How do you feel about abortion?

Question

Do you believe in abortion & why? I personally dont, I consider it murder. I hate hearing "well its not really a baby yet" ....uh yes it was, it is wasnt really a baby yet then you werent pregnant!!! I believe at least let the baby live and put it up for adoption, dont kill it before it has a chance at life. I know God doesnt approve of abortion, but setting God aside, It's morally wrong.
Thoughts anyone?

Answer 1

every woman should have the right to choose whether she wants to have a baby or not

abortion is NOT murder, if it is - what do you call miscarriage then? suicide?

Answer 2

The above arguments in favor of abortion are extremely contrived.

Duke thinks that a life only has value if it is sentient and rational. First, who died and made rationality the seat of ontological value for human life? Does that mean the more rational a person is the more value their life has and thus the more emotional they are the less their life is worth? Second, the baby's brain functions independently starting at week 6 or so of the pregnancy. Third, babies are not properly self-conscious for a long time after birth, by this standard can we go ahead and start killing viable, living 6-month olds?

The argument that a fetus is just a clump of cells is true if we don't value a beating heart or functioning brain but somehow decide that breathing actual air on our own is the line for the existence of a separate life. Aside from the fact that this classifies fish as "dead clumps of cells," we have an additional problem in that this line is completely arbitrary. Why not say driving a car is the line for existence or self-mobility? And what about infants, which cannot survive without a caretaker? Can we classify them as clumps of cells and "cut them off" too? Or is it only when they are internally tethered? If so, why does the location of the mother putting sustenance into the baby changing from navel to mouth suddenly make a new life? Is that all life is, really?

The one robust argument above is that women should be able to choose whether to have a baby or not. However, if the woman has chosen to engage in consensual sex, this liberty has been granted and the pregnancy is a consequence of her initial choice. Now there are also the rights of the second person [or potential person, see below] to consider. So this agrument only justifies an exception for cases of rape.

The biggest problem with all these arguments is that they conclude potential life has no value. But the very same people invariably believe that we have a responsibility to protect the environment for future generations. Meaning those hypothetical, yet unborn people have specific rights which we need to honor. Even if we think the fetus is a clump of unremarkable cells, the fetus is still not a hypothetical. It is an actual, unique developing life that has rights attached specifically to it. Environmentalism therefore contradicts directly the pro-choice movement.

Just food for thought. I myself am not fully anti-choice as I believe women are backed into a corner in the current society and that women need real choices before we can further limit or revoke choice. But, ultimately, I have never seen an argument that is going to hold it open in the long run.

Answer 3

As to whether it was a baby at conception: it was "just" an accumulation of cells that live and multiply. That happens every day in your blood, yet you don't consider a cut in your arm to be the murder of blood cells, do you?

I think that abortion is almost never the right choice - people tend to think in "what if"-s and many women struggle the rest of their life with that decision, thinking of "what could have been". The point? Something that can't feel can't feel, whichever way you put it. If that something does not get a chance to live, then it doesn't get a chance to become something. It IS nothing big, really, but it MIGHT become at one point. But we don't know, honestly, and we don't know what would be and could have been, we only know what is. And what is is an accumulation of cells that, until a certain point, do not feel anything.

I would recommend having a baby instead of arborting these cells; not for the cells' but for the mother's health.

And what about conditions like anencephaly? The baby would die within minutes after the birth. Can I REALLY, honestly condemn an earlier abortion, to help the mother with that horrible fate?

Answer: nope, I can't.

Women did kill themselves (and their unborn children) when they desperately wanted an abortion. Yes, having a living woman and a dead fetus is better than that, which is why we must ensure that women have this choice (which I never ever want to make, by the way).

BTW, I AM against late abortions due to minor health problems, say trisomy 23. I find the thought that a baby feels what is happening (due to developed nerval system) and is killed eventhough it could, at one point, live a happy life much scarier than aborting a fetus in it's 7th week.

edit: Ninja, where do you live that women abort because they "can't be bothered"? Everything I've read, and all that I experienced being the best friend of a woman shows me that no single woman takes that "easy". You don't just abort for the fun of it.

Answer 4

you won't be able to get a tubal ligation or a hysterectomy till you're over 21 and a minimum of have one infant. maximum medical doctors received't preform this on any women those who's easily less than 30. maximum abortions are performed between 6-20 weeks, and are a lot less expensive. they are from 2 hundred-800$ Tubal ligation/hysterectomy can variety everywhere from one thousand-3000$ there's a large massive difference in value. in case you concentration on an embryo "alive," then so are epidermis cells and bacteria and viruses. once you scratch your epidermis, wash your fingers, or take anti biotics, you're ending a existence. in case you devour meat, you homicide an animal. (pigs have higher IQs then an well-known 3 365 days previous, human beings nonetheless don't sense undesirable for eating Sir Francis Bacon) some human beings by no skill opt for to have sex, and sex isn't totally for copy. look at each and every of the animals which have sex for in basic terms exhilaration. All that being suggested, i'm obviously professional selection.

Answer 5

I don't understand why even the most nonreligious don't think that it is morally wrong. It amounts to murder. Save me the argument that a woman should have the right to choose what happens to her body. The woman makes that choice before conception. Save me the argument that it is a part of her body too. Science proves this notion to be false.
1. A woman cannot create a child alone, a man has to be involved.
2. Every cell in the woman's body that belongs to her shares her DNA, not one cell of the child shares her complete DNA.
3. Every part of the woman's body stays with her until either it dies, or she dies. The unborn child will leave the woman before she or it dies (if it is a normal, healthy pregnancy).
4. Every part of the woman's body cannot exist without her, a full term child can.
5. A woman, by definition, has female reproductive organs, not every child does.
The most basic teachings of humanistic principles are to preserve life and to care for and protect those that cannot care for and protect themselves. So, even if I were not a Christian I would believe that abortion was morally wrong!


EDIT: Just for those of you that think that I don't know anything about what it is like to have to make that choice...I had an abortion when I was 15 (before I was a Christian) and felt a horrible amount of guilt and pain as a result. For those of you who would use the "in the instance of rape" argument...I was raped at 21 (after I became a Christian) and became pregnant as a result. I love my son and not a day passes that I am not thankful for him. He was a blessing, a wonderful gift that came from something that was so horrible. From the pain of the rape came a child that will bring a lifetime of joy.

Answer 6

I think abortion is a form of rejection towards an unborn person. People, of all ages, experience rejection at some point in the lives, whether by their own mother, father, peers, society, etc. To be human is to suffer. This only shows that we need God all the more. The unborn are innocent people with souls and God knows every one of them. The unborn need protecting. I am pro-life and anti-abortion.

Answer 7

I don't think it is right as a whole. Now tubal prgnancies which they call medical abortions (I think the term needs to be changed) I don't have a problem with. The baby will not live longer than about three months and will kill the mother. There is no sense in leaving the live children without a mother when there is no way to save the unborn baby. Now using it as birth control, is disgusting. Its common sense if you are not ready to have a baby then you are not ready for sex. Simple easy to understand.

Answer 8

I dont believe in abortion unless its a case of rape or incest. Otherwise, abortion should be strictly illegal. In this case, the pregnant woman must put her own rights aside for her unborn child. If you didnt want to get pregnant, be more careful with yourself and you wouldnt have. There is no easy way out and aborting an innocent human being is selfish and cruel. Atleast have the baby and give it up for adoption, but if you could see what abortion does to a fetus, it's so inhumane.

Answer 9

If you believe abortion is murder, then you believe that God is a murderer. God clearly uses abortion and miscarriage and has taught his followers to use abortion. And there is a simply reason why God loves those who use abortion and hates those who are pro life. It is a simple fact that by saving a fetus you are causing the death of 12 loved and wanted children. And God calls you to save the children, not the fetuses because he has set up the world in such a way that attemping to save fetuses causes the death of children. His commandments are clear when viewed in light of His own actions. When God brings a fetus "home" to his arms, it opens up resources to save his other children.
And it is clear in the Bible that abortion is not murder. There are over 300 instances of murder described in the Bible, and not one even resembles abortion.
And when the Bible says things such as "I knew you in the womb" it is said by God with the understanding that he is going to miscarry more than 50% of those he knew.
Morally, it is clear that allowing 12 children to die to save one fetus would be immoral. Perhaps you should rethink your views on abortion.

Answer 10

Oh, boy that's a can of worms.

My personal opinion? I'm against it. My reasons are scientific rather than religious, but even so...I don't think it can or should be illegalized outright. In some cases (rape, incest, mother's life in danger), I understand it, though I don't agree with it.

Instead of illegalizing abortion, I think it should be left alone (except for late-term abortions, those should be illegal except for in cases where the mother's life is in danger). As an alternative, I think we should promote an awareness that there is no such thing as "safe" sex, only SAFER sex. So a person shouldn't have sex unless they're prepared for the possible consequences.

And birth control and condoms should be readily available.

Answer 11

I agree with you !

If everyone was moral we wont have a world full of turmoils and adversities.

Religion is a way giving support and rules to follow in order to be a bit more "moral" in regard of many things that we face in life .

But to end a life by choice it's murder ! And we do not need any religion to tell us this !

Adoption is a solution for some ,but women who abort do not want the burden to carry a life for nine months.

So it is a very touchy subject that as always been part of humanity . If it's a matter of life and death then It's not up to me or any of us to judge ,but it should be left to the medical field .

After all ! they are the one that have to live with their conscience right?