Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
it is all about personal privacy. it is not your business what someone does with their body. a woman has a right to control her own reproductive system just as a man does. your statement "a fetus isn't as developed/aware, but it still has awareness and is a human life" a fetus is not aware and it is a developing/potential human life that can not survive outside the womb. "troublesome" infants are able to survive without being housed and nourished in a host body, a huge difference.
without safe and legal abortion women will find away to abort with coat hangers or visit back alley abortions. many will be maimed and killed. is this ok with you? if you outlaw abortions what do you want to happen to women who don't want to take their pregnancy to term. force them to carry and give birth? then either raise the child or give it up? making women to be forced breeders is not an america I would want any woman to live in.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,060,466 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by sayulita
As a non-religious liberal woman, here is my view. Abortion is often called a "right" in this country because it is legal. So I guess in that sense it is, but it is not on the same level as the right to free speech, public assembly etc. It's not in the Constitution. And because it is legal and accessible, some women do use it as birth control. But I would guess, from my own personal experience with my sister and friends, that it is an agonizing decision for most women and not undertaken lightly. It's a choice women make for many, many reasons. Womenkind always have and always will find themselves with unwanted pregnancies and will seek out ways to terminate them. So they will have abortions, legal and safe or not. Better that they be legal and safe. I hate the idea of it but understand the need for it.
Yes I can respect this viewpoint...but I still feel abortion is messing around with nature and I believe it's still taking a human life. Not because God implants a soul at conception (like I said I think it depends on the stage too), although who knows about that, but because a fetus is a sentient human being (although no I wouldn't equate the life of the fetus to that of the mother or any other human being).
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,060,466 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by hothulamaui
it is all about personal privacy. it is not your business what someone does with their body. a woman has a right to control her own reproductive system just as a man does. your statement "a fetus isn't as developed/aware, but it still has awareness and is a human life" a fetus is not aware and it is a developing/potential human life that can not survive outside the womb. "troublesome" infants are able to survive without being housed and nourished in a host body, a huge difference.
without safe and legal abortion women will find away to abort with coat hangers or visit back alley abortions. many will be maimed and killed. is this ok with you? if you outlaw abortions what do you want to happen to women who don't want to take their pregnancy to term. force them to carry and give birth? then either raise the child or give it up? making women to be forced breeders is not an america I would want any woman to live in.
The only thing 'forcing' these women to carry their babies to full term is Mother Nature and the consequences of their actions.
In the past people realised there were consequences to their actions, something we have all-round seemed to have forgotten. The minority of women who got 'backyard' abortions were doing something that is unnatural, not an inborn right.
it is all about personal privacy. it is not your business what someone does with their body. a woman has a right to control her own reproductive system just as a man does. your statement "a fetus isn't as developed/aware, but it still has awareness and is a human life" a fetus is not aware and it is a developing/potential human life that can not survive outside the womb. "troublesome" infants are able to survive without being housed and nourished in a host body, a huge difference.
without safe and legal abortion women will find away to abort with coat hangers or visit back alley abortions. many will be maimed and killed. is this ok with you? if you outlaw abortions what do you want to happen to women who don't want to take their pregnancy to term. force them to carry and give birth? then either raise the child or give it up? making women to be forced breeders is not an america I would want any woman to live in.
The first half of your post evades a central question, namely whether the woman controls nothing more than her reproductive system. The second half is indeed a fact of life which is why I don't advocate banning abortions by operation of law. The number of abortion will decline as changes are made in peoples hearts, not in the lawbooks.
Yes I can respect this viewpoint...but I still feel abortion is messing around with nature and I believe it's still taking a human life. Not because God implants a soul at conception (like I said I think it depends on the stage too).
there are not many people if any who consider or think about abortion with out a care as to what it is. we mess around with nature all the time as humans from having surgeries to building dams and roadways.
and if that were the case, why not just kill troublesome infants after they've been born? Sure a fetus isn't as developed/aware, but it still has awareness and is a human life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavaturaccioli
This is a debate for good reason. No one knows when life begins.
Actually there is supporting evidence to the notion that self-awareness doesn't begin until the child is between 1 1/2 to 2 years old. Since self-awareness is one of the requirements for life, one should be allowed to "abort" his or her own 1 year old baby.
I of course am not advocating it. I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of the "when life occurs" argument.
As a non-religious liberal woman, here is my view. Abortion is often called a "right" in this country because it is legal. So I guess in that sense it is, but it is not on the same level as the right to free speech, public assembly etc. It's not in the Constitution. And because it is legal and accessible, some women do use it as birth control. But I would guess, from my own personal experience with my sister and friends, that it is an agonizing decision for most women and not undertaken lightly. It's a choice women make for many, many reasons. Womenkind always have and always will find themselves with unwanted pregnancies and will seek out ways to terminate them. So they will have abortions, legal and safe or not. Better that they be legal and safe. I hate the idea of it but understand the need for it.
The government does not grant "rights". Therefore, if it was not legal, under your arguement, abortion would not be a right.
The underlined part is about where I am on this subject.
I do not believe women, myself included, have the "right" to snuff out an innocent life growing inside of them, regardless of how it came to be conceived. Abortion should not be used as primary or even secondary birth control, but in true medical emergencies only, IMO. Contraception control and abstinence as well as fertility education is of the utmost importance. It is ridiculous that most women who are not actively trying to conceive know so little about their own reproductive systems and how to avoid sexual activity during the times they are most likely to get pregnant.
IMO, abortion is modern day infanticide with medical assistance.
Last edited by lifelongMOgal; 12-24-2010 at 11:16 AM..
Reason: typo
As a non-religious liberal woman, here is my view. Abortion is often called a "right" in this country because it is legal. So I guess in that sense it is, but it is not on the same level as the right to free speech, public assembly etc. It's not in the Constitution. And because it is legal and accessible, some women do use it as birth control. But I would guess, from my own personal experience with my sister and friends, that it is an agonizing decision for most women and not undertaken lightly. It's a choice women make for many, many reasons. Womenkind always have and always will find themselves with unwanted pregnancies and will seek out ways to terminate them. So they will have abortions, legal and safe or not. Better that they be legal and safe. I hate the idea of it but understand the need for it.
Good points, my views exactly.
The bottom line is whether a woman will be forced to bring her pregnancy to term. Some say an abortion is okay if it involves the health of the mother, where there is rape or incest, etc.
The fact is that abortion is legal in the US and has been for nearly two generations now. It is unlikely that abortions will be made illegal, although the pro-life movement has been trying that for decades now. I would suggest that we can reduce the number of abortions in the US if some kind of incentive can be given to women for bringing their pregnancy to term ... maybe a significant cash award of some kind? Who knows?
Actually there is supporting evidence to the notion that sentience (self-awareness) doesn't begin until the child is between 1 1/2 to 2 years old. Since sentience is one of the requirements for life, one should be allowed to "abort" his or her own 1 year old baby.
I of course am not advocating it. I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of the "when life occurs" argument.
Are amoebas sentient? Are they alive? There's a moral chasm to be leapt between those two concepts.
Last edited by Cavaturaccioli; 12-24-2010 at 11:14 AM..
Reason: Typo
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,060,466 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Park
Good points, my views exactly.
The bottom line is whether a woman will be forced to bring her pregnancy to term. Some say an abortion is okay if it involves the health of the mother, where there is rape or incest, etc.
The fact is that abortion is legal in the US and has been for nearly two generations now. It is unlikely that abortions will be made illegal, although the pro-life movement has been trying that for decades now. I would suggest that we can reduce the number of abortions in the US if some kind of incentive can be given to women for bringing their pregnancy to term ... maybe a significant cash award of some kind? Who knows?
To say we're 'forcing' a woman to carry a pregnancy to full term is to say we're forcing someone who has cut off their own hand to suffer because we don't give them a fully functioning prosthetic hand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
