Would YOU want to live? If you were the child would you want to live? That's the questions mothers think of. All they think of is themselves.
Printable View
Would YOU want to live? If you were the child would you want to live? That's the questions mothers think of. All they think of is themselves.
I agree that the baby should be born, even if the girl was raped - the baby didn't ask for its father to rape you. If you were foolish enough to not use protection, why should you abort the baby because of your mistake? It deserves a chance at life, and shouldn't be stopped because of people's mistakes.
On the other hand, if the baby is going to be disabled to an extreme I don't agree it should be born. What sort of life is that? For a person to be stuck in a weelchair since birth - or pointed at because they look "odd". If they've never had a chance to be run around like normal kids, or talk and speak like one then what sort of life is that? Where a mother has to look after you for the rest of your life...
If the baby is healthy is should be born, if the baby when its born will be completely disabled it shouldn't.
You cannot make generalisations like that. Have you asked every single mother who has ever contemplated an abortion? No. Don't say things as if they are fact when they clearly aren't. You are making it out as if at this age the baby knows of its own existence and can think for itself and can feel pain and can make up its own mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by marriott0.02
Edit: I'm glad people understand that there are at least some cases where abortion is right. The only thing I'm stressing is that some cases it should be left up to the mother rather than have a select group of peoples opinions enforced by law. Its not right to be able to take someone else's right to make this choice away.
I personally don't agree with abortion at all - and I think that the UK law which could enable a woman who is 24 weeks pregnant to have an abortion is quite sick actually. Someone said the methods are humain - the ones at the later stage are certainly not. One involves forcing the baby out in breech condition with forceps, stabbing their head and sucking their brains out. In my opinion, abortions should only (if at all) be legal up to the point where the fertalised egg turns into an embryo.
However, I don't think anyone has a right to choose whether a woman can have an abortion or not except the woman herself because she will know best (providing it's before the fertalised egg has turned into an embryo of course - after that, if it were up to be it would be a case of tough luck).
I don't even think abortion is acceptable when the mothers health is in danger - in my opinion, they should just deliver the baby the minute the diagnosis is made and try their hardest to keep it alive rather than just killing it.
This debate will go on for a long time... And there is no right or wrong answer.
Everyone has their own views and opinions, and nobody can give an accurate view until they experience the situation.
My view is that it can be right in SOME extreme circumstances.
So thats where I'm leaving it... and getting out of the debate :)
i think it should be more of a 'last resort'
i dont see it as right but i cant help but think it depends on the situation and sometimes its just not right to bring a baby into the world and it is the mothers choice
but yeah im not for it but certainly not against it either, free will and all.
just a last resort
Although I do believe that every life has a right to live, I don't really have an issue with abortion. Since an embryo or foetus doesn't really have anything that can strictly define it as humanly capable of making a decision for itself, I feel that the parents have a right to choose its fate.
Also, to those who say there are other options like adoption, in some cases its not possible to put children (severly disabled or not, born or unborn) on the adoption list due to its illness or the parents being unable to fund the adoption itself, therefore the parents themselves are left to deal with it, and considering they were unable to care for the child, they could be prosecuted to the full extent of the law for being forced to care for a child they're willing to give up so the child can have a better life, so in so many ways, forcing a child into a family that cannot care for it, whether it is disabled or not, could be considered worse and even against human rights, so aborting it before it is even able to experience pain or 'human' life itself could be seen as the lesser of two evils.
That's gross oversimplification.Quote:
Originally Posted by marriott0.02
this is a touchy issue, and i really understand the other side, butttttt
i am a strong believer that anyone should be able to do whatever they want as long as it isnt hurting anyone else. it's a woman's body and no one can tell them what to do with it. there's a certain point that a baby is considered alive and i suppose that should be the point where it should be illegal, but since im not an expert on that area i wont go there.
its a sweet thing to think that you can just give the baby up if you dont want it, but lets face it, there's not long lines of people outside orphanages waiting to adopt kids. if abortion were to be illegal, we would have an epidemic of parentless children filling up orphanges never truly having a set of parental figures to look up to. not only that, taxes would have to be raised quite heavily in order to take care of these millions of kids no one wants.
on the other hand, gay couples have been wanting the right to adopt for years. the only compromise i see: if you're gonna make abortion illegal, you have to allow gay couples (married or not) to adopt.
I am all for it, just like i'm all for stem cell research etc.