Personally I'm pro-choice, but I can understand the pro-life position.
Still, I can't understand how anyone can be against abortion when it is necessary to save a woman's life. There are actually countries: Chile, Malta, Nicaragua, and El Salvador where abortion is illegal even for those reasons. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/AbortionLawsMap.png
I even read an article about how before it was illegal for all reasons a child who had been raped and also needed an abortion to save her life had one in Nicaragua. The Nicaraguans protested against her abortion! How can anyone support making a child die to save the life of a fetus that would probably die anyway?
2007-09-30 17:52:37 · 8 answers · asked by Sicktoaster 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Nations like people don't become wiser in a day and same goes for the extremists in such societies.Keeping a margin for a misuse,Abortion can not only be life saving but also heal violated lives apart from some contribution towards population control.I agree with you.
2007-09-30 18:25:45 · answer #1 · answered by brkshandilya 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is only hard to see because Abortion has been deliberately misrepresented as a WOMENS RIGHTS issue when is actually a FETAL RIGHTS issue. Even the term "Pro-Choice" is part of this shameless demagoguery.
Society holds it is Murder to take the life of another human/citizen without just cause. So the central question of Abortion is "When does a fetus get its 'human rights?"
If the fetus isn't human, a woman is free to do as she chooses.
Once the fetus is given its rights, killing it without just cause is murder;
& the inconvenience of childbirth hardly amounts to just cause.
Nor is it just cause to kill someone because their father is a rapist.
And it's certainly not clear if you should kill someone because they have inadvertently threatened somebody else's life.
If the unborn child is viable, it is NOT a given that it should be sacrificed for the sake the mother. Many mothers would gladly lay down their lives for the sake of their children.
Now you might not agree, but if you rephrase the question, it's easy to see the other side.
Would you oppose killing a Child to save a Woman?
Got it? When you say 'Abortion' pro-lifers hear 'killing a Child'
On top of this I doubt the protesters believed the pregnant girl would die along with her unborn child. They thought the doctors were making it up, because someone did not want an underage girl to deliver the child of a rapist. And if I had to bet money on it, I'd bet they were right.
2007-09-30 20:27:34 · answer #2 · answered by Phoenix Quill 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Some religions, particularly Roman Catholic, believe that abortions are the exact same as murder. Since the average person believes that death is worse the younger the person (most people would think that someone who murders an 8 year old is worse than someone who murders a 28 year old), killing a fetus is the worst kind of murder.
In addition, they believe that it is God's decision if someone lives or dies, not theirs. They cannot kill someone to save someone else, no matter what.
Hope that makes at least a little sense.
2007-09-30 18:01:10 · answer #3 · answered by ncrawler1 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Most Pro -lifers don't.
It is a falacy that is persisted by the extreme pro chioce.
Most pro life just don't want abortion to be used a birth control.
Rape, Incest, saving a womans life are examples of why an abortion should be used, but there are other ways that are better for other circumstances.
I am pro life, but also pro plan B.
I think it should be a womans choice up to the point of Roe V Wade then it is a viable child and unless the womans life is endangered the woman had her time to make the choice from that point on it is murder.
2007-09-30 18:00:50 · answer #4 · answered by WCSteel 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. Most professional-existence persons permit for the rough alternative of saving the mummy's existence. Some professional-lefe persons even permit for exceptions because of rape or incest, however feel we have become on a slippery slope once we make too many exceptions. But we can't even get complete-time period 9-month abortions banned correct now, so your query is unnecessary.
2016-09-05 13:17:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Catholics are against contraception since it THWARTS God's Will.
Sounds to me like the Catholics have a really incompetent, easily disabled God, which makes me question the rest of their dogma. If some broad can get knocked up through immaculate conception, then how some pill or IUD going to thwart the creator of the entire universe?
And people who blindly follow such dogma are even more incompetent and disabled. It makes perfect sense to them to kill someone in order to save them.
(God save me from those who would save me.)
2007-09-30 18:20:18 · answer #6 · answered by Marc X 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because for some people, principles are more important than people.
Same basic reason why people are against nationalizing health care here in the USA...because they care more about the ideal of capitalism or anti-socialism than they do about people who need medical care.
2007-09-30 18:01:56 · answer #7 · answered by joanby 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Religion is a form of control
2007-09-30 17:56:16 · answer #8 · answered by Trash 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋