ABORTION: what do you think?

Question

I am writing a paper on abortion - so if you have ANY comments - pro-choice, pro-life, (please say why you are pro-choice or pro-life) stories, ANYTHING would help! Thank you!

i am writing a paper on this and i could really use your help! why are you pro-choice/pro-life? any stories? what do you think of this issue? ANYTHING will help me - i need ANSWERS WITH SUBSTANCE PLEASE! thanks!

Answer 1

not something i'd do... but who am i to tell someone whats right for them

i don't believe it is right, but in cases of rape and incest or when it would be harmful to the baby or the mother... but it would be far too difficult to enforce laws like that

Answer 2

Totally pro-choice. 'Pro-life' is a misnomer. The only life no one doubts is not given a say, under that term. As long as the fetus is in the womb, it is dependent on the carrier. There are plenty of times when the fetus does not develop correctly. The parents may not be capable of raising a child-financially or mentally/emotionally.
Pregnancies change a persons body and can cause health problems. The majority (92%) are done in the first trimester, when a baby is not even recognizable. (I'm not sure when the brain and heart develop but I think that would be a factor). Abortions are not inexpensive so most women don't use it as a form of birth control.
If religious reasons are claimed, first, there really isn't anything in the Bible about it and second, if God is all-knowing and all-powerful, that would count every miscarriage as an abortion. Plus, there are verses where soldiers are instructed to rip apart pregnant womens bodies.
Edit: PS: Hitlers mom was advised to have an abortion...

Answer 3

Pro-choice and Pro-life aren't willing to seek a common ground.

I can understand abortion under some situations under some strict rules.

I don't understand how a 14 year old who can't even get her ears pierced is somehow mature enough to make a life and death decision which abortion is about.

I don't understand how a minor who is 8+ months pregant by her molster get an abortion and turn back over to the person who got her pregant to do it again without contacting police.

I do understand when a woman has to make a choice that it comes down to if she lives or the fetus lives that I need to back out and let them work it out.

I don't understand a woman who is pregant terminates a life without letting the father know or given a chance to raise that child yet if she carries the child to term can demand child support without question.

We are talking human life not a tumor or a cyst.

Each side wants simple answers and there are none.

You get 1 and only 1 abortion without question if you need another one you get your tubes removed with it.

If you ask me how it would go it be like this if you want an abortion and it is due to rape you have to file charges.

You must be an adult a minor you follow the same rule as any minor considering any kind of medical procedure.

When a fetus is viable you have to have large about of evidence that you will die if you don't have an abortion.

A mother would be required to know the devolpment of the fetus and ALL alternatives presented than give 24 hours to think it over.

We have a waiting time to get a gun and people saying guns kill people so waiting is good.
So why can't have the same waiting time for the death of human being?

Again no simple answers to your question.

If you want simple answers pick a different subject.

Answer 4

It's very simple. Every abortion kills an innocent human being. Killing innocent human beings is wrong.

Here's some information that may help:

Medically Speaking, When Does Life Begin?
http://abort73.com/HTML/I-A-1-medical.html

Abortion Techniques:
http://abort73.com/HTML/I-A-3-techniques.html

Photos and Video of Abortions, Including 1st Trimester Abortions:
http://www.abort73.com/HTML/I-A-4-video.html
http://www.cbrinfo.org/Resources/pictures.html

Photos and Facts About Prenatal Development:
http://www.justthefacts.org/clar.asp
http://www.abort73.com/HTML/I-A-2-prenatal.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/3847319.stm

Abortion Stories:
http://abortiontv.com/Words/truestoriesfrom-mothers.htm
http://www.abort73.com/HTML/I-G-2-testimony.html

Abortion Risks:
http://afterabortion.info/complic.html
http://www.abortionfacts.com/reardon/effect_of_abortion.asp
http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/The_Link.htm
http://www.bcpinstitute.org/brochure.htm

Abortion Deaths:
http://www.lifedynamics.com/Pro-life_Group/Pro-choice_Women
http://www.afterabortion.info/news/abortiondeaths.html
http://www.lifeissues.org/ru486/deaths.htm

Pro-Life Answers to “Pro-Choice” Arguments:
http://www.deathroe.com/Pro-life_Answers/
http://www.pregnantpause.org/abort/choicarg.htm

Why Killing Children Conceived in Rape Is Wrong:
http://www.deathroe.com/Pro-life_Answers/Answers.cfm?ID=31
http://www.afterabortion.info/Victims/index.htm
http://www.focusonthefamily.com/focusmagazine/sohl/A000000103.cfm
http://www.dakotavoice.com/200611/Guest/20061101_GR.html
http://www.afterabortion.info/PAR/V2/n1/RAPESUM.htm

According to 480 American Physicians, Abortion Is Never Necessary to Save a Woman’s Life:
http://www.all.org/article.php?id=10682

The Testimony of Former Abortionists:
http://www.prolifeaction.org/providers/index.htm
http://www.humanlifereview.com/2000_summer/meehan_s2000.php

A Comparison of Abortion and Other Historical Genocides:
http://www.blackgenocide.org/abortion.html
http://cbrinfo.org/Resources/abortion.html

Answer 5

The pro-abortion and anti-abortion forces are warships passing in the night. Their slogans, “pro-choice” and “pro-life,” don’t engage the central issue that divides them, which is, what actually happens in an abortion. Neither group really disagrees with the other’s slogan. None of the opponents of abortion would object to a woman’s choosing to do what she wanted with a tumor or some other unwanted tissue growing on or in her body. On that issue they would be pro-choice. And no ordinary supporter of abortion would argue that a woman has a right to choose to do what she wants with her grandmother, or her infant daughter. In those cases, they would be pro-life, not pro-choice.

Nor was “choice”—understood as a woman’s right to choose to terminate the life of a person—authorized by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade. What the Court decided in that case was that during the period before the fetus was viable (which the Court, writing in 1973, said usually occurred at 28 weeks but could occur earlier, even at 24 weeks) a woman could not be prohibited from exercising her “right to privacy”—which included choosing to have an abortion. The Court did not hold that a woman had an unqualified right to destroy something that was a person. “If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.” The Court went on, in another decision handed down the same day, to define “health” so expansively as to put severe limits on states’ practical ability to protect fetal life after viability. But that holding does not alter the fact that the Court has never explicitly held that a woman has an absolute right to destroy something that it recognizes as a person.

What was particularly provocative in the Court’s decision was its “legislating” its own definition of life, i.e., “viability,” despite a disingenuous disclaimer (“We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins”). By not calling the fetus “life,” the Court could pretend that it had not authorized the destruction of life.

Neither “life” nor “choice,” therefore, is really the issue in the abortion dispute. And when we talk about “life” or “human life” we really mean “human being” or “person,” as in Mother Teresa or Yasser Arafat—or “personhood”—i.e., the nature of someone essentially like us and entitled to the same protection of the law . . .

Answer 6

Whether or not abortion should be legal, I think, depends on the circumstance.

If the mother's life is in danger, abortion should be an option; no need for both lives to be lost.

In the case of a rape, I think it should be an option. Rape can be so traumatic, no need to force a woman to deal with the additional consequence; she didn't willingly participate.

In the case of "uh-oh...I was sexually irresponsible and now I'm pregnant," I am totally opposed to abortion. If you don't want to get pregnant, act responsibly. If you have an "accident," too bad. You choose to have sex, you should be responsible enough to deal with the consequences. You don't have to be a parent, but you don't get to kill the baby. There are plenty of people out there who'd be more than happy to raise the result of your irresponsibilty.

Have sex+ get pregnant = accountability. You play, you pay; no excuses.

Partial-birth abortion, in my opinion, is outright murder. Once any part of a live fetus exits the womb, that fetus becomes a live birth. To kill that baby at that point is inexcusable.

Answer 7

I'm completely pro-choice. I think that if a woman doesn't want a kid, she shouldn't have to go through that and nobody should have any right to tell her otherwise. And I'm sick of the "don't have sex if you can't handle a kid" crap. If a nineteen year old could get her tubes tied, mine would be. But oh, you have to be like thirty? I don't tell ANYONE how to live their life, I think everyone should be free to make their own decisions.

"Responsible parenthood involves decades devoted to the child's proper nurture. To sentence a woman to bear a child against her will is an unspeakable violation of her rights: her right to liberty (to the functions of her body), her right to the pursuit of happiness, and, sometimes, her right to life itself, even as a serf. Such a sentence represents the sacrifice of the actual to the potential, of a real human being to a piece of protoplasm, which has no life in the human sense of the term. It is sheer perversion of language for people who demand this sacrifice to call themselves 'right-to-lifers.' "

— Leonard Peikoff

Answer 8

I am for limiting abortion to a bare minimum through education, informed birth control choices and pairing birth mothers with couples willing to adopt.

The outlawing of late term abortion, is a correct step in my opinion.

But I strongly believe that federal tax dollars should not be used to pay for abortion, period. In my mind it is government sponsored genocide, and could lead to the thinking that killing others who are not producers in society is alright (ie. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Kim killing those in nursing homes).

Answer 9

I don't think that it is right, the fact that people decide to have sex, should mean that they have to carry the weight of motherhood, and the father should own up to it. The child that the mother is carrying, it is alive too, it should have a chance, like everyone else in the world. Not just the parents, the child should be able to live.

Answer 10

I agree with Mentat. Abortion is a very personal issue that many people do not want to comment on. Sorry, but there are issues I feel very strongly about and I don't mind commenting about them. This is one I do happen to mind stating my opinion about and I will refrain from comment.

Answer 11

Here in Canada, 3 million babies have been aborted over the last thirty years.

This may not seem like a lot to Americans, but that is TEN PERCENT OF OUR POPULATION!!!

Imagine if the entire population of California was suddenly exterminated. Thats what its like.