English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

rare... so aside of these reasons, what is abortion used for...?

Is it simply used for birth control...?

2007-11-27 10:27:53 · 16 answers · asked by prancinglion 5 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

16 answers

yes...people just don't want the kid. Basically their mentality seems to be, (which is pretty sick in my opinion) "Whoops! DIdn't mean for THAT to happen. Lets make an appointment!"
There's no sugar coating it.

2007-11-27 10:32:43 · answer #1 · answered by *Tessie* 3 · 0 5

Abortion, what a nice and safe topic to discuss!
Even though abortion to save a mothers life is rare (not VERY rare, just not as common as other kinds of abortions) it is also rare to find people sociopathically aborting for birth control. Abortion is often a traumatic experience and the women who abort often have feelings of guilt, couples often break up or are badly damaged after abortions. All in all, it's not a nice process, it's not ideal, it's a non-ideal situtation for a non-ideal world. Unfortunately we aren't in a position to guarantee that a pregnancy won't destroy a woman's reproductive system, we aren't in a position to guarantee that their child will be taken care of and will have the food, love, education and shelter it will need- we can't even look after our population in the state it's in now, in america, they don't have something as simple as free vaccines or universal healthcare. Because we won't take responsibility for the child after it's born, i believe it is hypocritical to take responsibility before. The most common abortion is because the mother does not feel that she is able to look after the baby, it is possible she feels she's too young, she's not in a caring relationship, she doesn't have the money or she simply doesn't want the baby, this is sad, indeed, but unless we are willing to guarantee total care for the child and no physical repercussions from the mother, i believe we have to recognise the right of the mother to make her own decisions about her body, anything else is fascism.

2007-11-27 18:42:45 · answer #2 · answered by Way 5 · 4 0

Even though you may not have heard of it, that does not mean that medical reasons for abortion do not exist. I HAVE heard of abortions to save a mother's life - namely in cases of cancer in the mother, where the chemo and radiation therapies would most likely cause severe birth defects or fetal death. I know a girl this happened to.
There are other cases where abortion is used to protect the mother against possible severe health problems or life threatening conditions; Ectopic pregnancy, child pregnancy (where the girl's body is too young and undeveloped to safely bring a pregnancy to term), Uterine malformation, some cases of multiple fetus such as triplets or more when the mother's body isn't capable of supporting that many, and immune system problems where the mother's system starts to attack the fetus to the point where it could not survive to term.
There are others as well. They are not as rare as you think.

2007-11-27 22:42:32 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The mother's life sometimes is saved by not having to take care of the expenses that a baby represent. Starting with the birth bills and continuing with a 21+ year of financial care that a baby represents. Not including college.

It saves you from bankruptcy.

Do you want taxes go higher stop abortion or let the bodies hit the floor.

2007-11-27 18:49:03 · answer #4 · answered by Chupate esa! 5 · 1 0

There were approx. 800k abortions last year. Many of those children (if abortion was outlawed) would be parentless and have no means of support.

For those who are against abortion, what do you propose to do with 800k more children every year? Continue to overwhelm the foster care system? Reopen orphanages? Even if 100k are adopted and/or kept by the birth mother, what do you propose to do with 700k more children a year then?

How much would our taxes increase to support all these unwanted children and provide food, shelter, medical care (some would be mentally retarded or have disabilities and require lifetime care).

This is why I believe that politicans talk the talk in regards to eliminating abortion, but won't walk the walk when it comes to actually making legislation to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

Both Houses of Congress were dominated by Republicans from 2002-2006 with a Republican President, yet no legislation was created, much less passed.

2007-11-27 18:34:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 7 1

I have heard of many times where abortion was used because having the baby would have killed the mother- or even carrying it would have killed her. So you are wrong there.

It's good to have that option in case the pill fails (which it does). All forms of BC have some failure rate. And no, its not logical to say "well don't have sex then!" I'm a 31 yr old divorced female, and I don't plan on never having sex again. I'm on the depo shot, but if I was ever the .001% of women who got pregnant on that, I would want the option of abortion. Rather than carrying a child no one will want.

2007-11-27 18:32:38 · answer #6 · answered by Eraserhead 6 · 6 1

How do you know they are rare? Incest and date rape are much more prevalent in Humanity then anyone wants to admit. Did you poll women getting abortions? Do you have a link to such a survey?

2007-11-27 18:39:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It's not birth control- birth control is contraception. Abortion is the opposite.

2007-11-27 18:31:23 · answer #8 · answered by patrick w 2 · 1 0

well first ill say if your against me for this i dont care
but i had one because i was emotionally torn apart before i even found out i was pregnant and i barely have enough money for myself...its not in a mean of birth control...well unless your someone whos done this way more times than they should have..once is a mistake...and i would never think of having one again. ever.

http://abortionsupportsite.blogspot.com

2007-11-27 19:07:53 · answer #9 · answered by girlwithoutaname 3 · 0 0

the arguement 'to save a child from poverty' is wrong.in that case lets predict the future of every new born from now on.why dont the participants spend 75 cents and save us all the cost of an abortion?its an easy way out period.an excuse to be irresponsible.

2007-11-27 19:21:22 · answer #10 · answered by mike hunt 4 · 0 2

These matters are very private. Why would you feel you would know or even have the right to know?

2007-11-27 19:07:14 · answer #11 · answered by gone 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers