I'm pro choice because it's exactly that; allowing the choice. Just imagine how difficult of a decision it is. Sometimes a woman is just not ready to have that child for whatever reason. So why should we condemn her to a life of hardship? Because we identify with a fetus as a human being? People are more than just a sack of organs; we're a consciousness and a self-awareness. The right to life doesn't mean anything to the fetus, it's still just a part of its mother and has no idea what it means to be alive.
I can understand completely the idea of banning all late term abortions. In some cases the fetus is old enough to survive outside of its mother, and there's really no need to wait that long. I'd suggest the compromise of figuring out when the first synapses of brain activity begin and using that as the cut off point. If you ban all abortions though, many women still get back alley abortions or find some other way to get rid of the child. Forcing your own will into someone else's personal life because you think you know better than them rarely works out well.
2007-12-02 22:06:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
I am basically pro-life but I feel that the concern for an unborn child should be matched or exceeded by concern for children who are living in intolerable conditions. I cannot bring myself to support the pro-life movement because they ignore the social conditions that bring about abortion in the first place.
Its fine to champion the plight of children who cannot defend themselves but there are plenty of those on our streets that people ignore completely.
Either we protect them all or we should go back to our middle class homes and shut up because we are unwilling to tackle the tough job to really solve the problem.
I am against abortion but I have no right to cast stones at a woman who has no good options and who must watch every day as her other children suffer. When we fix our impoverished communities, end gang violence, ensure affordable health care for all, then we may condemn those who seek abortions.
2007-12-03 05:51:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Personally I am glad that Mom did not get an abortion.
The crux of the conflict seems to be whether or not abortion is killing a person.
Pro-lifers claim that life begins at conception. The believe that the instant that DNA from the sperm and the ovum are shared and combined inside the first cell human life begins. Yet they do not have any answer for stillborn fetuses, or sudden infant death syndrome. Since most pro-lifers seem to hold deep religious beliefs it is strange to me that they do not explain their stance with standard dogma. Instead they stridently, and sometimes shrilly, insist that they are right. They seek to win the arguement by assuming that all humans know that the pro-life position is of course the correct one.
Pro-choicers claim that it begins at some later, ill-defined point, when the fetus is viable-when it can survive outside the mother's womb.
Heartbeat, brain activity, and auto respiration have all been used by the medical community in the past to define life.
I define life as existing when a soul is attached to/associated with a physical form. This "soul," appears to me to be a spark of life provided by the Creator Of All. It sustains physical functioning, and also seems to be influenced by the physical world. It is that mote of God energy within us all.
Some with see my position as a cop-out. They will be infuriated to think that something outside of human understanding can actually exist.
I think of the soul as being similar to a bi-polar polymer. As an example of this I think of Dawn dishwashing liquid. One end has an affinity for oil, and the other end has an affinity for water.
For the soul, one end seems to be physical energy that we understand, and the other end seems to be energy that we do not perceive, much less comprehend. This quality of the soul may be frustrating for many people, existing as it does-partially in this world that we can explore, and also in a place/manner/time-space continuum that we cannot yet understand.
Only recently have humans been able to detect various frequencies of energy. The electrical impulses in the heart and brain, the chemical synapses of the nervous system, the effect of hormones on the body and brain, and even the basic building blocks of genes and DNA were all unknown until the end of the last millenium. We did not know that X-rays existed until about 150 years ago, even though they were present all along.
Will humans ever detect other energy sources beyond what we already know? I can not say with absolute certainty, but I do imagine that we will continue to search. It seems to be one of the defining characteristics of humans to be curious.
2007-12-03 06:10:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Schtupa 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
I think abortion is absolutly terrible, I also believe in having as much personal freedom as possible. I understand that with freedom comes responsibility, but that responsibility is personal. The government should stay out of a womans right to choose Our country should promote education and contraceptives. I think our schools should teach at least basic parenting skills, and conflict resolution also.
If you don't like abortions, don't have one. The government should not be imposing it's regulations on a womans body.
2007-12-03 08:54:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dave 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Pro Life. Anything with a heart is a person, weather you kill a 30 year old or a 30 day old it is the same. I chose life and I never could imagine life without my daughter no matter how hard it can get.
2007-12-03 06:43:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bridget B 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
I believe that abortion is wrong... under certain circumstances.
If the mother was impregnated by rape, or if she is too sickly or otherwise unable to carry a child without endangering herself, I'm pro-abortion. If that's the woman's choice.
If the mother was impregnated because she and the father were careless, reckless and otherwise thoughtless to the consequences of their copulation, then I'm anti-abortion.
The fact of the matter is that too many people go sleeping around without thinking of the pregnancy risks, have their abortions without a second thought, and then move on to do it again. I believe such people should not be having abortions just to rid themselves of an inconvenience.
2007-12-03 05:41:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by chaoticresolution 2
·
3⤊
1⤋
pro choice.
seems alot of pro lifers don't understand some of the terrible ways a woman can get pregnant.
I can't imagine a 12 year old having to carry a child from rape because some one thinks they should have to suffer with pregnancy and delivery to give another family a child.
I personally don't consider abortion a good option for most. I consider it an option for bad situations.
2007-12-03 06:03:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I'm 100% pro-life as it seems to me that most (maybe not all) pro-choice people ignore the basic humanity of the foetus (or in other words, the baby).
2007-12-03 06:09:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I'm pro-choice. There are no shortages of babies. If a woman (or couple) feels she can't properly care for a child, why should the child become a burden for the taxpayers, likely to grow up and be a crackhead, rapist, or worse? Besides, if abortion were illegal, they would still happen, just not as safe.
2007-12-03 05:40:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by doug4jets 7
·
4⤊
3⤋
I can understand if your a young teen, and you had an "accident".
but a fetus is alive and it has rights as an individual if you kill it you could be killing the baby who creates a cure for cancer.
I dont think abortion should be legal unless it involves the mothers health.
2007-12-03 05:39:13
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋