Abortions - Right or Wrong?

I agree. plus, the problem with adopting your child off is that most mothers develop an attatchment to their unborn children even if it starts the moment the child is born. then, the mother may decide to keep the child while she has no way to care for it. that could be bad.

Oh ho ho that was so funny taken completely out of context of what I meant, but it should be a little better now. It took me a minute to realize the first one I was like what’s wrong with it. Oh that was funny though.
On topic

This is a better explanation of what I was trying to say before.

Oh I know what you meant, but the fact is the wording was horrendous.

Waaaaaaat.

Abortion is a good thing, it keeps the population low. It prevents a child from being born into a shitty setting. It prevents more children in the fucked Foster system. It prevents emotional stress. I think the whole "Mother's choice" thing is absolute bullshit. The woman could say she was on birth control, and then the man may ejaculate inside, causing a child to begin forming. If I was that man, I'd call for a fucking abortion, but the woman could either A.) Make me pay money for the rest of my life, or blackmail me into a relationship with her, because if I left her I'd be forced to pay child support. I've seen this shit happen, so don't tell me it doesn't.

In my opinion, the life isn't life until a point. I don't know where that point is, but it's most certainly not within the early stages of pregnancy, when abortions are performed (most of the time, anyway). If it's not yet a life, it can't die. Having an abortion early on in the pregnancy is VERY different from killing a baby when it's born.

I also agree that abortion's acceptable if it's because of rape.

I'm not saying it's right 100% of the time, but there are circumstances where I see it as acceptable.

My opinion is that it's nobody's choice except the parent's of the child. If they don't want it and decide to abort then it's non of my business. Personally I don't like abortion but it's not my place to tell someone else their wrong based on my personal beliefs.

That's basically what I said. I'm glad to see that I'm not the only onw who can argue that it only seems logical. A lot of people seem to still think it's wrong even if said person was raped, etc.

Yeah I didn't word that quite right...

What I was trying to say was that if you think a mother should have a choice, then you should also acknowledge the fact that the baby should have a choice as well. The only reason the baby can't make a choice is because it doesn't have the knowledge to choose.

Unless you were talking about what Rbz was talking about.


I think human life is defined when people gain consciousness. If it can't think, it really doesn't have life (This is just my opinion). So I really didn't contradict myself. >_>

I really don't care what other's think about abortion since it's not really something I'm really interested in. I'm just curious as to know why people who are for pro-choice are okay with abortion (killing a baby inside of the womb), but aren't okay when people kill a baby outside of the womb (Though there are some that probably don't care either way). Once it gains conscious, there isn't a difference in my opinion.

"I think, therefore I am."

A good quote. I think using the word "self-aware" might be better than consciousness, in that case though.

Haha I remember back in sex class in high school, someone said it was murder to do those thing. Then our teacher was like : '' If you think that's murder,then everytime you masturbate or have a wet dream, everytime you ejaculate, you've killed hundreds of babies. Your a fucking murderer.'' We all laughed, the guy was ''oh...yeah your right''

Some issues with the law need to be changed if abortion is to remain legal. If you can kill a human for convenience (money,etc) then a person should not be punished for the death of a pregnant woman's fetus. Under current laws, you can be charged with two counts of murder if a pregnant woman dies yet, a woman can abort her fetus and not be charged with murder. The law needs to be consistent.

I personally don't regard the fetus as human before the 14th week (I think the law got this figured out quite nicely); therefore murder does not come into play from my point of view at all. Oh yes, it is a life, but not a human one, and lives other than human ones mean nothing to me; each one of us takes myriads of (non-human) lives every day simply by living, what's one more?

Therefore: Within those 14 weeks it should be entirely up to the parents, whatever reasons they may have for it. After that time-span (again, I think the law has it figured quite nicely here) it should be a question of the mother's safety, whether the mother was below 14 at the moment of conception, whether the fetus is the fruit of rape, or of serious eugenic indication (i.e. the fetus would not be able to survive on its own once born, etc.). This is exactly the legal situation here, and I'm perfectly happy with it.

But let's assume, for the sake of the argument, that it is a human being right from the moment of conception and thus abortion (even before nidation) constitutes the killing a human being. Even so, I would still condone abortion. As hinted at I'm obviously worse than Hitler for this, but I think there are instances where killing is right: Consider tyrannicide. Therefore, the murder cries are like water off a duck's back to me.

The abortion debate continues to this day partly because we cannot currently define at what point life begins. Does a baby have a right to choose if it has a heartbeat? How about just a brain? I'm not certain, but I don't think science is yet able to prove whether or not the presence of a brain indicates consciousness or self-awareness.

Just because the house is there, that doesn't mean the lights on are. And just because the lights are on, that doesn't mean that anybody's home.

If it were to be self-aware a minute after conception, I'd agree 100% with you. But the fact remains that (as far as science can tell) this doesn't happen until later on in the pregnancy. I can't think of a way to sugar-coat this so I don't sound like a tyrannical bastard, but I'll give my thought on this to you straight (I know I'll probably catch some shit from some of you for my poor wording): Up until that point, it's nothing more than a parasite feeding off of the host body until it can become self-aware. Which would be the point where aborting it would be downright wrong.

I think the main problem here is that, like others have said, when something becomes a human life is really hard to tell, though many people say(when it can think) However, from that perspective, you shouldn't kill animals either, since most of them they have conscious thought. Now, usually people respond to this by saying that they meant once the child has become self-aware, but that is an even bigger problem. It would practically allow "abortions" of children for several months after their birth, as they're not able to recognise themself 'till then(IIRC).

So, although for obvious reasons this would make most people(including me) feel sick, I think the completely LOGICAL, calculated answer to the question of when a child can no longer be aborted would be a few months after its birth.

Oh, I'm pro-abortion btw.

How so? It’s a life either way right what’s the difference if it has seen its mother, or can’t even think yet. The problem is we know it will become a sentient being that can think feel ect…
Think of it this way would we kill a brain dead person who can’t think or do anything a fetus can’t do, but we knew that in 5 months he would become better? The answer is no, it’s the same as a fetus we know they will become a sentient human being so it is wrong to kill them even before they gain those traits.

As I stated earlier this is so fucking retarded! (Agreeing with FPOD)

While I disagree with your choice I can still respect this.

Thanks. I'd just like to use this post to make it completely clear that I do not support "aborting" a baby after it has been born, it's just the answer that is completely logical and with no emotions attached, the answer a machine or AI would choose.

I hope that makes it completely clear, if it wasn't already.

Anyway, on the murderer getting charged with two murders, you might argue that only the parents have the right to decide what should happen with the life of the baby, and that the murderer killed it against their will, which I guess should count as murder simply because it practically is a murder seen from the surviving family's perspective, who had been looking forward to the new family member.

I dunno though, it could also just be a leftover from before abortions became legal.

Agreed. Although it is a fairly grey-shaded area as to what someone considers to constitute a human life, but any time before that I think abortion is a perfectly acceptable option, although my view of when a life is truly human is a bit later than that, but that's just my personal view.

The only thing that bothers me, like I hinted in my last post, is the fate of doctors. Would all doctors be forced to practice abortion techniques if it was against their moral code or religion. I think it should be up to the doctor, and if you are a woman looking for an abortion and you family doctor chooses not to than that is his prerogative and tough luck if you don't want to find someone else to handle it. I guess that's what abortion clinics are for though, heh.

It's always the choice of the doctor whether he/she wants to carry out an operation, this is no different :)

Yeah, you're right. For some reason I can't seem to shake that thought from my head though.