|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 7:00 pm
Hullo! I'm silently.. This is basically my introduction post... I really want to get involved but I'm pretty inexperienced in debating pro-life/pro-choice. I've been reading a bunch of the posts, though, and they're really helpful.
Anyhow, to let you all know, I'm stauntly pro-life. About as pro-life as you can get....
But about the 'two exceptions' that almost every pro-lifer agrees with....
I believe that pro-life is always wrong, unless there is a huge risk the mother might die. (Which is extremely, extremely rare.)
My (rather unusual, I guess) belief is that rape victims shouldn't have abortions. They will suffer just as much mental and physical pain if they have an abortion as if they go through with the pregnancy. They don't ever have to see the baby again, either; they can adopt him/her to a family who will love him/her even though they were unwanted. I know rape is an extremely painful process for the victim, sad which is why I don't think many of them realize the choices they can make. They can turn a horrible thing- (rape) -into a good thing -(a family gets a child they desperately wanted), instead of simply making things even more horrible by killing a child.
Now, I know rape abortions are only about 1% of the abortions, but it seems to be a major argument that pro-choicers use... er.. at least, in my experience. Anyway, I'd like to hear some other opinions on the matter.....
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 7:24 pm
I don't find that unusual at all. I believe that there should be no abortions, no matter the case.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 7:32 pm
That's technically my stand point, actually, I just worded it in a round-about way.... I think I was afraid of being alienated by everyone, for some reason... But, *yay* somebody agrees with me! *hug*
..but I have a question.. are there even any times when a mother HAS to abort her child in order for her to live? I've never heard of a specific case that is so...
Oh, and another thing I forgot to mention is that I'm against contraceptives, too.. O.o
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2004 7:34 pm
Well, there are some cases where the unborn child has to die, such as eptopic pregnancies (I have no clue how to spell that), but those are usually not considered abortions because the death of the child is an unwanted side effect, either one or both dies.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 21, 2004 10:27 am
silently They will suffer just as much mental and physical pain if they have an abortion as if they go through with the pregnancy. Er, no? Actually, more interestingly; Quote: The psychological responses to abortion are far less serious than those experienced by women bringing their unwanted pregnancy to term and relinquishing the child for adoption (Sachdev, 1993). Actually, emotional problems from Abortion rarely happens unless it was one inwhich it had to be done to save the mothers life; Quote: The truth is that most studies in the last 20 years have found abortion to be a relatively benign procedure in terms of emotional effect - except when pre-abortion emotional problems exist or when a wanted pregnancy is terminated, such as after diagnostic genetic testing (Adler, 1989; Adler et al., 1990; Russo & Denious, 2001). And as for them feeling mentally bad; Quote: Research studies indicate that emotional responses to legally induced abortion are largely positive. They also indicate that emotional problems resulting from abortion are rare and less frequent than those following childbirth (Adler, 1989). The "mental" issues you try to describe that they would feel is incorrect and not even recognized by the American Psychological(or Psychiatric) Association. As for phsycial? Considering Abortion is the safest medical procedure available. And just for statistical fun; Quote: Up to 98 percent of the women who have abortions have no regrets and would make the same choice again in similar circumstances (Dagg, 1991). ---- Quote: I believe that pro-life is always wrong, unless there is a huge risk the mother might die. (Which is extremely, extremely rare.) I believe you mean; "I believe that Pro-Life is always wrong IF there is a huge risk the mother might die." You're right though when it comes to it being rare. Quote: 3.3% of women have an abortion due to a risk to fetal health. 2.8% of women have an abortion due to a risk to maternal health.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:41 am
if it's endangering the life of the mother, i think abortion is okay. in any other case, i do not believe that. personally, i think, if your stupid enough to get pregnant, then that's your mistkae don't punish your unborn child, you know? i may not be very religious and holy holy. i do not believe that you should wait until you're married, but wait until you're in love and have a strong, honest bond. i do not think abortion is wrong because the bible or church tells me it is. i believe abortion is wrong because that's what my morals tell me.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2004 12:20 pm
Actually, Mikami, there are studies that have shown that suicides from mothers who aborted their babies, are much higher than those of woman who have produced so called "unwanted" babies. It's proven. People always do things they don't regret-- You can't say they regret having the baby, and not say they don't regret having the abortion. That's an opinion, and plus, I have graphs that prove you wrong. And as well, abortion is not the "safest medical procedure available." There are many inherent dangers in Abortion. Like in this article where an abortion clinic had a document explaining the dangers of Abortion. Quote: A series of information sheets obtained by The Interim and related to a Toronto abortuary offer a revealing glimpse into the workings, tactics and mindset of personnel within the abortion industry. They also indicate an attempt by such personnel to guard themselves against possible future legal actions by revealing some of the negative and dangerous aspects of the abortion procedure. Because the Choice in Health abortuary is located in an area populated by many immigrants and minorities, copies of its information are translated into other languages, including Vietnamese, Urdu, Spanish, Chinese and Tamil. On the financial side of things, the abortuary says it "regrets" that it must ask for a payment of $400 in cash for any woman who does not have a valid Ontario Health Insurance Plan card on the day of her abortion. It limits appointments to these uninsured women to just three per week. Clients having a laminaria (a device that dilates the cervix) inserted must pay the full amount in cash, or by cash and a subsidy agreement, on the day the laminaria is inserted. Interestingly, the documents present some basic information on fetal development; for example, they acknowledge that within the 14 weeks the Choice in Health Clinic commits abortions: an "early brain," liver, kidney and pancreas form; arms, legs, eyes and ears grow; a "soft skeleton" forms; and blood vessels form and begin to connect with one another. In the category of "risks," the abortuary admits that infection in the uterus occurs in two to four per cent of abortions, while "pregnancy tissue" stays behind in up to one per cent of abortions, and may necessitate a second abortion. Other risks include "continued pregnancy" (i.e., a failed abortion), blood in the uterus; excessive bleeding; injury to the uterus or other internal organs and allergic reactions. The abortuary promises "experienced, non-directive, non-judgemental" pre-abortion counselling, during which the benefits and disadvantages of parenting, adoption and abortion are said to be discussed. "Clients who decide to continue the pregnancy will be given resource information and referrals as desired," it claims. For those clients who have passed their 14th week of pregnancy, Choice in Health pledges to assist in arranging an appointment elsewhere in Ontario, where abortions can be performed up to the 5th month of pregnancy. This can be done through code names, so no one else knows that an abortuary is involved. Of course, Choice in Health's phone number is blocked. Elsewhere in the documents, Choice in Health claims that abortions create fewer complications that a tonsillectomy, and that it is safer for a woman to abort than carry a baby to birth - assertions that would be hotly contested by many. It adds that women undergoing abortions are offered the drugs fentanyl and atropine to help with pain relief and fainting. After an abortion, a woman can expect bleeding, cramps, nausea, tiredness, breast tenderness and frequent urination. There can also be "sadness or a sense of loss, even when the decision to have the abortion was easy to make." Mood changes and depression are other after-effects. Choice in Health stresses that women experiencing complications or emergencies after an abortion "may" be able to get help from a doctor or emergency room, but they should "CALL US FIRST" (emphasis in the original documentation) because "few doctors or hospitals have as much experience as we do with women who have just had an abortion." A brochure "For Men About Abortion" notes that many men escorting women for abortions are "confused, worried and upset." It acknowledges that "there are always feelings about a pregnancy and an abortion" and that "sadness and a sense of loss may also accompany an abortion." Indeed, a man "might find himself from time to time trying to imagine what the baby would have looked like." Another document involves using journalling questions to help a woman deal with "the healing choice." It advocates using "creative selfishness" to care for oneself without feeling guilty. Eliminating guilt is the key: "If you don't champion your rights, who is going to?" The also package includes an "Abortion Resolution Workbook" from Cincinatti Women's Services, which offers methods for experiencing "wholeness and healing" despite an abortion experience that leaves women "feeling bad, having nightmares, regretting their decision or simply still hurting and unable to forget." Hmm.. Seems to me that abortion is as much trouble as birth! That would make abortion superfluous on the "less painful than birth" argument. and also: Quote: Notably, the risk of suicide following a birth was about half that of the general population of women. This finding is consistent with previous studies that have shown that an undisturbed pregnancy actually reduces the risk of suicide.(4) Abortion, on the other hand, is clearly linked to a dramatic increase in suicide risk. This statistical finding is corroborated by interview-based studies which have consistently shown extraordinarily high levels of suicidal ideation (30-55 percent) and reports of suicide attempts (7-30 percent) among women who have had an abortion.(5) In many of these studies, the women interviewed have explicitly described the abortion as the cause of their suicidal impulses.  Here's my Source
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:53 am
I'm pretty much there. There are pregnancies which risk the mother's life and I believe women should have the option to abort there because one, it's self-defense, two, if they have other family who depend on them they have the right to be able to ensure they can be there for their families, three, one way one life is lost, the other way possibly two. I kinda like life. Usually. With rape, I'm kinda....fencing. I do agree that abortion isn't right in those cases, but some of them I really start to feel iffy on. Usually it's healthier to go through with the birth, emotionally and physically, (physical risk goes under the endangerment heading) but sometimes there are people who really can't go through a rape childbirth and end up severely depressed, which actually puts it back into physical risk considering a lot of the time it leads to suicide attempts. So I guess I stick with danger being the only one. Which has been permitted centuries. Actually, abortion was legal before the first kick up until scientists learned life begins at conception; it was only then that they outlawed it. I hardly think 98% of people who abort have no regrents, unless I've only met people from the 2% and that the 10-15% of women (in the US alone....and that's if I take the lowest statistic out there) who are forced to have abortions have no regrets at all and in fact thank the person who forced them to kill their babies.....but hey, maybe some women just plain love people forcing them into things involving serious health risks and certain death.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2005 3:50 pm
I agree with you, silently, about there being no time when an abortion is ok if the mother is going to die then she should not have gotten pregnant in the first place, and if the woman was raped then it is kind of what you were taught in preschool but on a much larger scale if someone hit you and you hit them back both of you would get in trouble for hitting and if you are raped and then you abort that child then you have just hurt someone, and even though you were hurt that does not justify what you did
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 12:12 pm
(Sorry it took so long to post today - I have to correct [literally] 300 forms and then print them out and re-check'em for errors. Blargh. xp )
Basically, my viewpoint on abortion is that it isn't right period. If the woman's life is in danger, then I feel it's basically a chance scenario, and therefore the woman should get special care while in the hospital, but she should still try and have the child. After all, killing off an innocent, especially an unborn innocent or a really young one, for yourself is kind of a major no-no in my book. With rape I basically feel the same way - the child did nothing to the mother, and was merely "at the wrong place at the wrong time", just like the mother. Therefore, it's not the child's fault that the mother was raped, and the child should not be punished because of that. If the mother doesn't want to keep the child, then she should put the child up for adoption and at least give it a chance at life. On the other hand, if the mother doesn't even want to parent the child, then she should have been more careful. I know that sounds extremely cold, but seriously, there are so many precautions a mother can take to prevent herself from being impregnated, and there aren't many circumstances where a guy could get away with rape unless the woman didn't try to fight back - basically with a gun he could force her into doing anything he wants, right? Well, the guy wouldn't even present a gun if the girl wasn't alone, so therefore it's pretty much a given that a woman shouldn't go out alone in strange places, especially at night. I forget who it was, but one of you posted on here that you had an experience where a guy had drug you into the guy's bathroom and he tried to have his way with you, but you fought back. That's what I'm talking about - fighting back. In casual scenarios where the woman WOULD be alone normally, there usually isn't much of a chance to hide a concealed weapon. Therefore, the woman can fight back, and so she can avoid being raped (if she knows where to aim, which should be pretty obvious. Teeth also work well if you can reach an arm or such.)
So basically, I feel that women could do more to protect themselves, and a child should not be punished (unborn or not) just because the mother was careless, ill-prepared, selfish, etc. Yeah, I know, it sounds majorly cold-hearted, but I just don't think it's right to harm a child just to save a mother who has already had a chance to live her life unlike the child.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:04 pm
Abortion just makes me want to SCREAM! scream
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2005 7:30 pm
A quick note: While acknowledging that the unborn child isn't at fault in any pregnancy scenario, including rape, saying that a rape victim shouldn't have "allowed him/herself to become a victim," is one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard. Many times these people are overpowered beyond any shred of their control and are lucky to escape the situation with their own lives. Saying that a woman is responsible for being raped is ALMOST like saying a baby is responsible for being aborted - like you put it, wrong place and wrong time.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2005 9:51 am
symphonic A quick note: While acknowledging that the unborn child isn't at fault in any pregnancy scenario, including rape, saying that a rape victim shouldn't have "allowed him/herself to become a victim," is one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard. Many times these people are overpowered beyond any shred of their control and are lucky to escape the situation with their own lives. Saying that a woman is responsible for being raped is ALMOST like saying a baby is responsible for being aborted - like you put it, wrong place and wrong time. Sorry, guess my argument had the wrong impact, huh? It's really hard to word it correctly, but basically once the rape incident turns towards abortion the situation is between the mother and the child. Now, the child didn't even choose to exist, whereas the mother could have taken precautions to the best of her ability. The mother has also had a chance to live her life, whereas the child has not. So basically, between the two, I'd say that the child's right to life basically overrides the mother's ability to choose, and she should always have the child. Now, if it were just a rape incident, between the woman and the man, and there's no child involved, I'd say the man would be the one entirely responsible for his actions, and therefore he should be punished for them. The woman does hold some responsibility since she wasn't careful, but the man definitely holds so much responsibility that he should be punished for it. ((sighs)) That's where the rape argument gets confusing to most, especially pro-choicers. They feel that if the woman shouldn't be punished for the rape crime then the baby shouldn't be allowed to exist since pregnancy is pretty painful at times. ((shrugs helplessly)) It's something I'm having a hard time finding an argument for.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2005 8:38 pm
"Holds responsibility because she wasn't careful" doesn't cut it. Please refrain from using your ignorant thought that all rape victims are wandering around dark allies at night. I'm sorry if it's easier for you to always blame the woman for her pregnancy, but in the case of rape, both the mother and the child are victims.
Heaven forbid you actually feel pity for the hundreds of rape victims whose homes are broken into and who are raped in the very place they are supposed to be most safe.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2005 10:08 am
I agree with those too. I'm a new member also hey everybody *waves dorkishly* sweatdrop
Although this is one topic I've been hit with. I know that girls can begin their menstrual period as young as age 10 maybe even a year earlier. By this time they are able to have children themselves at such an early age. What if a ten year old child were raped and forced to carry and give birth to a child all on it's own. It's like a child having a child...I don't really know how to answer this one at all. I'm still against them aborting it and I guess either way it would be emotional trauma for her. I think maybe she would even have to endure being slanderized by other kids at school for being raped or pregnant etc. but only if other people found out about it of course. How do I answer this one?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|