Government Controlled-abortions

[sepultallica]

if you haven't gathered from all my other posts, i'm a firm believer in the government's ability to oversee certain programs, and its potential for doing more with others. with that in mind, i would like to focus this this thread on abortion. i searched and didn't find any other threads on it. similar to other threads in these forums, this topic has the potential to stimulate thought and debate so i'll start it off.

 

with my belief that the government should oversee all aspects of the medical industry, i believe abortions should fall within this realm. i believe that abortions should be legalized. of course with certain restrictions and enforcements.

 

1. we've all heard the argument of the woman that's been aped and becomes pregnant. some states allow abortions, some don't. should she be required to go through the pregnancy? suppose the woman didn't want the child. should she have to suffer and possibly ruin her life just so she can put the child up for adoption? in a sense, we would be ruining two lives. mathematically speaking, wouldn't it be better if we ruined one life? screwed up way of looking at it but it's true.

 

2. next scenario. a woman becomes pregnant. she currently has three children. all of which have major physical and mental deformities, and all of which could not be prevented. while the mother wants the child, we know that the chances for this child is born with deformites is great. should she be allowed to bear this child?

 

3.a woman is married and has a family with children. the woman becomes pregnant with onother man. should she be allowed to give birth? the family stands a great chance of becoming troubled with the child. cheating is bad. families might be able to overcome that. but it would definately be harder to overcome it with a child that is not of the family. and if abortions are controlled by the government, should the government take the initiative to prevent the birth? since it would be a legal issue.

 

more scenarios to come. have to use the restroom

[sepultallica]

scenario 4. a woman becomes pregnant. she has been living off welfare for the past three years. she is unemployed and homeless. she is not capable of financially raising the child. should she be permitted to give birth?

 

scenario 5. a woman becomes pregnant. she uses narcotics on a regular basis and is addicted. it is not likely that she will stop using drugs. should she be permitted to have the child?

[sepultallica]

i'll be back in a cou8ple minutes to express my thoughts.

[sepultallica]

scenario 5. a woman becomes pregnate. she is perfectly capable of raising the child and living in a normal family atmosphere. but for some reason, she doesn't want to have the child. should she be forced to have the baby?

 

6. the population of the world has escalated to over 12 billion. population control has taken on a whole new meaning to the point that the government has resorted to restricting the amount of children that a family can have. a women becomes pregnat. she already has the maximum amount of children alloted. what should happen?

[sepultallica]

scenario 6. a woman engages in sexual intercourse and takes reasonable steps to prevent a pregnancy. despite her efforts, she becomes pregnat. she does not want to bear the child. should she be forced to have the child or should she be ab;e to elect to terminate the life?

 

well first off, you have the issue of whether you will even make abortions legal. if no then there is no debate on the ethics/morlas of these scenarios. if we are to allow them, then how would we regulate it. should the government be involved? should it be allowed would the government need to play a role in it? would society benifit from the government regulating it? i think that the government should be involved. i think that it is better to ruin one life than two. if a woman makes a mistake, she should be granted the choice to abort. i believe that there should be restrictions on this. first time, slap on the hand. anything after that, fines and imprisonment. obviously if we allow abortions, then the most notable case that abortion would e acceptable would be in scenario 1. this has got to be the most obvious ... should we allow a woman to give birth if her circumstances are similar to that of scenario 2? i think not. no need to bring a life in to this world that cannot possibly enjoy it. should we allow a woman that lives at the expense of society? welfare? of course not. we should prevent the birth and asses penalties if she persists.

[sepultallica]

i'll post some more thoughts but again, i had to stay late at work so i had a little spare time but now i must go.

[Glider]

The way you phrase certain things is quite telling: "...should we allow a woman to give birth... is a good example. And I thought women living in purdah had it tough.

 

Why, I wonder, does nobody ask questions like; "Should men be prevented from having sex (or sterilized using a reversable procedure) until they enter a legal obligation to support any and all subsequent offspring, deliberate or accidental?"

[sepultallica]

sorry man, i know my choice of words were kind of rough but i didn't have much time to put everything together and make it look nice. as far as the having sex part, i think that it would be harder to regulate men because they aren't the ones having the kids. sure if possible why not? it mnakes sense. if there is a way to identify them then sure. i'm a firm believer that the woman has the final say. we can debate that the man has just as much say but i don't see it that way. but either way, it's easier to stop it with the woman. and besides, it's the woman having the baby. it's her body. she should be the one taking care of herself. just like the man knows that if he does get her pregnant, he has to suffer the consequences (child supprt) the woman should bear some of the burden. if she wants to point the finger and say it was him and it can be proven, then fine, penalize him too.

[sepultallica]

Glider said in post #7 :

The way you phrase certain things is quite telling: "...should we allow a woman to give birth... is a good example. And I thought women living in purdah had it tough.

 

Why, I wonder, does nobody ask questions like; "Should men be prevented from having sex (or sterilized using a reversable procedure) until they enter a legal obligation to support any and all subsequent offspring, deliberate or accidental?"

 

you bring up a good point though. everybody attacks the woman because she is the one having the child. why not the man.

[Dudde]

as to the rape issue, of course she should be allowed to have the abortion. With the overpopulation issue once a woman has had her maximum the government would probably take steps to sterilize the woman and/or man, or she would have an abortion (assuming the government would take steps to monitor the population). However, if a woman cheats on her family, she should not be allowed to have the abortion, it was her decision to cheat, it's her responsibility to deal with the consequences, same as with a woman just having sex. If you can't handle the consequences, take more steps, or don't do it at all, if she really didn't want to become pregnant she shouldn't have had sex in the first place.

 

however, this issue would rely on the woman's honesty in the cases, and since we all know humans will not speak the truth if it benefits them, and lie detectors aren't always accurate, this becomes an issue on determining reasons, so if you opened up abortion it would be for everyone.

[sepultallica]

Dudde said in post #10 :

as to the rape issue, of course she should be allowed to have the abortion. With the overpopulation issue once a woman has had her maximum the government would probably take steps to sterilize the woman and/or man, or she would have an abortion (assuming the government would take steps to monitor the population). However, if a woman cheats on her family, she should not be allowed to have the abortion, it was her decision to cheat, it's her responsibility to deal with the consequences, same as with a woman just having sex. If you can't handle the consequences, take more steps, or don't do it at all, if she really didn't want to become pregnant she shouldn't have had sex in the first place.

 

.

 

so she should have to have the child even if it means that it's going to ruin an entire family?

[Dudde]

her decision, her fault, her responsibility. The government should not have to protect families. If the woman cheated once, and got an abortion, what makes you think she won't do it again? She doesn't have to tell her family she cheated, she could find out before, and get an abortion before anyone finds out. What's to say she won't just do it again?

someone cheating multiple times while taking preventative measures to be secretive about it is more likely to cause more trouble once she is found out. If the husband is going to hate the child just because it wasn't borne of his seed, he should be shot anyway.

[sepultallica]

good points.

[sepultallica]

better to be open about it than to lie about and have to deal with the cheating and the lie. not just the cheating. mathematics.

[atinymonkey]

Is this thread instigated by the crazy american who was just executed for killing a doctor to 'protect life'?

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3077040.stm

 

Mentalist.

[Dudde]

yeah well, religious extremists seem to be losing sight of their faith and just going on a blood-thirsty rampage anyhow, just to get fame..I for one give the thumbs up to the governor

Florida Governor Jeb Bush, a Republican who is the brother of US President Gorge W Bush, could have commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, but said he would not be "bullied" into stopping the execution.

 

hey man, I take no responsibility as an American for that, that was northern florida...we all know what florida does to people;)

[atinymonkey]

It's funny, but in the UK this really isn't a problem. There is no prominent anti-abortion movement. Loads of the fruit loops who would rather kill researchers rather than allow a fluffy bunny to be hurt, but anti-abortion isn't really an issue.

 

It must stem from the religious indoctranation that the US is subject to. In the UK, we have a rather feeble Church of England. They are more in the lines of bake sales and garden parties to raise money for the Church roof. I suspect that if a Church member expressed stronger opinions, they would be locked in a cellar with a cup of tea untill they calmed down a bit.

 

 

Thats not to say Americans have the majority of crazy