-19 Abortion is only acceptable when used for special health reasons, otherwise it's a cowardly escape from pregnancy that you most likely brought upon yourself. amirite?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It is not acceptable in any case, imo.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

well, to be fair if you're fetus is damaged or the doctors know you'll miscarry then it makes some sense...

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Well if it is a miscarry then it would already have passed. which is really sad, the loss of a child is hard. But you forgot rape, so I know someone will bring that up but thats not acceptable either. Pam Stenzal (spell check) daughter of a rape victim now preaches about safe sex.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

wow, ironic. And btw, i said "most likely" to make sure no one brought up rape, cause thats a sticky issue. (literally :P)

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I figured someone would bring it up. But I respect your opinon sir/madam.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Just because the doctors think the fetus is damaged or that the woman might miscarry is not an excuse. They very well might be wrong. I think the only times it is a reasonable way to terminate the pregnancy in such a way is if the mother's life is at risk, or if the mother was raped. And I will explain why on the last part. A woman has the right to not be pregnant. No one can force her to get pregnant and then continue to be pregnant against her will. That is violating her rights. Yes, yes, sure, it's violating the rights of the fetus. But sometimes you have to decide whose rights are more important; the person who already has an established life, or a clump of cells. That being said, I do not believe they should change the law to where it is illegal to have an abortion except in the case of a life threatening situation, or rape. If abortions due to rape were legal and abortion due to just wanting to not be pregnant were not, then I believe there would a major increase in the amount of people claiming to be raped when they actually were not. Yes, some of them would be telling the truth, but not all of them.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So the woman's right not to be pregnant is more important than the child's right to live? I don't feel a child should ever be aborted unless absolutely necessary to save the mother.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yes. And I am talking specifically about rape cases. If a woman willingly has sex and gets pregnant, then I do not think that warrants an abortion. She knew the risks and did it anyone. But trying to make a woman who became pregnant because of rape continue to be pregnant is further victimizing the victim.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

How is the right not to be pregnant more important than a person's right to life?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

How is the right of a clump of cells that could not survive outside of the womb yet more important than the right of a woman?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

*be. Not sure how that became "yet"....

by Anonymous 11 years ago

There are times where the choice is giving birth to a dead child, or getting an abortion. More importantly though, there are times when giving birth risks the mothers life. Sometimes the only way to save the mother is to have her get an abortion. I feel like her life is more important than a fetus's.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If abortion isn't acceptable, then sex without the intent of reproducing shouldn't be acceptable. Abortion is a form of birth control. Why should there be a difference between removing an embryo and preventing gametes from becoming an embryo? It all achieves the same end result, just at a different stage in the game.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I think it's cos gametes are not genetically human yet. I dunno. If my wife had a baby that neither of us wanted, she should abort for everyone sake, including the baby's.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Abortion as a form of birth control? Really? What an awful idea. Do you know how bad that is for your body? And how expensive it can be? Seriously, go out and buy some condoms or a plan b pill if you need it. (Not that plan b is much better, but I'd take it over an abortion.)

by Anonymous 11 years ago

What is it, then? It controls whether or not the woman gives birth, ergo, it's birth control. It doesn't matter how bad it is or how expensive. Danger and cost don't really have an influence on what something is. Dogs are more dangerous and costly than hamsters, but both are still pets. Other forms of contraceptive fail, anyway. Abortion is a last resort.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Birth control: deliberate limitation of childbearing by measures to control fertility and to prevent conception. So technically abortion isn't birth control because it's not preventing conception. It occurs after the fact. However, if you use abortion as a form of 'birth control,' this implies that you are actively choosing abortion over other alternatives (read: condoms, the pill), which is dangerous and expensive and is therefor not a good idea.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Condoms and spermicide do nothing to affect fertility, so they must not be birth control according to that definition. You can't just copy and paste some definition from somewhere and use it as the factual and universal definition. Choosing abortion as a last resort for birth control does not at all imply that it's being actively chosen over anything else. Condoms fail, the pill fails, rape occurs. It's stupid to only have one line of defense against an unwanted pregnancy.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Before you go accusing me of not knowing what I'm talking about, you should go and do some of your own research. Every definition I found of birth control (and I looked at many before posting) used the word contraception, as in preventing conception. Since abortion occurs after conception, it is not a form of birth control. There is the phrase 'abortion as birth control,' which means that women have unprotected sex and then turn around and have an abortion. In these instances, abortion is not a 'last resort' since they didn't use other forms of contraceptives. As a last line of defense, abortion is a viable option. But ONLY as a last line of defense.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Birth control prevents conception. It prevents creation of life. Abortion ends a life. There is a huge difference. However I dont think either one is right

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Abortion does not end a life.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yes it is. Cells=life.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Ok, so why is it acceptable to let all the gametes die, but unacceptable to remove an embryo before it becomes advanced life? If it's all "life", why does it matter at what point you end it?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I never said it was unacceptable. It's like killing a cancer cell. But cancer cells are still alive.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You got me. d

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Abortion isn't birth control. Birth control stops conception.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

No, contraceptives stop conception. Birth control is literally the control over birth.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

birth con·trol Noun: The practice of preventing unwanted pregnancies, typically by use of contraception. It prevents pregnancy before it happens.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

"Typically." Removing the embryo prevents unwanted pregnancies in a sense.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

In a sense.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Removing the embryo ends the pregnancy. It doesn't prevent it from taking place.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I think that it's your personal choice, and whether it's something as horrible as being the victim of rape, or if carrying the baby to full term will have severe, or even fatal consequences on your health. If you are unable to support a child financially, or if you have plans for your life that don't involve a baby, whether or not you get an abortion is your choice.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Any permanent consequences, if for nothing, is too much, including jsut stretch marks. Thye forever degrade the body you probably put a lot of work into, for nothing except the life of a baby who will probably either have a subquality life due to unloving parents, or never know their real parents due to adoption.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Or um, you know, it's a valid choice that belongs to the mother alone, not what everyone else thinks? You're telling me that you know whats better in the situation than the mother or father? I don't get this. If you don't like abortions, don't get one, but don't try to shove it down everywhere else.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I disagree. Sometimes people are careful, and something happens and the woman still gets pregnant. Ok, sometimes people are just being stupid. Not using protection. But I really don't think that the baby benefits from having a mother that can't handle it. Adoption? My friend's Dad was adopted, and she said it didn't end well. Another friend of mine was adopted... He has depression, and being given up by his real parents doesn't help it. At all. Plus there's the matter of forcing a woman to go through pregnancy. Yes, people need to be more careful, but I feel like this thought process is sort of like a punishment thing. If I had been unwanted, I would feel horrible to find out the only reason I was kept was because "That's what my mom gets for not being careful!" And if we have to go with a punishment idea, getting an abortion is bad enough I'm sure.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So you think it's a better idea to end the babies life than risk him or her having some difficulties like everyone else does?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Absolutely. In my opinion, terminating a fetus is much more humane than forcing mother, father, and child into a life they completely do not want. We have a solution to a problem like that. I don't understand why morality is just suddenly getting in the way. Cancer is a problem, we treat that by injecting cancer in lab mice and test on them. Terrorism is a problem, we solve that by torturing suspects. Not enough money is a problem, we solve that by overworking people in a 14-18 hr work day. I don't understand why we're getting so furious over removing a half-developed fetus. "It's a human life", well what makes a human life sudden so much more special when it's underdeveloped? Just because you are born does not mean you are living. Put a family through such preventable emotional trauma, putting them through a life they wish they aren't a part of, and they're as good as dead.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

There is always the chance that the doctors are wrong. I've heard multiple stories where the mother was told her child would be deformed, etc and they turned out perfectly healthy. And if the child is born with problems and the parents don't want it that badly, they can give it up for adoption. But many parents of children with say downs syndrome will say they wouldn't go back and change it if they could. That is still a person. Why is it our decision to murder that child?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yeah, doctors aren't always perfect. The adoption process is lengthy and physically tiring. I think this makes me sound very selfish, but imagine going through 9 months and then giving birth and seeing your baby in front of you. You're not going to want to give it up. It's just so much more emotionally scarring (in my opinion) to actually see your baby and then getting rid of it. Of course you can counter me by asking if it's better to kill it, which I would reply yes because I guess I'm selfish like that. If I saw my baby in front of me there's no way in hell I'm giving it up. But that's just me.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yes;Yes I do. I'm going through depression right now. Not for any reason, it's just chemistry in my brain. I would jump at the chance to never have gone through this. Even if that means I wouldn't be alive, because if I wasn't alive than I wouldn't care.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I think abortion shouldn't have anything to do with anybody except the mother, and in some but not all cases, the father of the baby. Who are we to say it is or isn't okay? However, there are a few cases I would not be supportive of an abortion. The first is if the mother has a stable enough relationship, no health issues that could harm her OR the baby, and is financially supported. If they were just being stupid and don't want a baby at the time, it just sounds kind of selfish. Adoption is a good choice, because many mothers wish they could be in that position. The second reason would be everything I said about the first reason, but if you are not financially supported. If you can't afford a baby you can go to Planned Parenthood or some kind of Mother's Home (I forget exactly what the place is called), but you can choose who adopts your child, with all expenses (hospital bills and the like) paid off by them. I'm not saying people in these situations should NEVER get abortions, that's their choice and not mine, but if I were in either situation (or any situation except for fatal health risks) I would NOT get an abortion and think it would be better if they didn't either.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It does sound selfish but what I don't understand is that you say you wouldn't be able to give your baby up after seeing it in front of you. But don't you think if you had decided to have the baby, you would see it.in front of you and be glad you didn't kill it? You would love it no matter what was wrong and would do everything you could for.it.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yes, I would do anything for it. BUT why did you question me?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Sorry, that was for spareseconds

by Anonymous 11 years ago

What about if a girl's BC fails and the condom breaks and she can't afford a baby?

by Anonymous 11 years ago