Abortion opinions

[drew84]

I'm pro-choice and so is everyone that I know. To me unless a contraceptive that is both 100% effective and safe is invented then people should just accept the fact that it's around and legal in some countries whether they like it or not. I believe one thing to decrease the number of abortions is a better sex education and more effective contraceptives.
Of course there are people that don't like to use condoms so there should be more funding and research made to invent a new safe sex thing (without using condoms) and a new contraceptive. One could be something that vaccinates people against STDs and HIV and the other could be a contraceptive that is 100% effective and safe for both women and men to use but make them in a way that they don't interfere with each other and also not be effected by medication, one example is that anti-biotics interferes with the effectiveness of the birth control pill so if woman is on the pill but catches a cold and take anti-biotics then there’s a chance that she will get pregnant cause the pill won’t be as effective. So there must be a contraceptive invented that won't be effected by medication.
The contraceptive one for men could maybe stop the sperm from maturing or make them have shorter life spans once they are inside a woman and the contraceptive one for women could maybe allow her menstrual cycle to happen but accurate the life span of the egg once it's released or it could make her womb, uterus and cervix into a death trap for both sperm and egg.
Should a man or a woman who is using the contraceptive one decide to come off it to start a family then they will be fertile again within days, weeks or months but of course they can keep on taking the vaccine for STDs and HIV. Of course giving if they are giving enough funds and more research to do those do separate things but could both be used at the same time then hopefully they will be invented, developed and used.
Something like those will come eventually so maybe if that happens abortions could be a thing of the past. Even if those things do happen then abortions will still be around though but there won't be as many so I will still be pro-choice either way.
Although considering that all anti-abortion groups also consider contraceptives as abortion and also wants contraceptives to be banned don't seem to realise that there are 6 billion people on this planet and we are running out of room, maybe that's why there are people opposed to research to find vaccines and cures for viruses, cancers, STDs, HIV and so on.

 

[CunningStunts]

I dont agree with that 3 or 4 month mark at all. I myself am Strong Pro-choice. I'll tell you why I dont agree with that. Most of the time when a woman is debateing wether or not she is going to have a abortion, most of the time she come to the decision real early. As for the woman who find out that the baby there having has multiple birth defects, They dont find out until a late period in their pregnancy. That's why you have many late term abortions.

Certainly if the baby has a serous birth defect or something, that would be different. But otherwise, people are on wait lists a year plus in the US to adopt babies.

 

[Rattrap]

I do not understand people who want to legislate moralityProstitution,Drugs(war on drugs a joke),Abortion,etc.....

The Republican/Bible Thumpers/Segregationist/ will insist that we should be totally independent in financial matters ,but they want to interfere in our personal lives?:eek:

Not to say I agree, but to understand why people want to legislate such a thing is pretty simple:

Abortion = murder.

As soon as the sperm fertilizes the egg, that is a new human life, and to abort that human life is murder.

It's the second point that I feel is to be hotly debated. I quite disagree with the notion that a fertilized egg constitutes human life. It constitutes a couple of cells. Cells die constantly, all the time, when virtually anything happens. You sniff a marker, and you've just killed more cells than constitutes a fertilized egg. The backup argument then is usually that it represents the possibility of human life, but that's a damned slippery slope that you aren't going to be able to balance on. If you've never heard the Monty Python song singing about every sacred sperm, please do. Look up the lyrics if nothing else.

I'm pro choice up until the 3 month "cut off". After that, I believe that it's infanticide.

I suppose I'm in this middle camp - the "up to a certain point". Oddly enough, this sort of ties into a conversation once I had with a Vegan. I asked him where exactly the lines were drawn - animals were a no-no, as is well-known, but out went insects as well. Going to less defined creatures like sponges and what-not, his answer was along the lines of "Well, I suppose we draw the line at things that have a nervous system."

That can feel. Well, as we recognize such (cells, after all, have more or less the same functions as we do). I guess I feel the same way about abortions, insofar as I feel death is wrong (which I don't, to be honest).

If a woman can't make the decision to have an abortion during the early stages of pregnancy and waits too long than she needs to just have the thing.:2 cents:

I like to think this way, but I recognize that having never been will never be in such a position, I can't really say.

I dont agree with that 3 or 4 month mark at all. I myself am Strong Pro-choice. I'll tell you why I dont agree with that. Most of the time when a woman is debateing wether or not she is going to have a abortion, most of the time she come to the decision real early. As for the woman who find out that the baby there having has multiple birth defects, They dont find out until a late period in their pregnancy. That's why you have many late term abortions.

Good ol' ethics. Slippery slope stuffs: should we fight and strive to keep those alive who are dependent and unable to live functional lives (i.e., legislate against abortions even in cases where defects are detected)? The unborn or not? Why? Because it's 'right'? Or that every human, whole or not, has the right to live?

I suppose I don't agree with that. No more than I agree that every creature everywhere has the 'right' to live. Those that aren't equipped for survival don't.

...but here I am addressing possible arguments that haven't even been brought up! More ammo for discussion, if nothing else then.

 

[Bigoldowls]

It's interesting to note that this argument about abortion is a peculiar American subject. Every time there is the Presidential election this topic gets an airing.

In the UK we have had legalised abortions for about four decades now - we've had the debate, the pro-choice lobby won, the majority accept their view and now we all get on to discuss other day-to-day subjects.

 

[girk1]

It's interesting to note that this argument about abortion is a peculiar American subject. Every time there is the Presidential election this topic gets an airing.

In the UK we have had legalised abortions for about four decades now - we've had the debate, the pro-choice lobby won, the majority accept their view and now we all get on to discuss other day-to-day subjects.

I wish we could be as civil & openmided about a woman's right to abortion here as you are in the UK. It seems that the only seriuos oppostion to abortion in UK is gestation & "how late is too late to have an abortion".(I do see however,where you dropped the period for legal abortion from 28 to 24 weeks back in the nineties due to increased technology) I assume that Gestation period is the only debate there & not whether abortion should be banned altogether? Which is reasonable.

Politicians here in America KNOW that the average American is uninterested in politics & BOTH (major) Parties use emotional issues such as ABORTION,GUN CONTROL,etc.... to get their party bases mobilized in order for them to get out & vote. And there is a very strong religious element here in the US who want abortions banned & impose their religious values on other citizens. So this is a battle that will go on for some time.