be arrested.
So many issues, but no clear answers. But like I said, that's why state laws differ and confuses people.
2007-08-04 07:14:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ambassador Z 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Abortion is killing the fetus?! Haha that is so dead wrong.
Abortion is killing your unborn child while you feel it moving inside you.
Suicide is illegal. Abortion has to be made illegal too.
Can't have things both ways. This is a 2 way road, not a 1 way road.
Killing is killing, you can't make excuses for Suicide and give different excuses to abortion.
Both excuses should apply to Suicide and Abortion.
For real hard truth and facts and honesty, you can't be pro choice and pro life at the same time.
Pro choice simply means you are for murder and you are for suicide.
Pro life means you are against killing unborn babies and you are against killing yourself. Is that clear for everyone?
2007-08-04 07:13:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is a very good question! I often wonder that myself. If I choose to end my life, then I am going to do just that. I also feel that a person has the right to decide when their lives will end, and die with dignity instead of having their misery prolonged. I also see the issue with helping someone end their lives - how do you know it wasn't murder? I also think that the Terry Shivo case should do something to tell about the dilema. There were conflicting reports on her decisions. What if a person feels one way, and then years later, changes their mind? Unless it is in writing, then there is nothing but a fight. The best way to do things is with a living will. I have one, my husband has one, and both of our families have numerous members that have them. We have also discussed our decisions and choices, and know what the other wishes. This is something not very pleasant to talk about, but a need to share before a tragic, unforseen event happens. If I were asking someone to help me with my decision to end my life, I would have my doctor write a letter explaining my condition, the long term effects, and the suffering that will happen/is happening. I would then write a letter myself, explaining my feelings, why I had decided to do what I was doing, and that it was of my own free will. I would also have a "Do Not Recessitate" order (DNR) in place so that there was no dispute that I had wanted to live or die. Along with all of this, I would have my living will right there. All of this in a packet to be found with me would be sure to explain my position on my life, as my choice to end it.
2016-04-01 19:15:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I just want to be clear on one thing...
Are all the Pro-Lifers that have been answering this question also opposed to capital punishment?
In the conservative political movement, it is practically mandatory to be Pro-Life with regards to abortion, but no one questions anyone's commitment to the sanctity of life when it comes to capital punishment.
You say you can't have it both ways. I agree. So I want to hear conservatives argue that EVERY life (fetus or convicted murderer) is precious and should not be killed.
Make that argument, then you can argue about not having it both ways.
Also, suicide is not illegal. Not in the last century or so.
2007-08-04 07:33:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
That's a very good question - I'll be interested to see the thoughts of everyone. On the same thought also, think about this - why is it that we let "people" suffer tremendously with fatal illnesses and don't hesitate to prevent our animals from suffering by having them "put down"....what IS wrong with the Human Race? Also, why do we feed, clothe, educate, provide health care, provide libraries, state of the art work out centers, to convicted child abusers, killers and real sick-o's and we don't care to provide much for our elderly or poor children. This world is a mess - we need to take care of each other......we will be our own demise.
2007-08-04 07:12:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by suzycrmchz 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Suicide is killing a person, though it is also yourself. Abortion is killing a fetus, which is not considered a person.
If you are against abortion, don't ever get one. But don't take the right away from everyone else. Do you want people who don't want kids having kids?
2007-08-04 07:07:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by Surf Forever 5
·
2⤊
0⤋