Ah jese. Someone asked a question and suddenly everyone needs there own little question box so that everyone reads THEIR two cents on it.
2007-08-12 21:03:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
Please- read all the way through!
If it can't exist outside of my body, then yes it is a part of me and I have the decison over whether it should be there or not. It is not an "individual" until it can exist without my sustenance.
Hey- existence, God, natural evolution or whatever forces of the universe made women's bodies the ones to carry the children of the future. Or not, if they so see fit to empty the womb of the possible life within. Or their doctors do. Or their partners that may not want to shoulder the responsibiltiy. Or they are raped. Or life for the child would be an awful situaltion.
I hurt for the men that have created a child and the woman has chosen abortion, because the man cannot stop the action. My heart goes out to you, and I wish you were the person that created the unbearable and unfathomable life that resided in my body when I was but a child myself.
It is not easy, not pretty, not painless, and it leaves a scar on your soul that will be counted on your journey to heaven (if you believe in such a place) as a difficult and searing process in your life's path. And I am grateful there was a legal and medically safe alternative to a coat hanger.
And be careful whom you choose to share your sperm with! Make sure they feel the same way about the possible outcome of any sexual activity.........because you don't have the choice. They do.
2007-08-12 21:31:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by dizzkat 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
boy, you really know how to stir it up, don't you?
Actually, I DON'T think a fetus is a PART of a woman's body. It grows IN her body, but is expelled later, so it isn't a part of it.
I think that making abortion available is a good thing, but I don't think anyone should actually do it. I know, I live in a fantasy world.
I did some reading about the effect of banning abortion on a society. If you force all pregnant women to carry and bear their children, you create a society of unwanted people. Those people would commit crimes, swallow up all the governmental benefits, and eventually ruin the society. It's better if we have children that we actually want, and can afford, and can love and send to school, etc. Adoption is an excellent choice, of course. but not everyone can afford to do that.
Here's the thing. If you want a child, have a child. If you don't want a child, either use birth control, or just don't have sex. And don't judge or condemn other people for their actions. If you are against their actions, don't commit them yourself.
2007-08-13 03:55:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by kitten lover3 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Depends on where in the birth process the baby is in is in. Early on, it's nothing but a mixture of the sperm and egg aka nothing but genes (not alive yet. It's just genes.). This is also called an embryo. This is when abortion should happen as there is no life to it because of the aforementioned reason. However, I believe abortion should only happen if the poor woman was raped or would endanger her own life. Later on, the fetus develops organs and can be considered alive, so then abortion at this stage would be killing someone. Also, just because it needs his/her mother doesn't mean that the fetus isn't alive. It's like saying that about a baby because a baby can't live without his/her parents or general support, so yeah I agree with you.
2007-08-12 21:22:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by ArmedSquirrel 5
·
3⤊
1⤋
removing an already ineffective fetus isn't comparable to terminating a residing, transforming into fetus's life by utilising decision in any respect. and now and lower back, I even have heard it grew to become into some wellness determination to have the damaging damaging mom grant a ineffective toddler than to bypass in and take it- much less harm to the uterus or something. I could think of that according to risk, with on the instant's present day surgical procedures, having a woman carry a ineffective fetus for on a similar time as won't be required anymore???? My heart breaks for those women persons who do lose their toddler previous due into their term. How devastating.
2016-10-15 03:49:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I wouldn't have an abortion, but I think the "woman's body" part comes from the fact that the fetus cannot survive with the woman's body.
And as for the man's sperm being a part of the baby, a man should keep his sperm out of any woman who doesn't share his beliefs about abortion. It doesn't get in there on it's own.
2007-08-12 21:07:33
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
I think this question is too personal, and that too many people have different views.
Some view it as a womans body, her rights.
Some view it as murder.
All I know is that a guy shouldn't control a womans choice on it. No man knows what it's like to be pregnant, and never will.
Yes it is a guy's sperm, but not every guy cares if he gets a girl pregnant, or knows how to handle it himself.
EDIT: why are we arguing about this? Like I said, everyone has their own opinion. Why is this a question on answers? There will never be a straight answer for this topic. It's like saying "Why do people believe in god" or "Why do people hate gay marriage?" THERE WILL NEVER BE A RIGHT ANSWER FOR IT.
2007-08-12 21:04:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
4⤋
Using your own logic, gender really has no meaning as every single person comes from both woman (egg) and man (sperm).
2007-08-13 01:56:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by Erin 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Interesting argument but who will side you is the Q.
I liked what Bollywood Turtle says
2007-08-12 21:10:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yes. It came from her egg, in her womb, attached to her umbellical cord, and I call it a baby.
2007-08-12 21:04:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by bigDcowgirl 7
·
0⤊
0⤋