Abortion Survey...

[mrblond5311]

So does this mean you don't believe in using the pill or an IUD as contraception?

 

 

Sorry I'm behind in the times. What's an IUD? and how do they work?

[GradGrrl]

I think most abortions are done "out of convenience"

 

The moral isues are pretty straight forward...no one can argue what is really being done when one has an abortion.

[jeskill]

Sorry I'm behind in the times. What's an IUD? and how do they work?

 

IntraUterine device, they've been around for years, at least since the 70s, if not longer.

[jeskill]

I think most abortions are done "out of convenience"

 

The moral isues are pretty straight forward...no one can argue what is really being done when one has an abortion.

 

How do you know most abortions are done out of convenience? Do you have any statistics to back up your statement?

[padren]

I think most abortions are done "out of convenience"

 

The moral isues are pretty straight forward...no one can argue what is really being done when one has an abortion.

 

I think there is a huge argument over what is being done when one has an abortion. Unless its pretty late into it all, personally, I would say what is being done is a cluster of cells is removed and discarded. I have more moral dilema stepping on an ant, which I do actually try to avoid. I don't even kill misquitos to be honest, but removing a cluster of cells, whether in a uterus or in a mole, really doesn't bother me at all.

[worsethanyou]

It's not punishment for the child. Punishment is the action for doing something wrong which the child did not. The mother should also do her best to make sure her child should does not percieve it that way. They also should not find out as a child but more of a young adult. The child would most likely respect their mother more for being able to go through with the birth even though it would be painful. All of your reasons deal with certain circumstance's which are not always present in these cases (which is why the word "may" is so common in your reply).That mother "may" also have a better life because of the child. The child "may" grow up to be someone great. I am pro-choice but I don't believe that every woman in this scenario should be able to abort an unborn child. As far as continuing college why wouldn't you be able to finish? There are alot of programs out there and plenty of ways to get help with that if the mother is willing. And if your family disowns you because you decide to keep the baby than that wasn't much of a true family to begin with. Your' "family" should be there to support you whether they agree with it or not. I understand it might break current relationships down but why would you want to be with someone who had different morals than you and wouldn't do all they could to help you? As far as being fair goes; if the world were fair she wouldn't have been raped in the first place. Why not at least give the child a chance to be what they can be and decide for themselves how their life should be. To make that decision for the child would just make the situation even more unjust.

 

I agree adoption is not easy and it's not always the answer but the mother does have that option and if after 9 months she's grown close enough to that baby to want to keep it then that would overpower the negative circumstance that got her pregnant and help her through the tough times and bad memories.

 

I'm prochoice because I believe no one has the right to make that decision for her; but then again no one has the right to make that decision for an unborn child. Why would you assume they would have a bad life and wish that they were aborted? A wise man once told me "Assumptions are the mother of all screw ups" and I think it would be a "screw up" for anyone to assume anything for an unborn child.

 

It would be a lovely world if no one got punished for things they didn't do. People falsely imprisoned - are they not being punished' date=' as they had never done anything wrong? It is still a punishment whether they are completely innocent or not.

 

You are a guy, this could never happen to you and you are bloody lucky that that's the case. Everyone can say they are pro-life, pro-choice and anti-abortion but until it happens to them how can they know how they will be affected and what they will think? And as it can never happen to you I don't think you should judge those who make that difficult decision.

 

However, rules and regulation should remain the same. I think that if there is even the slightest chance of viability outside the womb then abortion should be illegal. And babies can survive at 24 weeks. I think the absolute limit should be 13-14 weeks, unless the mothers life is at risk. There was an issue recently here about a baby being aborted at 28 weeks because it had a cleft palate. I think that is diabolical.

 

I think most abortions are done "out of convenience"

 

If we look at abortions as a whole this may be true. But this topic was centred around being raped and getting pregnant and in these cases i think covenience is the last concern for the mother

[sunspot]

We do not currently have a consensus opinion as to when life actually begins. However, there is a logical way to determine this. Most religious people assume a continuity between life, death. and rebirth (life) into heaven or wherever. If we use this assumption, than the definition of death should be the reciprical of the definition of life.

 

In other words, when people die, their brains and hearts stop, but things like hair and fingernails will continue to grow. Death is not measured by biochemical events still occurring, but only by the integrity of the heart and brain. If the biochemistry of a fertilized ovuum defines life, than burying a person with their hair still growing should be considered torture. It is not torture because biochemistry alone does not constitute life. When the unborn's heart begins to beat and they begin to show brainwaves this is the reciprical of our definition of death. I would be satified with this. It also allows some flexiblity during difficult situations like rape, etc. The girl should not be rape twice. i.e., once by cultural guilt, if she works within the parameters of life/death.

[padren]

In other words, when people die, their brains and hearts stop, but things like hair and fingernails will continue to grow.

 

Just an aside: I recently learned that the hair and fingernails don't grow, but the tissue shrinks with dehydration, giving the appearance of these growing.

[ecoli]

Just an aside: I recently learned that the hair and fingernails don't grow, but the tissue shrinks with dehydration, giving the appearance of these growing.

 

what tissue shrinks?

[padren]

what tissue shrinks?

 

http://www.snopes.com/science/nailgrow.asp

 

The sorry fact of the matter is that we dehydrate after dying. Our flesh dries and, in so doing, pulls away from nails and hair. Thus, though the nail on our big toe, for example, remains the same length as before, the toe it is seated upon shrinks. Because we are accustomed to nails and hair growing, not hands, feet, and heads shrinking, we perceive this change as an increase in one rather than a decline in the other.

[pink_trike]

(m) I'm anti-abortion unless the mother's life is endangered by the pregnancy. But I don't think that abortion should be legislated.

[Dark Photon]

in the case of rape abortion shoudl be permitted as it is the lesser of two evils, the mother must be given the oppurtunity to heal mentally.

[chemfreak]

I thimk that it is VERY justifiable

 

M 12

[scicop]

reminds of the old telephone prank....the telephone rings you answer:

 

Hello, Abortion Clinic!! You rape them, we scrape them, no fetus can beat us!!!!

 

Its the womans choice. There is no debate. God has spoken.

[alice]

I'm doing a survey on public opinion on Abortion the specific question is:

 

For those persons that disagree with abortion would you change your mind based upon the following situation question:

 

Can you consider rape victims abortions justifiable based upon lack of consented intent to become pregnant?

 

Thanks for any responses I get please state whether your male or female by typing (m) or (f) next to your response and if I'm lucky enough your age too thanks a million. I hope to get at least 100 responses through online responses and in person responses.

 

Teri

 

(f)

 

It's not justifiable at all. Whether or not she liked it, life is growing inside her. What she should do is give birth to the child, and if she doesn't want to keep it, then she should give it up for adoption, that way, the child will live and a precious life is not lost.

[The Spith]

It's not justifiable at all. Whether or not she liked it' date=' life is growing inside her. What she should do is give birth to the child, and if she doesn't want to keep it, then she should give it up for adoption, that way, the child will live and a precious life is not lost.[/quote']

 

Life is growing inside us all, from tapeworms to nematodes to pathogens. What is the difference between killing these and killing a much smaller ball of cells?

[Mokele]

What is the difference between killing these and killing a much smaller ball of cells?

 

Tapeworms are cuter.

[Kermit]

(M)(16)

 

I tend to pick "pro-choice" if asked to, but I generally don't label myself as such, or even as the alternative. I think a mother should have the decision over what's consuming a part of her nutritional intake.

 

I'm too scared someone's going to foam at the mouth and lunge at me for supporting an ideology opposite theirs. Hey, if they can host parades outside abortion clinics and do other crazy things, i'm fairly sure they'll foam at the mouth and try to bite my throat.

[alice]

Life is growing inside us all, from tapeworms to nematodes to pathogens. What is the difference between killing these and killing a much smaller ball of cells?

 

No difference at all. I suppose killing a person doesn't make a difference either. What is a million cells, and life? If we can kill pigs, cows, chickens, fishes, or whatever animal we eat in our daily meals, why not kill the mature human beings and make a special meal out of their flesh?

 

Today's special:

HUMANBURGER - only 1 cent

[Mokele]

By that logic, it's immoral to have an immune system, or to eat. Either you're a hypocrite, or you'll kill yourself right now. Oh, but wait, that's killing too!

 

News flash: death isn't just a part of life, it *is* life. Deal with it.

[tomgwyther]

Answer to question...

YES to abortion in that circumstance. [M] 27

 

Actually I belive early abortion is completly justified, there are millions of orphaned children all over the world who desperatly need parents,

to bring a new unwanted life into an already crowded world seems selfish toward the children who are left to wander the streets unloved and in poverty,

 

I lost my daughter last year, and I'm now considering adopting rather than conceiving, when I'm ready to have kids again that is.

[alice]

By that logic' date=' it's immoral to have an immune system, or to eat. Either you're a hypocrite, or you'll kill yourself right now. Oh, but wait, that's killing too!

 

News flash: death isn't just a part of life, it *is* life. Deal with it.[/quote']

 

It is part of life, who said it's not?

 

I guess abortion's alright. It's way better than raising a child you don't want. This recently happened to my aunt and uncle. It's not that they didn't want a child, they weren't ready for one. My uncle's job was unstable and my aunt is jobless. They got pregnant and bore a kid. Then, months later, they got pregnant again, and bore another kid. Result, two bratts. One mean noisy annoying little girl of age 3 and a silent cute little boy of age 2 who has a hole under his balls or somewhere in that part. They are the noisiest bunch! My aunt's thinking of giving the two kids for adoption. Great! The smartest thing she's ever thought of since she married that creep of a handicapped uncle. Why is he a creep? Because he's now jobless and he keeps on asking his siblings for money to go to Manila just to gamble in the race track and try his luck in lotto. Pathetic. She should've taken the child's life when she could, or she could've made sure they were ready for it before they had sex.

[Kylonicus]

I'm pro abortion, because I think anything we can do to end human life is a good thing.

 

I think we should not just kill infants, who did nothing wrong, but all forms of minorities, and people who we simply don't like. The elderly would be a good group to wipe out, or welfare recipients, because they are just "draining the nutritional intake" of our government. So welfare recipients should be gased. I think we should kill political opposition and anybody who is a different skin color or sex, except for sex slaves. We should kill all of our prisoners, because it's convenient to kill them, rather than trying to rehabilitate them. We should commit mass murder, because it's convienent. Maybe we should just erect big statues of Adolf Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, and change the our motto from "Land of the free, home of the Brave", to "Land of the free, home of the Slave", or maybe we could inscribe on the statue of liberty, and in our court houses,

 

"SLAVERY IS FREEDOM,

DEATH IS LIFE,

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"

 

That would really epitomize what were all about then!

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not being serious, but I am trying to make a serious point.

 

You start with abortion because it's convienent, but where do you draw the line? Lines always a tendency of being pushed farther and farther, and eventually it could get to the point of gassing the elderly, the infeebled, or the political scapegoat. It's happened before. It can happen again.

[Mokele]

Lines always a tendency of being pushed farther and farther, and eventually it could get to the point of gassing the elderly, the infeebled, or the political scapegoat. It's happened before. It can happen again.

 

Frankly, that's just a piss-poor arguement. First, there's absolutely no proof that *any* of the incidents you mentioned had anything to do with abortion, nor was it used to rationalize them. Second, even if it *were* the case, just because something *can* happen doesn't mean it will. You cannot simply look at any idea and construct some flimsy sequence of events that may possibly lead to a bad outcome, then turn around and use that to negate the idea. That's like saying that freedom of religion is bad because it'll lead to human sacrifice and the eventual legalization of rape and murder.

 

'Life' does not confer any moral rights. Personhood does. What qualifies as a person varies, but a ball of cells certainly doesn't in any conception.

 

Mokele

[elfstone]

Just wanted to mention that the author of "Freakonomics" argues that legalizing abortion had a direct effect on crime ratings dropping. The people who propose adoption as the solution should realize that an unwanted pregnancy can be dealt with, but an unwanted child will most likely suffer for being born. Morality should dictate us to reduce suffering, not increase it. As Mokele said, persons are entitled moral rights, not a ball of cells.