Indisputable Abortion FACTS:

[monolith94]

Zylka, what does it matter if a fetus feels pain as a metal rod goes through it??? I mean, it's not like it can sue you, can it???

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Zylka
...because you can't prove a point on it and therefore dismiss it as "lowly"? C'mon Spiffy, you're better than that

There is no point to be proven about whether it is ethical or not to destroy an embryo. To some, it is an individual with all individual rights. To others, it is some goo that has no say on its fate in its current state. This debate has nothing scientific in it, and is purely moralistic.
This issue is the strong point of the anti-choice camp. The pro-choice can not argue that an embryo is a human being in the making. Whether it is an individual already or not, however, is a mindless and issueless debate.
If the limit was one week, all the anti-choice would still be saying that abortion kills babies. Heck, the anti-choice crowd considers the monocellular organism to be a full fledged individual. The 'time limit' issue is an utter non issue.

BTW, a small note: most abortions are dealt quickly, i.e as soon as the pregnancy has been identified and the paperjob has been handled. The 3 months limit is more a technicality than an ethical statement, since in some cases, this identification and paperwork may require time. Some other times, the mother may want to keep it at first, before changing her opinion a few weeks later, for various reasons.


For the sake of convenience, and for the sake of avoiding this pointlessness, I blindly agree with the limit fixed by the law. For now, it is 3 months. Very well. I'd accept it as blindly if it was 2 months or 4. This law is a convenient measurement to me.

A-D-O-P-T-I-O-N

Adoption would look like a beautiful thing to do, and I personally wish it'd be more developed in France. I am no fan of abortion in itself, because I know it does loads of psychological damage to women. I personally try hard, so that my girlfriend never has to go through abortion.
However, adoption should not be the only answer, because I highly doubt there is nearly as much demand for adopted children than there is supply of unwanted children (if you forbid abortion).
More than that, an unwanted pregnancy can result in disastrous results for your life even if you don't have to raise the kids afterwards (assuming the abortion system is perfect and takes your kid right after birth). An unwanted pregnancy can ruin your studies if they are at a high level, it can ruin your carreer and send you on the streets, it can ruin the relationship of your life etc.
All these elements may have deep consequences for the rest of your life. To avoid them, abortion [b]must[b] be legal and kickin'.

Right, just as I would be equally indignant for making an "accidental" bank robbery in which I "accidentally" shoot a teller in the spine. Even if I fully and sincerely regret my actions down the road - I'd better damn well pay for the mistakes, with the rest of my life! THINK

Completely irrelevant comparison. 'Accidental' pregnancies happen either when there is a technical incident like when the girl forgets to take the pill this night, when the condom is defect, or when the guy swears to stop ****ging before the ejaculation (a long time favorite of unwanted pregnancies).

Accidental pregnancies can also happen when the girls are led to trust a guy who doesn't care a **** about her. Many teenage girls are misled this way, and the guy disappears as soon as he hears the word 'pregnant'. Too many teenage girls, still learning about love, do nnot expect such cowardice from their studs, and end up being pregnant of an absent father. Yeah, sure, forbid abortion, and further punish the weak for having been cheated "We have to protect the strong from the weak" I guess

There are also teenage girls who simply do not expect to turn pregnant. I know it sounds stupid, but in some backwards areas, girls aren't taught about sex at all, which leads them unaware of the consequences of sex. I guess they should take responsibility as well ?

Lastly, there are the many cases of limited control for the girls. I'm especially thinking about the alcohol influence, or promiscuity. A girl who gets drunk, knowing she's likely to have flirt, may sometimes not control that her lover isn't using a condom or the like. This is the only kind of circumstances in which we could imagine the girls are 'faulting' and should bear consequences for their 'wrong' (i.e not preventing pregnancy despite looking for sex).

To be short, an unwanted pregnancy is almost never the fault of the woman, except when she is willfully looking for promiscuity sex without protecting herself. Most unwanted pregnancies come either from technical accidents, from men's cowardice, or from a life accident (when the wanted pregnancy suddenly becomes unwanted because of some event).

Women sure should suffer their whole life because of that :Puke:

[Imran Siddiqui]

I blindly agree with the limit fixed by the law. For now, it is 3 months. Very well. I'd accept it as blindly if it was 2 months or 4.

(puts on Devil's advocate horns)

What about places where the law is different, such as the US, where you can have abortion up to the time of birth?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
What about places where the law is different, such as the US, where you can have abortion up to the time of birth?

I thought late abortions were only allowed for medical reasons ?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Nope, you can have an abortion up to birth time. Even though Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and Stenberg v. Carhart (sp?) allow for a ban on 3rd trimester abortions no state has come up with the Constitutionally sufficient ban yet (though one state will sooner or later).

[Spiffor]

Well, I have no problem with that. However, I admit this can fuel the anti-choice bigotry, and it could get some reforms for this reason.

[Sava]

oh BTW, ADOPTION, isn't an option if the pregnancy is high risk (i.e. the mother could die)...

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Sn00py
That's kind of silly, you somehow have a soul when you first breath.


I find it typical that people would argue when is a baby a baby and not argue that killing anything for no good reason is justifiable.

On the contrary, I would consider killing a fetus similar to killing a comperable animal. I would suggest that people have a good reason for having an abortion after the first week or so after conception, and would not suggest people do it for the heck of it. Just as I believe people should have a good reason for killing an animal, I believe they should do the same for an abortion. Just as I accept as a valid reason killing animals for food, I accept the reason that it was an unwanted pregnancy and the mother is not ready to care for a child. (Just to clarify here, I'm not endorsing cannibalism.)

On the first point, its no more silly than some people placing the value of a human embryo immediately after conception higher than the life of an adult Dolphin or Chimpanzee. In spite of the fact that the embryo is barely more sophisticated than an amoeba, the emphesis is placed on the fetus even initially.

[orange]

but can it live on its own? No. Until it can, it is a parasite. Good day.

[Rex Little]

Originally posted by Zylka


You talk as if the child is some impending PROBLEM that is at fault for burdening the mother! Was it the child's choice to be conceived? NO - SHE was the one spreading her legs!

...and don't even bother with the case of rape, as that is a minority exception meant to be tackled AFTER the vast majority issue.

Fault has nothing to do with it. Regardless of how or why the fetus got into the mother's body, it doesn't have the right to stay there unless she agrees to keep it there.

[Victor Galis]

I think the baby is not a human until it can survive outside the womb (without some sort of special support machine).

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Sava
oh BTW, ADOPTION, isn't an option if the pregnancy is high risk (i.e. the mother could die)...

Yeah but don't you agree that it would be nice if a larger fraction of those who abort would instead consider adoption? It seems so perverse having all these couples desperate to adopt a healthy infant and to have millions of abortions taking place next to a small trickle of infants offered up for adoption.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Sava
My mother had an abortion. She doesn't regret it one bit. My parents were at a time in their lives when they couldn't afford to give a child a good life. Abortion is a decision that should be between a mother, father, and doctor... or mother and doctor in the case of rape, incest, dead-beat dad, etc... NOT the government.

It's not as if I said that every mother regrets her abortion

[Robert]

Originally posted by Sava
Jack... there are hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of kids already awaiting adoption. If there were no abortion, there would be 40 million more unwanted children. It's humane to end the life before birth rather than to put children in some failing institution.

In history there have been millions of 'unwanted' babies.
Why should they be putted in 'failing institutions'?
In fact they'll just be raised by their parents like all kids are, and 98% of these children will be loved.

In fact most of these babies would probably not even be 'unwanted' if the parents didn't knew there was an option of abortion.

[Robert]

Originally posted by Spiffor

This highly depends of the circumstances. Some mothers may be able to overcome the difficulties that come with an unwanted baby, and some others do not.
There are mothers of unwanted kids who treat them like ****, as a form of petty revenge towards the father; I hardly call these often violent mothers "loving".
There are mothers who cannot raise their kids/give them love because they have to work too much to have both ends meet. Yes, giving love to a child is work and takes time, although many people seem to think loving a kid is enough. Abstract love is not enough, the kid must recieve real manifestations of this love (as mundane as changing the diapers, or as great as spending a few hours raising its morale after a personal failure) etc. Too many mothers are not in the material situation to satisfy this need.

I agree things can go sour with wanted babies too. But that's no reason not to give a choice to the mother.

Thus, because of the lazyness of the parents the child should be murdered?
Pherhaps you're talking about the very very very very few situations in which the mother is insane or whatever.

But you're for sure not talking about let's say 99,5% of the current abortions.