2007-10-19 09:20:45 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
What do you do with the kid though? Let him be someone's property?
2007-10-19 09:23:26 · update #1
I agree that a life is a life. It's just that I don't want to take care of life and when that life is older and no longer cute, I will ignore it and buy a fancy car.
2007-10-19 09:34:54 · update #2
Are there doctors there with the proper equipment to perform those services? I doubt it, because I don't think they have access to any type of health care. I doubt they have any forms of birth control as well. Good luck. 2D
2007-10-19 09:56:41 · answer #1 · answered by 2D 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you in favor of killing the women?
You do understand that the medical facilities of most 3rd world nations is somewhat unclean...
What about Vasectomies in third world nation? I mean a little snip is much better than killing a person or it's mother. After a kid or two, frog march the father down to the local nasty hospital and a snip snap later, he can go to his job for the next 13 hours.
Or, maybe family planning is an answer. like education to the women on how to avoid pregnancy, or all about abstinence.
Because, you know a 3rd world baby is worth much less than an American baby... (does that even make sense?).
2007-10-19 09:29:44 · answer #2 · answered by Christian in Kuwait 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i could undertake from a third international u . s . a . too if i ought to. it relatively is plenty greater mandatory there by way of fact a minimum of right here we've centers which will save our adoptive toddlers secure, heat, knowledgeable and fed if no longer with an prolonged term family contributors. childrens in third international countries do no longer unavoidably have get admission to to even those maximum worry-loose needs.
2016-10-07 05:54:25 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The unfortunate thing is that in the developing world, health care is scarce, primitive, and basic. So abortions would be hard to come by...
2007-10-19 09:24:01 · answer #4 · answered by gilliegrrrl 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Babies in third-world countries are worth less, so we should have even more of a right to kill them.
(note sarcasm)
The idea that a baby born into "poor" conditions should be aborted because of such conditions is nothing short of pure evil. Why does everyone have to be born healthy and wealthy to be considered "worth having?"
And do you honestly think that people in third-world countries are less happy than we are? I have traveled to quite a few of them, and my experience in general is the opposite if anything.
2007-10-19 09:24:17 · answer #5 · answered by Thom 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I believe in pro-choice regardless. But aren't more and more Americans adopting from third-world countries?
2007-10-19 09:23:50 · answer #6 · answered by sandwest 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I am pro choice anywhere
If you don't allow women to chose, they will anyway, only that they will risk their lifes for it. In my country, before 1989, abortion was forbiden. Do you think that stopped it from happening? It didn't stop it, the difference was that many women died cause of having abortions without anesthesia, in awfull conditions on the doctor's kitchen table
2007-10-19 09:22:24 · answer #7 · answered by larissa 6 · 3⤊ 4⤋
It is unfortunate to destroy a life, but again if you see, it is better to destroy an embryo than give birth to a person who will have a life full of suffering!
It's up to you to decide!
2007-10-19 09:24:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
How about euthanasia in countries without modern hospitals?
How about capital punishment for petty thieves where there aren't any prisons?
Killing is killing. It cannot be justified by societal inadequacies.
2007-10-19 09:23:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Its not called abortion there, its called population control, and though it is necessary, it is still wrong
2007-10-19 09:23:25 · answer #10 · answered by Russ Bus 3 · 1⤊ 5⤋