Say a few teenagers choose to have sex. They are in college and use a condom, and say it brakes –is it idiotic for them to have protected sex and the protection fail? And well damn, she finds out she is pregnant and it was a accident, there is two things she can do – have the kid, which would be hard for a kid going through school that can barley afford to live and pay for school as it is. Or have an abortion and not have to worry about missing school and maybe failing a class. If I was in that predicament, I would have to say take’m out.

Now lets look at poverty in the US, wow – those parents who could have had that abortion instead of the kid. Women can get government help if they are in that kind of situation to have an abortion. Instead they had the kid, and it suffers day and night because his parents don’t have jobs and can not afford to buy them food. Now they could have lost there job, or they could be just too lazy and to much of a drunk to go out and find a job.

shouldnt this topic be closeD? its way over 20 pages

we can go up to 50 and more, if needed.

we'd need to end the current debate to start a new thread anyways.

^ Yeah, some people need to quote others to respond and it's harder if there are two different topics. It's not really necessary to make another thread.

You totally missed the point. sadolakced acid said unless the baby can survive outside the mother; this has nothing to do with surviving after birth. Killing what is basically, at this point, a parasite (despite what it eventually becomes) that can't function on its own is hardly what I would call murder..

.:edit:. No, I'm not changing my points, I still believe that government-funded abortions should be legal only for special cases and all others can only be allowed if the mother pays out of her own pocket. I'm simply supporting the statement that abortion is NOT murder.

......like we don't know that

abortion is bad...i am against it

baby has his or her heart in about the first 12 days which makes it a human. it is very rare to get a baby from getting raped. so...yea it shouldnt be rite to kill a unborn baby

i think i'll let fae handle this for fear that i may scar someone for life.

LOL @ mr. acid. I haven't been modding much.

*frown*. please read the rules to the debate forum, which includes: "read the topic carefully. Understand what is being argued before going off on a rant."

Thank you.

How is it any more rare to get pregnant from getting raped than to get pregnant simply by having consentual unprotected sex?

The chance that you will get pregnant from being raped or a one-night stand is minimal because a mother's immune system will attack the fetus since it doesn't recognize its DNA, thinking it is cancer.

Most fetuses are thus naturally miscarried in the first few days. The ones that survive to be born are usually the result of repeat sex with the same partners, after which the mother's immune system recognizes the DNA as friendly. There is ample scientific evidence for this.

Perhaps you could cite this "ample scientific evidence"? (Not that I am doubting you, but statements like that generally should be cited.)

Minda, people are accidentally pregnant from having sex one all the time. Sex is like drugs. With one joint of pot, you can get addicted; from one time having unprotected (or malfunctioning protection) sex, you can get pregnant. It doesn't take more than once....it never takes more than once. It's always just chance. If the woman happens to be ovulating and has sex, she can get pregnant.

Actually...marijuana isn't physiologically addictive, and in terms of psychological addiction, it's not that powerful. Although, besides that, the rest of your point is still a good one.

Fine, subsitute "one shot of heroin" for that.

edit;;
Why aren't you on AIM? Bitch.

Scientific American magazine quotes a lot of the references; you could probably find it online but I had the print copy.

The reasoning behind it is biologically solid though, an immune system WILL attack foreign DNA.

You CAN get pregnant from a one-night stand, but the chance is very tiny. The chance of getting pregnant increases each time you have sex with the same partner; so while it's certainly possible to concieve a rape baby, the chances that you would get pregnant from that are a lot smaller than the chances that you would get pregnant from having sex with someone that you have had sex with for several weeks or months.

ya but if she had sex in the first place then its terrible to kill a life because of an accident, the responsibility is hers and she can't just end the responsibility by abortion. i guess im not completely against it too.

uhm "abortion" is the 1st thingy i h8,and yeah it happens for some to get "raped" so if she is too young,to keep the baby or she doesnt have "the things" that the baby will need to have a nice life,in this kind of situations,i accept`it,but in rest,!DONT BLAME THE KID,YOU MADE`IT! (i really h8-ted the story with the "Bird" who come's with the little brother/sister,what some parents tells to they're childrens,when they dont know how to explain to a little child how his/she's sister/brother came to life.)

"People these days don't take responsibility for anything...but don't quote me on that."

IMO.

Thank You
Enjoy.

well i am against it. bcuz in doin so u r killing a life but it is entirely up to thee person if they want to abort their child but we all have different view on this so no matter where we are in the world there wil be two sides to this pro and anti abortion.

I am staying with abortion. Not because a raped girl can get rid of it (she can just leave it in the adoption center) but because it can help prevent overpopulation. If overpopulation continues to increase God knows what can happen. I mean sure there are other ways to prevent over population but adding Abortion in helps. I know I sound very cruel but this is how I think. I might change for some reason, but for now, Abortion should be allowed. Abortion is a woman's decision, not ours. It's HER sin to commit so it's HER responsibility.

i agree that people need to take responsibility for what they done and the fetus is an innocent victim. but if you ban abortion, you take away the mothers' rights. all of you are saying it's morally wrong and irresponsible but think, you aren't the ones who has to carry the baby for nine months. if you force a woman to be a mother when she doesn't want to, it's the baby that suffers. and if all those people who had abortions were force to carry out the baby, think about the foster and adoption services. they would be over capacity and those children will probably either be packed into overcrowded houses or kept in an orphanage until they're 18.

i agree that if you have careless sex and get pregnant all the time, you shouldn't be having sex in the beginning. but if you ban abortion, you basically give rights to the fetus no matter how developed it is and you take away the mother's rights. if you do that, then that could open a whole flood of new legal matters.

if abortion is murder, is a miscarriage neglect?

Peggy Sue got pregnant,
And was addicted to fifteen drugs,
She went down to the abortion clinic,
And was accosted by right-wing thugs.

Oh will the fetus be aborted?
By and by, Lord, by and by.
There's a better home awaitin',
In the sky, Lord, in the sky...

please type with real words. i can't really understand what you're trying to say there.





\
yet again, real words please.

anyways:

1. abortion is not murder, it is not killing a life.
2. abortion is up to one person: the mother

`ello2ya2 , if ya dunt understand meh,get a pair of glasses.doh!
d0 i seem like i care,if you understand or not? read my upper doubled LIPS! NO!

1. abortion is not murder, <- IT IS! (BLAME THE PARENTS)
2. abortion is up to one person:<- BOTH! (she didnt made that baby alone,i guess NO?)


"People these days don't take responsibility for anything...but don't quote me on that."

^

type like that again and you shall be ignored. i'm not going to waste my time deciphering 10 year old txt speak- you have a keyboard, use it.

1. murder is unlawfull killing of a human being. a feotus is not human (it wouldn't be called a feotus if it was), and abortions are currently legal. so no, it's not murder, and it's not killing, which is taking the life of something which has a life. feotuses don't have a life untill they can survive outside the mother's womb- also defined by law.

2. last time i checked you didn't need the father's permission to abort a feotus.

whaaaaat?

read the thread, or be warned. this is your verbal warning. i'm sorry about this, but we've already discussed both points extensively and if you have nothing new to add, please don't post in debate.

yes, you dont want to be warned by fae. i learned my lesson.

You are so ignorant it makes me want to vomit. Just because I'm bored, I'm going to write you a response and see what you can say in return.

1. I don't think that it should matter whether or not abortion is murder. It is the mother's choice. I don't know how many times I have to repeat this before someone directly counters it. We as humans should have the right to do what we want with our bodies and to have laws restricting us is completely inhumane (I know, ironic isn't it?). If we want to rid of something in our wombs, why must the law have to give us approval?

2. The woman has to go through all the troubles of having a baby and I know you'll never face those things. The main reason why a woman would want to have an abortion is if she didn't purposely get pregnant. I don't think the father would even care to contribute to such a decision as abortion. It is entirely the woman's choice. It's her body.

And in response to your last comment, people do take responsibility, but sometimes things such as rape are unavoidable and people simply can't take responsibility of a baby. Imagine even being a father at your age. Would you rather do or do without the complications and responsibilities? I doubt you would even have enough money to support another human.

Your rights end where someone else's begin.



It's also the woman's choice not to have sex. And people need to realize, if you have sex, there is a possiblity of having a baby.




ComradeRed already explained that rape has a low pregnancy rate, due to the mother's immune system.



Genocide helps with overpopulation too, but you aren't advocating it are you?

Perhaps rape has a low pregnancy rate .. just by chance?

It's all by chance. It's luck of the draw. If the woman happens to be ovulating and gets some sperm in her, voila, she will be pregnant.

No matter how many women have gotten pregnant by rape (and any other way), there's still the possibility.

QUOTE

Your rights end where someone else's begin.

And where would that be? I believe we've been debating that point for the last 32 pages.

I know. LOW pregnancy rate. The low percentage of women that do get pregnant because of rape should have a choice of what to do with their baby.



You created it. Don't you have a right to destroy it? Wouldn't legal abortion prevent women from having a baby, taking it to a dark alley and killing it herself?

Abortion should be legal, safe and RARE.



Accidents happen. Don't give me all the responsibility shit. Not everyone can be responsible all the time and no one can prevent the inevitable. If you couldn't support yourself and your offspring, both of you could lead miserable lives. Wouldn't it be better if there was a safe and legal way of preventing that? And it would also prevent kids being put into orphanages. It's tough being an orphan. Everything's so much more complicated because you're not the mainstream.



Genocide is an absolutely unreasonable comparison. Genocide is wrong in many ways. Just to name one, it is killing not for the good of the person. Abortion is keeping the mother and the baby from suffering. You may not have enough money to support yourself and the baby. You may not even have the mentality of someone who can handle the responsibilities of handling another child!

Just because we make abortion legal, doesn't mean everyone's going to be getting pregnant and getting abortions. It's not mass killing like genocide. It's just WHEN NEEDED which is probably not going to be often. Getting an abortion puts the woman's health in jeopardy as well, so it's not something you could just make a quick decision about.

By that logic, I'd should be legally entitled to kill my own child.



You should be responsible for your actions at all times. If you can't support yourself and your offspring, you shouldn't have a baby. And the only way to ensure that you don't have a baby is to not ever have sex.

The comparison to genocide was to illustrate that both abortion and genocide are responsible for millions of deaths. They may control population, but neither are ethical means of doing so.



Having sex is something people should not be making a quick decision about, yet people do it anyway. Hence the need for abortions.

no. a fetus cannot survive outside the womb when abortion is legal. however, your child can survive and is alive, so if you killed it, that would be murder.

accidents happen. some people use condoms but the rubber breaks. and not everyone can use secondary conception. a lot of women become sick from birth control. contraceptic foam/spermicide doesn't always work.

like i said before, if you ban abortion, you acknowledge that the fetus has rights and a life.

abortion equals murder.

is a miscarriage neglect? and if it isn't the mother's fault, is it malpractice?

once you give a fetus rights, you open up a door to a whole new world of problems.

you can't force a mother to carry out to term because you infringe on her rights.

... in my opinion, it's not exactly reasonable to compare the two for one simple reason. miscarriages are by chance, most of the time, but abortions are intentional. a woman who wants to have a child and loses it accidentally is NOT be the same as a woman meaning to get rid of a fetus and follows out with her plan.

Here, let's put it this way. When there's an embryo in your womb, it is still part of your body. Therefore, you created it with your body and you should have the right to do what you want with whatever's in your body. Once it is born, it is it's own being and that's when it should have rights as a seperate human.



Everyone should be responsible, but not everyone can be responsible. People can't always be perfectly civilized beings and never make mistakes. I know this from experience because I suffer from ADD (even with medications!) and always carelessly do things that I know I shouldn't do. It's something you can't control all the time and people should know even if you make a mistake, there will be something to back you up.



Did you even remotely READ what I said? Abortion is not going to cause as many deaths as genocide (not as quickly) and it's for a good cause. People don't just carelessly get abortions because it puts the mother's life in danger as well and is probably costly. Abortion can be equivalent to surgery in some ways. It's something you don't want to do, but you have to do.



That is why protected sex and abstonance (sp?) is so encouraged. People slip-up once in a while, but it doesn't mean that every time someone has sex there's going to be an abortion. Some people can support the baby and some can't. And those who can't shouldn't have to make the baby suffer.

--

Has anyone noticed that most of the people debating against abortion is male (James, Brenden, Claudel, etc)? Males will never know what it's like to be pregnant and what it's like to be faced with a decision such as abortion. Abortion is a surgery removing a baby from your womb where a fraction of your nutrients are being delivered and it will throw your whole body off balance. It's not something that will happen so often that it will decrease the human population drastically.

Please people, BE REASONABLE!

I think it's horribly wrong to kill a child, whether in the womb or not.

The fetus, as well as when the child is a clump of cells, is never part of the mother's body. Soon after conception, white blood cells try to attack the foregien body because the child does not share all of the mother's DNA. The umbelicle cord, though connected to the child, does not make the child part of the mother, but, simply, a large parasite taking nutrients from it's host.

Women who use abortion as a form of birth control should be forced to take responsibility for her actions. She was the one who had sex without protection or the use of birth control. She shouldn't blame the innocent entity inside of her for her mistakes.

I can understand negative feelings toward a child concieved through rape. However, this is still no excuse to abort the pregnancy. If the mother does not want the child, she can put the child up for adoption if she wishes. That way, a couple who cannot concieve can take a child into their family and give it all the love and care it deserves.

One thing that really pisses me off is when women say that guys shouldn't have any say about what happens to their unborn child. If the guy is the father, then he should have every right to be able to keep his child after it is born. The fetus, infant, or clump of cells shares half of his DNA with the child. Because an infant is able to share DNA with a male, males should be allowed to have a strong opinion on abortion. It's their child, too, not just the mother's.



This is exactly why abortion should be made illegal, because if people have something to fall back on, they'll never become responsible. They'll get pregnant and say, "It's okay, I can always get rid of it" instead of "This is why I should have protected myself. Now I have to become more mature and responsible for my own actions so I can take care of this child."

Rin-chan

Please explain to me why laws are interfering with a woman's body. Animals have no problem sacrificing something like that and don't tell me BECAUSE THEY'RE STUPID, PRIMITIVE BEINGS. It's because they do what's best for their survival. Ooh, it's a little baby. Don't kill it! It's murder! It's common sense!! If you're not in the position of someone who's pregnant and can't support a baby, you'll never know.



Obviously you don't know what an adopted child has to go through, wondering who their real parents are. They're left out and can't participate in science activities that involve comparing traits of yourself and your parents. I know it sounds like it's not a big deal, but it could leave a scar in their life. Some people just can't comprehend knowing that they're not the mainstream.

Also, just because your child is put up for adoption does not mean it will be adopted or even taken into 12 foster homes, eventually ending up alone at 18 either way.

And that's not including abuse, neglect, etc..

Babies younger than 24 weeks old have survived outside the mother's womb.

You know what does work? Not having sex if you don't want a baby.

A miscarriage is neither neglect or malpractice. Technically, any pregnancy that doesn't result in birth is an abortion. The thing that Pro-Lifers want to get rid of are induced abortions.



By this logic, partial birth abortions should be legal. And suicides too.



That's ludicrous. Why should the law give you break because you made an irresponsible decision? By this logic, drunk drivers should be let off without consequence.



Oh really? Since the mid 1970's, there have been more than 1 million abortions per year in the United States alone. During the reign of the Khmer Rogue, less than 2 million are have estimated to have been killed in purges from 1975-1979. In the same time frame, more babies were killed as a result of abortion than the Cambodian genocide.



No, those who can't support the baby shouldn't have sex in the first place.



It doesn't matter what gender you are. A loss of life is a loss of life. And there are plenty of women that are Pro-life, maybe not on these boards, but they are there.

Abortion shouldn't exist because people will continue to have sex without thought of the consequesnces and then think afterwards, "Holy shit! I can't take care of this child!" If they were mature human beings, they would either keep the child and deal with the financial problems as they come or put the child up for adoption.



This is why open adoption exists. In an open adoption, the child will always know who they are and who their parents are. The real parents frequently visit the child throughout his/her life. The alternative is a closed adoption where the child will either learn about their parents at a certain age or will never know. Even if they don't get adopted and live in foster homes or an orphanage, then so be it. At least the child will be able to attend school, make friends, have enough food to eat... Also, foster parents are frequently given the opportunity to adopt the child they're fostering, making the chances of gettting adopted go up.

Besides, they'll be alive and can make the most out of their life if they wish to do so.

Personally, I think this is the better choice.

Rin-chan

ps- Go kryogenics!!

i'm both. i'm against it because you would be killing your own baby which is a life. and im for it because like if you get raped or ur too young or something and its jus not ur fauly then have the abortion, but if ur old enough but it up for adoption or somethin

We don't care. Please read the rules of debate. Your arguments have already been debated against. And .. you can't really be pro-choice and anti-abortion. Choose one or the other and debate on it.

Ah, responding to rinchan.



AHHH. WHAT HAVE I SAID OVER AND OVER AGAIN? Abstonance and protected sex is very encouraged. Having sex before marriage is even against some religions! It's not like everyone goes about having sex and getting pregnant enough for the change in population to be significant. And not all of us are mature human beings.

I know this sounds immature, but put yourself in a 21 year old mother's shoes. You were at a party with all your friends. Everyone's drinking (legally of course) and having a good time and you really can't resist, so you decide to get drunk with them. Everyone faces peer pressure. You tell yourself you're not going to have more than one small drink, but you end up getting so caught up in yourself that you don't realize how much you've taken in. The next thing you know it, you wake up in someone's bedroom and realize what you've done. And by now you're begging God to forgive you and you know what you've done was terrible, but you couldn't help it!

You go to the hospital and find out you're pregnant. You're in college and stacked up with work every minute of the day! You don't have time and money to care for another child and you know there are consequences for putting a child up for adoption. They may never be adopted. They may be adopted to wrongful parents. They may feel unhappy and unwanted for the rest of their lives. Or you could do what would be the responsible thing and save the child from the possibilities of having a bad life and/or having a good life, but sometimes it's worth the sacrifice.

Now, about these 'open adoptions'. I think they're a really good idea, but what if the parent just simply doesn't want to visit the child? Should that be forced upon the parent? I think that's unfair. A woman should be able to do what she wants with her child and no laws or government should keep her from her decisions.

I don't want to double post, so here's a super long one for James...



Pro-life sounds so .. "goody-goody, I'm unaware of the consequences of letting my baby live". I mean, if you were to choose between pro-choice and pro-life, it'd be like "Oh, pro-life because you want to safe someone's life. Isn't that good?" But people have lost their common sense! Life has no value if you don't enjoy it and a baby that's born and put up for adoption (or maltreated because of lack of money and time) will most likely not have a very enjoyable life or childhood to say the least.

Again, accidents happen and that's when abortion is necessary for the good of the parent and the child.



Yes, they should be legal. I think one should have control over what to do with their life and what is living inside them. Government should not be preventing people from committing suicide either. It's just .. absolutely unfair because you're living life with no value and really, there's no way out (IF YOU WANT TO COMMIT SUICIDE, DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME, DAMMIT).



Drunk driving is different from having unprotected sex or being raped or having the condrom break or something of that sort. Drunk driving is CLEARLY wrong and there are several campaigns striving to convince people not to specifically DRINK AND DRIVE. It's not an irresponsible decision to be raped or have an accident happen. There are things you can do to prevent this and people are trying their hardest, but not 100% of sexually active human beings are going to have perfect success in not having an unwanted child.



One million abortions. And is the world collapsing because one million babies weren't born? If this is the rate (and you think it's high already) for the next 100 years, I think we'll be fine. People are practicing safe sex a lot more though. Abortion isn't a fun thing. I'm sure people want to have safe sex, so something so horrible won't have to be done.



I know. I'm quite sure a majority of 'pro-lifers' are male. But yes, it doesn't matter. Opinions are opinions. A loss of life.. Lord. You make it sound so traumatic if someone gets an abortion. If only 1 million babies die in a year, what's the big deal? I know I sound insensitive, but just think about the 6 billion people walking the earth right now. And I'll even give you the benefit of the doubt and say 500,000 of the 1 million will live happy, prosperous lives. The other 500,000 would live horrible, miserable lives. Things even out. No need to go crazy about it. The earth's population won't die because a few people accidentally got pregnant.

they way i see it, is one sector of the population feels that an abortion is morally wrong and wishes that the entire population conform to thier morals.

the other sector does not feel that an abortion is morally wrong, but they do not force any other part of the population to conform to their morals.

you don't see pro choicers blockading an maternity ward and screaming at the pregnant mothers to get an abortion, now do you?

you do, however, see pro lifers blockading abortions and condemning the people to hell and screaming at them to hvae the baby.

so, which is right?

forcing an entire population to conform to the beliefs of a minority,

or to allow each individual to choose?

you know, i feel a new wing needs to be started. a "pro deather" group, that advocates the forced abortion of any babies of pro lifers.

it's really just the reverse of what pro lifers are advocating. but it seems so much more wrong then, doesn't it?

join the pro death platform.

^ Wow, you put that extremely well. I'm with Justin 100%.

Again, I will state that none of these problems would exist if people didn't have sex when they aren't ready to have a child.



Partial Birth abortions should be legal? Do you even know what they are? No one should be commiting suicide. But this is for a different debate...



It's an irresponsible decision to get drunk and have an "accident." It's an irresponsible decision to have sex when you're not ready to have a baby.



You're looking at this the wrong way. The thing is, if abortion wasn't legal, people wouldn't be having as much sex. Therefore, there wouldn't be 1 million babies to abort every year.

Sorry if i'm not clear, I'm in a hurry.

Are there statistics to show that rates of sexual intercourse have increased directly as a cause of the legalization of abortion?

Again (for probably the 10th time), I will state that people make mistakes and accidents happen. I'm not going to say it again. Read the examples I've given in my previous posts.



American Civil Liberties Union-



And no, I've never heard of a 'partial birth abortion'.



Then you might as well make alcohol illegal and might as well make having sex illegal if you want to be so absolutely safe. I'm sure you would enjoy having America represent freedom in such a great way .



Nah, you're fine. You just don't seem to be reading everything I say.

why can't neglect and abortion be compared?

my aunt was told by the doctor midway through her pregnancy that she should rest more because the stress was straining the health of my cousin. she decided to work instead because she needed the money. my cousin had a difficult birth and could have died.

if abortion was banned, it inevitably gives the fetus rights. so using logic of a therefore b, if my cousin had rights/life as a fetus, my aunt was in charge of taking care of her. so she choose to ignore the doctor's advice and endangered my cousin. under america's constitution, you have your rights as long as it does not violate anothers. my aunt endangered my cousin, therefore violating her right to live, and if the fetus had died, my family could very well of sued her for neglect/ignoring the doctor's wishes.

once again:

i agree that if a woman has numerous abortions, she really needs to find another method of birth control. everyone is entitled to a life and noone should have the power to kill multiple babies like that.

but once again, a woman has a right to do whatever she wants with her body. the fetus might be a parasite in the womb but it's still in the body and continues to feed off the body.

YOU CANNOT FORCE A WOMAN TO CARRY OUT A BABY TILL TERM.

mistakes happen. that's how almost half of us happened. our parents weren't exactly ready for children yet but the condom broke.

don't say the woman should use another method. a lot of woman get really sick from birth control pills. some smoke so the medicine clashes with the nictotine.

no one is going to stop having sex just because abortion is banned or wrong. back when abortion was banned, woman used to stick wire hangers up into their uterus to remove the baby. many died like that.

prolife people have great morals and care a lot about other people. i commend you for that. however, you cannot create a law that removes millions of women's say in something that involves themselves. it's still a free country and you cannot force your beliefs on someone else. until you can force the entire nation into protected/wise/controlled sex, unwanted pregnancies will still be a problem. our foster/adoption services will be on an overload. abortion is a certain balance.

because it's not logical. abortion and miscarriage aren't the same and james and i explained why. miscarriages are not neglect but neglect can lead to miscarriages. there lies the difference. you cannot group all miscarriages together with neglect because it's not possible that all miscarriages are caused from neglect. you must also understand that there is a difference between an miscarriage and a stillbirth. 30 to 50 percent of women who miscarried do not know they were pregnant. how would it be possible that so many women would "neglect" something they don't even know they possess? factors like age, health problems, infections, environmental toxins can lead to a miscarriage. it's not neglect if you miscarry because of your age or the environment... etc.

many women actually have a 'history' of miscarriages. if you seem to think that their miscarriages are results of neglect, you're sadly mistaken.

it's also possible that women, who are pampered as soon as their loved ones know that they're pregnant, will have a miscarriage. as you know now, that's not due to neglect and it's out of their hands.

and this is why miscarriages aren't the same as abortions and certainly not the same as neglect.

i'm sorry i didn't clarify. i wasn't saying all miscarriages could be charged with neglect. the circumstances have to be right. the miscarriages i was thinking about are the ones that result from women who made an ill decision regarding her pregnancy. it's rather confusing but this was one of the problems that came up in a debate i had.

for a grown person, family members can seek justice for them after their deaths. we thought if banning adoption acknowledged that the fetus was a being with rights, then after that, family members could seek justice for the lost fetus.