Abortion Options

[FoxBandCutie08]

Alright, I am pro-choice. Please consider this.

If you are raped, why would you want the memory of that terrible and awful experience in the kid, that you're going to be taking care of the rest of your life? Every time you look at that child, you're going to remember what happened to you. What happens when they want to know where their dad is? What are you going to tell them? Oh, your dad raped me. He's in jail now for it. I got pregnant unintentionally. I didn't want you. That can be as traumatizing for the child as the initial rape was to you. Think about the shame and humiliation the kid will go through.

And about adoption. Anybody know how hard it is to get one? How expensive it is? Well, there are a whole lot of good people who want kids, but they are very very strict on who can have them. Then you have kids growing up in orphanages all their lives, feeling lonely and unwanted. The world is overpopulated as it is.

If you lined up the population of China in a single file line, how far around the world would it go?
The answer is: The line would never end because of the rate of reproduction.

In one country alone.

I think a woman's choice to have an abortion should not be decided by any man. Ever.

How many men will ever have to have an abortion?

Yes, you can place your opinion and that's fine, but you really aren't the sole decider in the situation, because the woman is the person carrying the unborn child.

I think that even if you don't believe it is right, you should let people have the choice. I mean, isn't this country about choices, and freedom? Why should we limit people's choices, just because we aren't very open-minded about the topic? It's against the Catholic Church to have an abortion. The majority of the U.S. is Catholic, so you can see where the vote will go on this. But think about it, what if there was a religion that said you HAD to have an abortion? You might find that wrong, but should you deprive them of their right to their own faith? I know there is most likely no religion like this, but it's just for the basic concept of understanding.

You shouldn't limit people's choices. That's what this country is about.

[acid_high]

I'm pro - choice.

PRO CHOICE DOES NOT EQUAL PRO ABORTION.

I feel a woman has the right to decide what to do with her own body.  I personally would never get an abortion, but if someone I know decided to get one, I would be there for her.

It's not our right to get in the way of what the mother wants. We can play the blame game forever but the point is that in the end it's the mother's choice. I am Pro Choice

[CorruptedApple]

To anyone who doesn't believe that a fetus or a lump of cells is a life:

Remember, life is a neverending cycle.

[*disco infiltrator*]

How is life a neverending cycle?

You are born. You live. You die. That's the end. You don't continue.

[*mipadi*]

How is life a neverending cycle?

You are born. You live. You die. That's the end. You don't continue.

No, silly. Dead people become one with the Force, and thus go on as a binding part of all living things.

[AnnahhbeL]

i'm against abortion.
i mean taking a life that's in you? its just soo sad..
there may be just a few cells, but there's something LIVING inside of that peson...you cant just go ahead and kill it..

[*disco infiltrator*]

No, there's not.

[f4113n]

ppl who say fetuses (however the plural of fetus is spelled) are alive, wut do u constitute as alive? merriam-webster dictionary defines "life" (the noun) as:

1c : an organismic state characterized by capacity for metabolism, growth, reaction to stimuli, and reproduction

^therefore, we aren't alive until we hit puberty jk

seriously tho, im pro-choice. if the potential parent(s) cant provide a decent home for it, and the mother doesn't think she has the means to take care of it, then why bring another life into the world? and uhm, dont we all end up dead sooner or later anyways? and if u really think that its wrong, its taking a life, then isnt every time a woman has her period equvalent to an abortion? techinically, its the same as a fetus at conception except its just missing one sperm cell. is that really enough to make the difference between life and non-life? even if u can dispute that, i really think that human life begins when the baby first begins to function as a human independently, as in having the umbilical (sp?) cord cut. up until then, it doesn't even breathe on its own or anything, its just a part of the mother. y arent ppl opposed to taking tumors out of ppl? u could argue that tumors r alive if u say a fetus is alive at conception. actually any virus/bacteria inside anyone's body is alive for that matter. why do we use medicine to kill those lives? bc they can kill ya. so can childbirth. and if the mother is in an economic situation where she can't support the baby or herself, and wants to get an abortion but can't, then its really stupid to not let her get one.

[AngryBaby]

too many people think if you are pro-choice that means you are pro-abortion. it doesnt. personally, i would consider adoption before even thinking about abortion, i just wouldnt want it, and i think it should be rare. but that doesnt give me the right to take what i believe and legislate it onto other people. thats not how "the land of the free" is supposed to be right? saying a woman should NOT have the right to not go along with her pregnancy if she doesnt want to kind of erks me. I mean, do you think this wasnt a hard choice for the mother? you think it doesnt make her sad? but her decision was based upon what she thought was the best decison to make. and i will respect that.

most women are pregnate because they wanna be, if they dont, why should they HAVE to go through if they dont want to? at leats give them a choice. its not like every women does it. let the women that wanna get an abortion get one. and the ones that dont want to just wont, by their own decision. not because they had to anyway. at leats they know they were given a choice.

[*kryogenix*]

too many people think if you are pro-choice that means you are pro-abortion. it doesnt. personally, i would consider adoption before even thinking about abortion, i just wouldnt want it, and i think it should be rare. but that doesnt give me the right to take what i believe and legislate it onto other people. thats not how "the land of the free" is supposed to be right? saying a woman should NOT have the right to not go along with her pregnancy if she doesnt want to kind of erks me. I mean, do you think this wasnt a hard choice for the mother? you think it doesnt make her sad? but her decision was based upon what she thought was the best decison to make. and i will respect that.

What if someone doesn't think that murder should be a crime? Why should we legislate something against their belief?

most women are pregnate because they wanna be, if they dont, why should they HAVE to go through if they dont want to? at leats give them a choice. its not like every women does it. let the women that wanna get an abortion get one. and the ones that dont want to just wont, by their own decision. not because they had to anyway. at leats they know they were given a choice.

They had a choice, unless it wasn't consensual sex.

[AngryBaby]

What if someone doesn't think that murder should be a crime? Why should we legislate something against their belief?

someone that doesnt consider murder as a crime can be considered as insane.
and i dont think mothers that choose to have an abortion are going through insanity.

[*kryogenix*]

someone that doesnt consider murder as a crime can be considered as insane.
and i dont think mothers that choose to have an abortion are going through insanity.

And if one believes abortion is murder?

[AngryBaby]

then that is their opinion. an opinion that is greatly argued back and forth. murder itself, is not argued. any sane person knows doing so for absolutely no reason is wrong and if anyone does think for some reason it is "right", they are considered insane and probably in jail for murder themselves. but even murderers feel they had intent for each person or the one person they kill.

abortion is much more complicated. you cant just call it murder. that can be your opinion, but many will disagree. considering technically the fetus growing in YOUR body isnt even living yet till a certain time. hence the reason why some states allow abortion up to a certain age of the fetus.
but if you said "i think murder for no reason is wrong" not many people will disagree with you. Murder is not Legal in some states and you wont see a debate on cb saying "Murder, should it be legalized?". So its obviously not considered the same exact thing. The fact that we still can't decide and theres alot of debate about it, is percisely the reason why their should be a choice.

[*kryogenix*]

then that is their opinion. an opinion that is greatly argued back and forth. murder itself, is not argued. any sane person knows doing so for absolutely no reason is wrong and if anyone does think for some reason it is "right", they are considered insane and probably in jail for murder themselves. but even murderers feel they had intent for each person or the one person they kill.

abortion is much more complicated. you cant just call it murder. that can be your opinion, but many will disagree. considering technically the fetus growing in YOUR body isnt even living yet till a certain time. hence the reason why some states allow abortion up to a certain age of the fetus.
but if you said "i think murder for no reason is wrong" not many people will disagree with you. Murder is not Legal in some states and you wont see a debate on cb saying "Murder, should it be legalized?". So its obviously not considered the same exact thing. The fact that we still can't decide and theres alot of debate about it, is  percisely the reason why their should be a choice.

So whatever the majority agrees with is always right?

[ralphwinner]

Look, it's very simple, a fetus is not living. Unless the Being is living independant from the mother than it can not be considered murder...

Pro choice all the way!! Anyways, a child can sense when they are not wanted and has a bigger chance of being screwed up later in life. On top of that, if the mother does not have the ressources to raise the child and is scared shitless of giving birth, what is she supposed to do??

[sikdragon]

Fetus is a latin term, when translated into english, guess what it means... baby.

A baby cannot live independantly of it's parents or some sort of care giver. It cannot take care of it's basic living functions itself.

For the evolutionists out there, who believe that all life came about through a single living organism. How would you feel if someone came a long and aborted all life on earth? Yeah exactly!

Seriously though, from conception the baby is alive. As soon as the sperm enters the egg, it is life. Those are the dice you roll. If you don't want to have a baby, you need to abort the sperm or the eggs, or the canals by which the sperm travel. Something or anything before it gets there.

Abortion is murder. Murder is the theft of life. Shedding innocent blood. Sacrificing children on the altar of convenience.

What about rape victims? What about when the mother's life is in danger? Those abortions account for less than 2-5% of all abortions. How many babies die needlessly? Because a woman doesn't want to feel the pain of child birth, or because they don't have the money, or because her mate told her to. All no reason to kill a baby. How can you justify 95-98% of the estimated 1,293,000 babies killed via abortion in 2002?

Give the baby to an orphanage, or an adoption agency, or a church. There's a church on nearly every street corner. Simple as that. It's what has always been done.

Did you know Norma McCorvey had her child after abortion was legalized?

[*disco infiltrator*]

Just because it's two to five percent doesn't mean it's not there. Two percent of that statistic that you yourself gave is 25,860. That's just two percent. You think 25,860 already living women should die just so that their not-yet-living potential child can live its life without its mother? Oh, and five percent is 64,650.

If life is the issue here, it seems much more logical to not kill someone that's already living and instead prevent something from living.

Apparently, according to you, it's killing either way, so why would you outlaw something that you think kills people to kill people by outlawing it?

[*kryogenix*]

Just because it's two to five percent doesn't mean it's not there. Two percent of that statistic that you yourself gave is 25,860. That's just two percent. You think 25,860 already living women should die just so that their not-yet-living potential child can live its life without its mother? Oh, and five percent is 64,650.

If life is the issue here, it seems much more logical to not kill someone that's already living and instead prevent something from living.

Apparently, according to you, it's killing either way, so why would you outlaw something that you think kills people to kill people by outlawing it?

So would you support the ban on abortion except in the cases for those 5%?

[*disco infiltrator*]

I've been saying that forever. I support case-sensitive laws, just don't think it's possible to happen, since anyone can lie and say they've been raped or something. It would be too difficult to make it case-sensitive since each person would have a different plea to get one. I don't think these huge sluts should go out, get drunk, have unprotected sex with some guy and be able to get abortion, but the law is going to come down to none or all, and if banning abortions means that these women who have suffered so much will have to go through it all again or if the kids they bear will suffer, then I would much rather want all available, no matter how small a percentile they take up.

[*CrackedRearView*]

I've been saying that forever. I support case-sensitive laws, just don't think it's possible to happen, since anyone can lie and say they've been raped or something. It would be too difficult to make it case-sensitive since each person would have a different plea to get one. I don't think these huge sluts should go out, get drunk, have unprotected sex with some guy and be able to get abortion, but the law is going to come down to none or all, and if banning abortions means that these women who have suffered so much will have to go through it all again or if the kids they bear will suffer, then I would much rather want all available, no matter how small a percentile they take up.

It shouldn't even be a case-by-case law. As I've stated a hundred times in this thread, it should be a "one and you're done" law. After one abortion, that's it. That should be enough to quell the ignorance of a few idiotic teenage girls, while still accommodating those that have legitimate excuses to receive the procedure.

Exceptions may vary, as with any law -- but it remains to be the most logical solution I've seen thus far. Go figure that it's mine.

God damn, I should be a Congressman.

[*disco infiltrator*]

I agree with that too, with the exceptions. I don't know why people keep arguing me when I agree with them. Just because I'm not conservative doesn't mean I think people should run around getting a bunch of abortions for no reason...I've stated what I think a hundred times too, then people try to refute what I say by saying what I've said. I don't get it.

And hi Justin.

[*kryogenix*]

Well, if it hasn't been said already:

Did you know that the Hippocratic Oath was changed so that it would permit abortion?

[*mipadi*]

Here are some intriguing questions:

1. If a fetus is a person, why do we wait until someone is born before we count them in the census or allow people to claim them as dependents on their tax returns?
2. Why do we measure their age from their birthday instead of their conception day?
3. Would it be OK for an art museum to charge a pregnant woman for two tickets?
4. Why did it take the Catholic church almost 1800 years before it decided that a fetus was a person?

(While I'd love to take credit for these questions—and more—I've got to give credit where credit is due; see here for more information.)

[*kryogenix*]

If a fetus is a person, why do we wait until someone is born before we count them in the census or allow people to claim them as dependents on their tax returns?

There's a difference between a human being and a US citizen.

Why do we measure their age from their birthday instead of their conception day?

It's easier to keep track of birthday. Sex doesn't always result in conception.

Would it be OK for an art museum to charge a pregnant woman for two tickets?

The museum is charging for the experience of viewing the exhibits. The fetus isn't really experiencing it, so why pay? Nor is the fetus occupying space that other paying visitors could use.

Why did it take the Catholic church almost 1800 years before it decided that a fetus was a person?

I don't know this one. I'll ask my priest.

[*mipadi*]

There's a difference between a human being and a US citizen.

In this case, specifically, what would you say the difference is?

The pro-life argument looks, to me, to be something like this:

A person born to US citizens is a US citizen.
A fetus is a person (according to pro-lifers).
Therefore, a fetus is a US citizen.