|
|
| there is no way to do a poll on abortion because there are too many view points to consider is something so important. |
| gold 1 |
|
17% |
[ 3 ] |
| gold 2 |
|
29% |
[ 5 ] |
| narf. |
|
52% |
[ 9 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 9:50 am
Being that abortion is the most hotly debated topic in the US since slavery, now I want to lay down some ground rules. I would LOVE to hear everyone's opinion, and I WANT people to try to convince other people to change their opinion. but NO ad hominium (Sp) attacks (e.g. ??you are an immoral a*****e if you believe??). Sometimes people do not realize they are doing this. A way to avoid (although not 100%) this is to never use the word ?you? or derivative of that.
Ok, that said, I?m going to start with my view: I was once pro-life with exception to rape and ?health.? I didn?t even think incest was a good reason for abortion. But now I?m basically pro-choice. I believe that a zygote, with such potential to be a human, deserves to have it?s right?s protected. I do believe that the only time murder is justified is in the case of self-defense, familial-defense, and national-defense. Women die unexpectedly in pregnancy and birth and post-partum, but due to effects of having been pregnant. There are a lot of times this can be predicted, but there are still cases it is not through no fault of the OB/GYN (physician). In the USA, .029% of women pass away from pregnancy related conditions (http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/ib23.html), where people have a .00019% of dying in an airplane crash. While I don?t feel that .029% is a relatively high number at all, I still thing it?s a significant enough so that anyone that fears death by pregnancy should be given the choice. I feel abortion is homicide but it?s justified when a woman fears for her life. When we have that percentage chance of death lower that waking up in the morning and walking to the door, only then, would I suppose pro-life policy. I do hope that day comes.
Now here in the part the I REALLY want to hear opinions on because it relates to something I have not yet decided. It has been shown that at least 80% of miscarriages pregnant people had fetuses that had a polysomy disorder (where there are an incorrect number of chromosomes) and there is evidence to show that the other 20% have other genetic defects. A woman?s increased chance of having a baby with Down?s syndrome the later they wait to have a child is a function of having less miscarriages, not the length of time the ovum (egg) is resting in the middle of meiosis, as what was once thought. So that being said, should abortions be allowed in such cases too being that there is a natural, although not understood process that seems to do it anyway? And if not, why not? In Medicine, we enhance natural activities all the time. And if we should let fate or higher powers decide, why don?t we just let them decide other facets of health and life?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 11:04 am
Kalorn While I don?t feel that .029% is a relatively high number at all, I still thing it?s a significant enough so that anyone that fears death by pregnancy should be given the choice. I feel abortion is homicide but it?s justified when a woman fears for her life. When we have that percentage chance of death lower that waking up in the morning and walking to the door, only then, would I suppose pro-life policy. I do hope that day comes. You also have to take into consideration how many families would disown or disrespect their daughter/sister/neice/what have you if they found out about the woman getting pregnant. This is a HUUUUUGE thing that is always overlooked. A lot of religious families out there today who are very close-minded conservative people may not support abortion but if you throw in the variable of the person getting an abortion as being their family member they very well may freak out entirely. "MY daughter is pregnant? And she's only 16?! DISGRACEFUL! She would never do a thing like that!" Said daughter would feel bad and due to her family's constant pressuring of other people not to be pregnant before marriage (this girl could've been raped or consented, either way she's still pregnant at the moment) so she'd go in and get an abortion. Now, as a Christian people expect me to be all up and arms and opposed to this. BULL. I feel that if the family is likely to harm you or kick you out or what have you for being pregnant, whether it was your fault or not, than you have a right to get an abortion because 1) (this is for Christians and I use this argument a lot) you're supposed to respect your parents(see Ten Commandments) and if that means that you gotta get an abortion after getting caught up in the moment or being dragged into a bush, so be it 2) technically it is endangering your life by not getting the abortion because churches today have become so strict and would frown on your family which would cause the family to frown on you which equals major guilt and suffering aaaand 3) if a woman is stressed, pressured, having a hard time throughout her pregnancy it is a known fact that the baby's chances of being healthy when born are slim. So, that being said about fearing for your life, I think it applies to more than just medically dying. Fear for your life could include family communication, acceptance in your church/school/what have you, how it would affect your schooling/work if you were pregnant, and a variety of many other things. All that could lead to anxiety, stress, the likes of which can all turn into problems such as depression, harmful dieting, self-inflictions, and other things that could not only harm the mother but the child. If a person has already been known to have these problems and isn't exactly thrilled to be pregnant I believe they automatically get to choose (sometimes not if their condition was serious) whether or not to keep the kid. Don't get me wrong. If a person wants to get an abortion simply so that they can go around having unprotected sex as much as she wants without having to worry about getting bloated by a kid in her tummy I'm not too supportive of that stare No offense to anybody out there who enjoys sex (who, that has experienced it, doesnt? well...some...thats not the point), I'm just saying if this woman is being loose (let's assume she's not on drugs and such cuz if she were I would want her to get an abortion to save the kid due to the harm he/she would receive while in the womb) and wants to have an abortion simply so that she can have that incredible sex-encounter with one of her usuals on Saturday night I'd probably tell her she can't have an abortion because she needs to learn what happens when you go about not protecting yourself. She'd have to be responsible before the kid is even born! She can choose to put the kid up for adoption later if she wants but some people simply need to learn responsibilty and consequences for not taking a hint when the condom aisle is PACKED with many varieties of protection. As for that last paragraph you wrote Kalorn, no clue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 11:15 am
ScarredImage ...(let's assume she's not on drugs and such cuz if she were I would want her to get an abortion to save the kid due to the harm he/she would receive while in the womb)... i really do not disagree with you in general in the point the life can mean more than just dying, but i think dying is the most important point. also they phase above doesn't sit well with me. i understand the point of view of "burning the village to save it" but i disagree with it. agreeing to disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:36 pm
My view is once it takes it's first breath, it can be considered human, as it will finally have met all the qualifications for it to be considered a living human.
Though I would like to add, that my personal views on abortion do not, at all, conflict with the fact that I believe abortion should be legal (and should be legal to the point I put above).
Personally, if I were given the choice, I do not think there would ever be a case where I would personally choose abortion. I would also like to add that, even with legalized abortion, I would personally hope that the percentage of abortions would be 0%. However, like I said earlier, I want the choice of whether or not I can have an abortion.
I would like to bring in the topic of the usage of contraceptives, such as a condom; as well as the illogical position of those who are for the usage of contraceptives and against abortion. What I am asking is, how is it logical to be for contraceptives (which decreases the chances of getting pregnant) and be against abortion (which decreases the chances of giving life to a potential human.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:02 pm
chaoticpuppet My view is once it takes it's first breath, it can be considered human, as it will finally have met all the qualifications for it to be considered a living human. Though I would like to add, that my personal views on abortion do not, at all, conflict with the fact that I believe abortion should be legal (and should be legal to the point I put above). Personally, if I were given the choice, I do not think there would ever be a case where I would personally choose abortion. I would also like to add that, even with legalized abortion, I would personally hope that the percentage of abortions would be 0%. However, like I said earlier, I want the choice of whether or not I can have an abortion. I would like to bring in the topic of the usage of contraceptives, such as a condom; as well as the illogical position of those who are for the usage of contraceptives and against abortion. What I am asking is, how is it logical to be for contraceptives (which decreases the chances of getting pregnant) and be against abortion (which decreases the chances of giving life to a potential human.) I think if abortion were legalized and people actually had a choice less women would get an abortion/consider it. I mean...that may sound odd but if you think about it a lot of people are saying "I WANNA BE ABLE TO CHOOSE!" not because they WANT an abortion but because 1) it's a protest 2) they want the freedom of choice and 3) it's a protest (protestors unite! lol...no i dont protest). It's kinda like giving a kid the choice of his music. Some parents don't let their kids choose at all, which causes them to rebel behind their backs. Other's let them choose within limits, most of the time no rebelling is done. And then there are the parents who let their kids choose no matter what. They have no need to rebel PLUS most times they pretty much listen to "appropriate" music. So pretty much, IMO, if you give someone a choice they're more likely to choose the right thing. Take that choice away and they're gonna rebel simply because you're not giving them any freedom. As for your comment Kalorn, I agree that the child shouldn't have to be killed but if you think about it if the mother is already an alcoholic/druggie than the chances of the baby being healthy, even after only a few weeks, is slim. My neighbor (who is adopted) has a learning disability because his mom was a heavy drinker when she was pregnant. Some kids can manage and if the mom agrees to back off on her habits, great! But if she's gonna abuse herself and the kid...that's just messed. But I'll agree to disagree if you wish smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:12 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:12 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:44 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 8:33 pm
Oh, just so we have the legal terms for killing, here they are: The following definitions of killing apply only to humans. If it is not a human, then the following definitions do not apply. Justifiable Homicide: a killing without evil or criminal intent, for which there can be no blame, such as self-defense to protect oneself or to protect another or the shooting by a law enforcement officer in fulfilling his/her duties. Homicide:the killing of a human being due to the act or omission of another. Included among homicides are murder and manslaughter, but not all homicides are a crime, particularly when there is a lack of criminal intent. Manslaughter:the unlawful killing of another person without premeditation or so-called "malice aforethought" (an evil intent prior to the killing). It is distinguished from murder (which brings greater penalties) by lack of any prior intention to kill anyone or create a deadly situation. There are two levels of manslaughter: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter includes killing in heat of passion or while committing a felony. Involuntary manslaughter occurs when a death is caused by a violation of a non-felony, such as reckless driving... Murder: the killing of a human being by a sane person, with intent, malice aforethought (prior intention to kill the particular victim or anyone who gets in the way) and with no legal excuse or authority. In those clear circumstances, this is first degree murder. By statute, many states consider a killing in which there is torture, movement of the person before the killing (kidnapping) or the death of a police officer or prison guard, or it was as an incident to another crime... Second degree murder is such a killing without premeditation, as in the heat of passion or in a sudden quarrel or fight. Malice in second degree murder may be implied from a death due to the reckless lack of concern for the life of others... All definitions provided by http://dictionary.law.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 8:36 pm
I think that there should be a line to define where life begins. However, I don't have the expertise to say where that line belongs. It seems logical that it would be where the brain is complete, but I can't say for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 11:40 pm
SyphaBelnades I think that there should be a line to define where life begins. However, I don't have the expertise to say where that line belongs. It seems logical that it would be where the brain is complete, but I can't say for sure. the brain is not complete even after birth. but it's there after the first trimester.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 10, 2005 11:42 pm
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 7:47 am
I am pro-choice. I do acknowledge though that it would be somehow hypocritic to support abortion, but condemn the person (let's say for instance a doctor) who kills a baby right after its birth.
This issue is very tricky and it somehow inerfers with my beliefs in human rights. When is a fetus considered human? Only after birth? I really don't know about it. Maybe a little fetus can already think and feel, we don't know about it because we can't remember if we were thinking when we were fetuses.
It is somehow scary to think about the possibility, that we as well could have been aborted. But then, we wouldn't be here today. We wouldn't be the same, so it probably wouldn't matter that much.
If we pay so much attention about valueing life, why do we think the death penalty is OK, but abortion is not? Two lives, one is justified to kill, one not? What if we knew that the fetus is going to be a criminal when it grows up? Would it then be OK to kill it? In order to prevent damage that the little guy/gal could do?
I believe that it should be a woman's/parent's choice if she/he wants a kid. If there's no financial back up for the kid, it will grow up in poverty and misery, which could possibly lead to the kid becoming a drug addict, alcoholic, domestic abuser or criminal. Which is what we don't want in our society, right?
Also, teen pregnancies aren't rare anymore. Irresponsible behaviour among teens is something understandable. Teens often aren't conscious about the consequences of their actions and therefore don't think twice before getting laid. Birth control, condoms? Who needs it? It just bothers us and prevents to have 100% fun!? Right? As a teen mother/father we would suddenly have a huge responsibility on us. We weren't even able to be responsible for ourselves in the first place, how could we possibly take care of another human being and make sure that the same thing doesn't happen to our kid? Young grandmas and grandpas!!!!????
Adoption would be an alternative, but is there a guarantee, that my kid will find a caring and loving foster family? No, there isn't. Also, personally it would be very tough for me to give up my own kid, yes, even if I was pregnant now (I'm 17). Foster kids might end up being passed around like a gift nobody likes or wants. What psychological damage would that bring for a little kid? It would be unbearable for me, but for a 4 year old? Therefore my conclusion: adoption isn't always the best option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 11:20 am
Kalorn SyphaBelnades I think that there should be a line to define where life begins. However, I don't have the expertise to say where that line belongs. It seems logical that it would be where the brain is complete, but I can't say for sure. the brain is not complete even after birth. but it's there after the first trimester. Really? Someone had told me something else, once. I guess my idea doesn't really make much sense then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 11, 2005 1:01 pm
SyphaBelnades Kalorn SyphaBelnades I think that there should be a line to define where life begins. However, I don't have the expertise to say where that line belongs. It seems logical that it would be where the brain is complete, but I can't say for sure. the brain is not complete even after birth. but it's there after the first trimester. Really? Someone had told me something else, once. I guess my idea doesn't really make much sense then. my brother thinks that the only true evil is the causing of pain (physical or emotional) and so to the best of our knowledge, no emotional or physical pain is cause without a neuro-active brain, and a brain that sends and receives action potentials is formed by the end of the first trimester. so he feels that anyone should be able to abort a fetus until then. before that it is a lump of cells. PS, in case it hasn't been made very obvious already, i have extensive biological/physiological education, so if i ever use a word that someone doesn't understand, please please please feel free to ask what something means. i promise you i will not think anyone is stupid for not knowing. there are still plenty of words and terms and concepts that i don't know either. i have been so emerged that i forget how to speak English sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
