Thank you. It's amazing how many people don't get this.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

There's a surprising lack of comments here...

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Of course you believe in it. You can't deny it exists; there's nothing to believe in. Belief implies it may or may not exist.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Obviously. However, anyone with basic reasoning skills would be able to devise that OP was implying he/she _believes_ it should be allowed and not simply acknowledging its existence.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So what do you propose it be for then? I don't think I see how abortion can be for anything except becoming unpregnant.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

What this guy said^

by Anonymous 11 years ago

(Girl, actually)

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Unless I am very much so mistaken, "contraception" is something that inhibits conception, not prevent birth. So it's not a contraceptive because of the definition of "contraceptive", that's not up for debate. I do, however, agree with OP's sentiment. Regardless of their moderately unclear word choices. Case in point, though, is that the two of you as well as the OP are wrong in this matter. Contraceptive does not mean something that "makes you unpregnant"

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I knew of a woman that had 5 abortions. That was absolutely terrible. Why didn't she just get fixed if she was going to keep making the same mistake.

by Anonymous 7 years ago

I think the OP means it not be used casually, and for it to only be used when absolutely necessary

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That doesn't really clear it up for me.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

What he means is that there are other forms of birth control. There is no excuse why a woman cannot be on the pill or for either of the two to wear a condom. Abortion should not be a casual form of birth control. But there may be exceptions like a fourteen year old being raped. There is a difference because the girl that is pregnant could not have easily prevented this situation and it is not necessarily her fault, whereas it isn’t hard to wrap it up.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It does say contraception... A girl that is a virgin and is raped; a girl that decides to have a baby, but continuing the pregnancy would kill the mom, child, or both; would be examples to use abortion. Oh, an ectopic pregnancy needs to be terminated, too. So, in situations like those abortion is okay, but if a girl is sexually active and ends up pregnant because she didn't use protection, shouldn't use abortion as an 'after the fact' birth control. That's more what the post is about... does that make sense (I'm not asking if you agree, just if you understand)?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yeah that makes it more clear to me. Thank you.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

There are no "exceptions" and it isn't ever "absolutely necessary." Killing is killing, no matter the circumstances.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I know a lady who's child developed without forming a brain. Is it really necessary to carry a child for nine months that has no potential for living more than a few days?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So let's kill all people without "potential" , is that what you're saying?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That's fucking twisted. He's not saying kill people who won't do well in life. He's sayingif you knew for sure your child was going to die days after birth it would only be ethical and moral to abort it early on. It's not like he said "Anyone mentally handicapped should be killed at birth"

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Actually he exactly questioned whether it's necessary for a child to live if it has no potential. Who are we to decide who has enough "potential" to survive?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If it has no brain, it has zero chance of survival. Would you like to carry a dead baby full term and then have it immediately die? Or here's another hypothetical for ya, what if there was no way of having the baby without it killing you?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Doctors. Doctors are the ones who decided who has potential to survive. 1 in 1700 babies die the first hour they are born because they have barely developed lungs. In the last decade doctors have now become able to see which babies won't have developed lungs by as early as 10 weeks. Those babies SHOULD be aborted. It Is the ethical thing to do.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It is a terrible unforgivable thing to kill a baby! Every child has a legal right to live and it Is beyond the choice of the mother. Luckily were talking about fetuses. Little more than growths or tumors until week 24.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If scientist discovered a single cell on a different planet they would claim they found life. Why can't we accept life in the womb?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

No actually they wouldn't call that life. Because it's not, it's a growth in a human body and that human has the right to destroy that growth, or let it grow up to be a big growth and dress it in clothes to play with other people's growths. I'm not saying all situations are ethical for abortion but there are many examples that are, and bottom line, it's the mothers choice

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If you claim it isn't murder and it is a choice of the mother then why do you say it's sometimes unethical?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's ethical to abort a baby that WILL die days after birth because of a defect. In fact unless you're sadistic it's the only option. It is not however ethical for an 18 year old girl to abort her baby simply because she had unprotected sex and doesn't want a baby now. It would be immoral for her to abort that baby, but it's still her choice to make.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I don't believe it's the mother's choice. If you say that then she should always have that choice. So can she kill the baby once it is born despite any circumstances since it is her choice?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

What a less than intelligent thing to say. When it is a part of her body she is growing out of free will, she has the free will to stop growing it. When it is born, it becomes a fully recognized human with rights and a life of it's own. It is no longer an extension of the mother, it's a human. Before birth it's not a human, and it has no rights. It's a clump of formulating cells. Birth Is a definitive line for a reason. You're trying to say if a mom has the right to abort her fetus she has the right to kill a baby of hers? That's sick and twisted

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Actually, other. I believe in abortion, and in a way it's a contraception. It's almost like the day after pill, isn't it? Or am I not understanding the question?

by Anonymous 8 years ago

Yes abortion should be an emergency thing. I can't understand how anyone would use it as contraception. But it is her right.

by Anonymous 7 years ago