Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: Should abortion be legal?

Voters
60. You may not vote on this poll
  • No - it is against God's will

    6 10.00%
  • No - it is murder

    6 10.00%
  • No - it is against the unborn child's rights

    6 10.00%
  • Yes - but only if the mother's life is in danger

    10 16.67%
  • Yes- but only if the mother's physical or mental health is in danger

    9 15.00%
  • Yes - in cases of rape

    15 25.00%
  • Yes - if the mother is underage

    11 18.33%
  • Yes - as long as it's early

    20 33.33%
  • Yes - it's better than bringing an unwanted child into the world

    19 31.67%
  • Yes - it should be entirely the woman's choice

    25 41.67%
  • Yes - it's just another form of contraception

    3 5.00%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 95

Thread: Should abortion be legal?

  1. #26
    目録 Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Index's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-02-05
    Posts
    169


    Country: Poland





    Quote Originally Posted by Revenant
    I would impose my idea that swindling is wrong, I would also impose the belief that murder was also wrong. It all has to do with doing one's best to protect the rights of others, and us pro-lifers believe it is protecting the fetus' rights to life and happiness.

    I agree with Kinsao's response to Sansuikan San's hyposthetical(?) question.
    Swindling or murder directly affect people whilst abortion does not. Why do you think it is your responsibility to protect the rights of others? Who put you in that position, and what makes you capable of judging whether a woman's rights are less worthy of protection than that of a fetus? I would put the rights of the mother above the rights of the fetus because she is already a functioning person and member of society who has a role and place in the world. A fetus is just a living organism that has no such position and is not even guaranteed of living after being born. I would only reconsider the legality of abortion if it was demonstratably affecting the existence of the human race due to negative population growth.

    PS Solipsism might be just one explanation for why people have abortions. What about the person who chooses not to bring a child into the world becuase the conditions for raising that child are not there and so the child may become a burden to the rest of society? In my opinion it is solipsism to consider that your opinion should apply to everyone else. It is also solipsism to suggest that human life is what the universe revolves around.

  2. #27
    No Longer a Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-03-05
    Location
    Okayama, Japan
    Age
    43
    Posts
    374


    Ethnic group
    Native American
    Country: Japan



    That is why this issue is so contraversial, cause people have completely opposite views on this. I do not believe as you do. I believe that from conception to death, the person's existence is continuously in development, and at least within the developed countries (I cannot speak for the undeveloped countries, as I know not much about them), there are other options and supports. So I don't feel it is right to intentionally deny an organism that would likely become just as you or I the right to life.

    What defines what is a person and what is not? What does having a role in society mean? Would there not already be born people who don't meet this criteria? What of those who cannot function without our continued existence?

    The debates always get a bit messy from here on out.
    "The whole purpose of religion is to facilitate love and compassion, patience, tolerance, humility, forgiveness."
    --H.H. the Dalai Lama

  3. #28
    Your Goddess is here Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Ma Cherie's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-03-04
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    469


    Ethnic group
    African American
    Country: United States



    Just a thought and this may be off-topic, but what in situations where there's a huge problem with population? I'm not saying this is right mind you, but I was wondering? I'm talking about forced abortions to control population growth, and there are some people out there who believe forced abortions are okay, but are completely opposed to voluntary abortions in countries where it's legal if a young woman decides to have an abortion.
    “All right then, I’ll go to hell”―and tore it up. It was awful thoughts and awful words, but they was said. And I let them stay said; and never thought no more about reforming.
    The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
    by Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)

  4. #29
    Gag me with a spoon Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    19-11-03
    Age
    37
    Posts
    155


    Country: United_States



    I dont get it, the arguement to keep abortion legal is that its 'not' murder, but capital punishment, which no matter what IS a form of organized murder, is legal.

    I mean, either killing is wrong, or it isnt; whats with all the wishy-washyness of the issue?
    ________________________________
    *shing*

  5. #30
    Horizon Rider Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Kinsao's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-05-05
    Location
    England
    Age
    40
    Posts
    592


    Country: United Kingdom



    I believe that killing is wrong (*whisperwhisper* except when someone really pisses me off) and am opposed to capital punishment.

    I think the question is, though, whether you consider the fetus to be another human being with equal rights to all human beings, or whether you consider it to be inferior and have fewer rights because of its extremely early stage of development.

    Of course, it's been said before and I totally agree, that if the life of the mother is at risk, her life must take priority.

  6. #31
    DON'T PANIC! Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tsuyoiko's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-05
    Posts
    979


    Country: United Kingdom



    I find it hard to agree with any arguments that look at 'potentiality'. At any given moment we can say A might become, or has a good chance to become B, but I don't think we can base our morality on it. I think moral issues have to be resolved in the present, e.g. looking at what this foetus is right now, is it OK to abort it? Looking in terms of potentiality, are we going to lock up unruly kids now, because of the likelihood they will turn into criminals? No, we deal with what they are at this moment. Yes, we do that with one eye on the future, but it is the present situation that we deal with, IMO.

    I don't really believe in the 'sanctity of life'. I believe in trying to look at a situation as a whole - I would call it a 'weak utilitarianism'. I don't accept blanket statements like 'murder is wrong', but prefer qualified statements, like 'murder is usually wrong, but we must assess each case on its own merits', which is more or less what happens in court. Is a woman wrong to kill a man who is raping her and has threatened to start on her daughter next, then kill them both? I would argue she is within her rights, if that is the only way she can defend herself and her child. Is a woman wrong to abort a foetus if she knows she cannot cope with pregnancy, childbirth and raising the child, or giving it up for adoption. I agree with those who believe that adoption is preferable to abortion, but what about the woman's right not to carry the baby to term? Pregnancy and childbirth are a big deal! I think a woman has every right to decide that she can't go through with it.

    Having said that, I think it is absolutely crucial that people are educated to understand abortion as a last resort, and that they know about contraception. I am also in favour of raising the age of sexual consent to 18 (it's 16 in the UK at present) to give the message that sex is for adults. I would also consider some way of dealing with people who use abortion as a means of contraception, although I believe they are very rare. I'm not sure what form that would take, but counselling might be a good start. Some education in just how hard it is to be a parent might go some way to preventing unwanted pregnancies as well.

    One more thing: IMO abortions should only be allowed up to the time of viability, and revised if that changes. At the moment in the UK it is 24 weeks. I think babies have been born a bit earlier than that, so perhaps it should be lowered.

  7. #32
    目録 Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Index's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-02-05
    Posts
    169


    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Revenant
    What defines what is a person and what is not? What does having a role in society mean?
    Having a role in society means that you are connected emotionally and socially to others. Since one's identity is to a large degree determined by the world in which one exists and by the reflections of one's self that come from other people, I don't consider an unborn fetus a person. Its only connection is a physical one with the mother. Therefore I think that in determining whether the rights of the mother or unborn fetus should be upheld, I would say the mother takes priority due to her inclusion and participation in the social and phenomonological world.
    Quote Originally Posted by Revenant
    Would there not already be born people who don't meet this criteria?What of those who cannot function without our continued existence?
    I'm not quite sure what you are saying here...

  8. #33
    No Longer a Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-03-05
    Location
    Okayama, Japan
    Age
    43
    Posts
    374


    Ethnic group
    Native American
    Country: Japan



    This is one of the few issues that I am a bit fanatical about. I know that both my brother and I (were abortions more easily accesible) could have easily been ended, and I know that my wife suggested an abortion at first when she first found out she was pregnant, just cause we weren't terribly financially stable. But I look at him now, and I am grateful to have him.

    Ma Cherie, the question you ask is a difficult one, and I cannot answer. The people who support forced abortions and oppose voluntary abortions do not seem consistent, but I would be interested in hearing their reasoning for this.

    Winter, I am opposed to Capital punishment, as I am opposed to anything that takes away life unnecessarily. I believe that most criminals by all rights should be locked up for the safety of others (the prison system does need some improvements though), but that a criminal still has the right to life. I am also opposed to the majority of wars, as it seems a lot of unnecessary deaths for oil, or whatever it is they are fighting over.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tsuyoiko
    I find it hard to agree with any arguments that look at 'potentiality'. At any given moment we can say A might become, or has a good chance to become B, but I don't think we can base our morality on it. I think moral issues have to be resolved in the present, e.g. looking at what this foetus is right now, is it OK to abort it? Looking in terms of potentiality, are we going to lock up unruly kids now, because of the likelihood they will turn into criminals? No, we deal with what they are at this moment. Yes, we do that with one eye on the future, but it is the present situation that we deal with, IMO.
    I have an a different view of that, since the goal of morality is happiness, then it makes sense to keep whatever ideal conditions for happiness there are as long as possible. There is a reason why we do not let suicidal people commit suicide (padded rooms), there is a reason why I do not easily let the life of a person in a coma go. All have the potential to experience happiness in the future, and so it is with the fetus. A potential criminal probably won't actually kill someone, they may rape, or hurt someone, but only a small percentage actually take the life of someone. At least I always give the benefit of the doubt to the ideal of happiness.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tsuyoiko
    I would argue she is within her rights, if that is the only way she can defend herself and her child.
    I would say she is well within her right.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tsuyoiko
    Is a woman wrong to abort a foetus if she knows she cannot cope with pregnancy, childbirth and raising the child, or giving it up for adoption.
    I would say she is. In some ways I think the option of abortion causes people to take the easier route. She may have an emotionally difficult time, but most people are more resilient than they think. After a change in conditions, even for the worse, people most often return to their original setpoint of happiness. They work towards this, as the new perceptions they take on enable them to experience more happiness again, and it is happiness that everyone is after.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tsuyoiko
    I agree with those who believe that adoption is preferable to abortion, but what about the woman's right not to carry the baby to term? Pregnancy and childbirth are a big deal! I think a woman has every right to decide that she can't go through with it.
    They are a big deal, but I absolutely believe that her discomfort for a the nine or ten months is in the best interest of the unborn being. The unborn being will then be able to experience life, and make his/her own search for happiness.
    Quote Originally Posted by Index
    Having a role in society means that you are connected emotionally and socially to others. Since one's identity is to a large degree determined by the world in which one exists and by the reflections of one's self that come from other people, I don't consider an unborn fetus a person. Its only connection is a physical one with the mother. Therefore I think that in determining whether the rights of the mother or unborn fetus should be upheld, I would say the mother takes priority due to her inclusion and participation in the social and phenomonological world.
    Do we decide lives on the role they play in society? A friendless welfare bum who lost his family in a fire, what of him? He gets a small apartment from welfare, and just a bit of money for food. He never talks to anyone, and social services checks on him once a month.

    Or let's take someone who is in a coma. They have been in a coma for quite some time, and as most coma patients go, they are neither moral persons nor moral agents. They don't have cognition, so they cannot be social people (and therefore be emotionally connected to anyone). I don't think that in their case, we can say it is alright to put them out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Index
    I'm not quite sure what you are saying here...
    What I am saying is that non-viability doesn't seem a valid reason to end anyone's existence. A fetus isn't 'viable' apart from the mother, but then so are so many people not viable without our continued assistance.

    Also, there are already a lot of people that are a burden on society, but that isn't grounds to end them, so I don't see how that justifies the end of a fetus either.

  9. #34
    目録 Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Index's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-02-05
    Posts
    169


    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Revenant
    Do we decide lives on the role they play in society? A friendless welfare bum who lost his family in a fire, what of him? He gets a small apartment from welfare, and just a bit of money for food. He never talks to anyone, and social services checks on him once a month.

    Or let's take someone who is in a coma. They have been in a coma for quite some time, and as most coma patients go, they are neither moral persons nor moral agents. They don't have cognition, so they cannot be social people (and therefore be emotionally connected to anyone). I don't think that in their case, we can say it is alright to put them out.

    What I am saying is that non-viability doesn't seem a valid reason to end anyone's existence. A fetus isn't 'viable' apart from the mother, but then so are so many people not viable without our continued assistance.

    Also, there are already a lot of people that are a burden on society, but that isn't grounds to end them, so I don't see how that justifies the end of a fetus either.
    I'm not attempting to justify ending or terminating life. As I mentioned earlier, and you yourself have too, the arguments about this can go either way and often get heated. My point however, is that in such a situation, the decision should be left to the mother (for reasons mentioned above such as role in society) rather than to a third party. In this way a mother who shares your views on the issue is able to express her freedom to those views by not having an abortion, and at the same time the mother who considers abortion a viable option is also able to exercise her right to have one. Arguments for and against abortion are more than necessary, just as any discussion about ethics, morality or indeed most issues, but in this case I think the final decision about what view to subscribe to should be left to the individual.

  10. #35
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Sensuikan San's Avatar
    Join Date
    09-02-05
    Location
    Nr. Vancouver, Canada
    Age
    76
    Posts
    346


    Ethnic group
    Anglo-Irish-Norse
    Country: Canada



    Well!

    I finally made it! Joined the club, so to speak!

    ... I received a "Red Ball" - a negative rep. point for my posts on this thread !

    and .... from the comment that came with it - I would be surprised if I was alone ...!

    Apparently someone (anonymous, of course!) ""Really doesn't agree with me" ... !

    That's all. They don't agree with me!

    I don't think my posts were offensive. I think that I was honest, open, serious, balanced and qualified in my views. I did not display vitriol, extreme language - or even try to incorporate humor into a serious debate ...

    ... but "Mr/Mrs/Ms. X or whoever" .... "Really doesn't agree with me."

    ....and didn't have the courage of their conviction .... or even courage at all ... to leave a name !

    And that and only that is what pee's me off !

    I'm old enough to not like, respect or approve of snarkey, self righteous, pompous, self serving, arrogant, snotty little cowards who hide behind anonymity!

    Had they given their name - this post would not exist. Respect would have been given as due.

    I don't agree with a lot of people on many things on the forum ... I think we can all say the same. But is that a reason (or a weak, mealy-mouthed excuse) to try to penalise?

    I think not! If that were the case - we would all, I'm sure, be handing out the "neg. reps." hand over fist - every day!

    Don't get me wrong ... and this is the serious part of my post ... I'm not concerned with the bad rep. (actually ... it amuses me! I wondered when and how I was actually going to get one ...now I know!)

    What concerns me ... and interests me deeply .. is that it should have happened on this thread!

    I feel that it demonstrates to us all just how deeply this topic is of concern, and just how seriously it is taken by all. Obviously - just by disagreeing with my point of view - "somebody" is pretty pee'd off!

    Nothing wrong with that! We all experience that feeling!

    But by the nature of their action, and knowing the status of this topic in the world ... I am prompted to ask of "somebody" :

    What's your next step?

    Will you hang around an abortion clinic, rifle at the ready ... ready to kill or maim ....and demonstrate to us all how strong is your view on the sanctity of life?

    Anonymously, of course ....

    ジョン

    P.S. - If I ever, EVER give anybody a bad rep. - I pledge here and now that I will sign it! That's the way I was brought up, and that's the way I brought up my kid.
    If you haven't been a Communist by the time you're 40 - then you don't have a heart.

    If you're still a Communist after the age of forty - you don't have a head ....

    (Denis Healey)

    If you're still a communist after the age of sixty ... you're coming to your senses again ....

    (Sensuikan San)

  11. #36
    No Longer a Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-03-05
    Location
    Okayama, Japan
    Age
    43
    Posts
    374


    Ethnic group
    Native American
    Country: Japan



    Index, the decision is already up to the mother, and beyond my vote (which would definitely not be solely dependant on the candidates view of abortions), I have little say in the matter. I would still argue, in the hopes that one of our many voices would persuade a women to allow the unborn their own existence and hopefully happiness.

    Sansuikan San, negative rep is quite normal on other forums, and are hardly so civil as the neg rep you recieved (i.e. 'you are sh*t and I hope you die' is just one of the reps I recieved). I'm surprised I haven't gotten any on this forum. I neither sign good nor bad reps, and will continue the same practice. Although, just to counterbalance the neg rep you got, shall I give you good rep.

  12. #37
    目録 Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Index's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-02-05
    Posts
    169


    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Revenant
    Index, the decision is already up to the mother
    Except in countries where abortion is illegal, unless you consider backroom ad hoc clinics at unafordable prices a good option?

  13. #38
    DON'T PANIC! Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tsuyoiko's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-05
    Posts
    979


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by Revenant
    This is one of the few issues that I am a bit fanatical about. I know that both my brother and I (were abortions more easily accesible) could have easily been ended, and I know that my wife suggested an abortion at first when she first found out she was pregnant, just cause we weren't terribly financially stable. But I look at him now, and I am grateful to have him.
    I think your personal experiences have given you a valuable perspective. If I had similar experiences I might feel differently, but the issue of abortion hasn't affected me personally. I'm glad that everything turned out well for you in the end.

    I also think that the fact people disagree can be seen in a positive light, as it encourages debate and so ensures that we think hard about important issues like this.

  14. #39
    Horizon Rider Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Kinsao's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-05-05
    Location
    England
    Age
    40
    Posts
    592


    Country: United Kingdom



    I'm very surprised that you got bad rep, Sensuikan-san. I actually went back to look at your posts, and they seem to me a very fair and balanced expression of your opinion.

    I have a personal policy that I never bad rep anyone. Generally speaking, if their posts and the views expressed in them are so offensive as to seriously piss me off, I take the line that the person must have big problems and a short bitchy comment from me isn't going to help much. It's much more constructive to debate through posting (or pms if necessary).

    I hope whoever gave it to you gets the message that, although this forum is very polite in terms of rep, it's totally cowardly not to put your name.

    And, yeah, disagreement is good, it generates the discussions. Let's keep it fair and reasonable, everyone have different opinions but that's no reason why there can't still be a civil debate.

  15. #40
    The Hairy Wookie Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Mycernius's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-02-05
    Location
    Hometown of George Eliot
    Age
    49
    Posts
    916
    Points
    21,649
    Level
    44
    Points: 21,649, Level: 44
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 1
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    English
    Country: UK - England



    I have looked over this thread since Tsuyoiko san started it. Although I voted a while back, I feel that I must finally post. I have answered to the following
    1. Yes - but only if the mother's physical or mental health is in danger
    2. Yes - as long as it's early
    3. Yes - it should be entirely the woman's choice

    Although non of them really fit my actually view, they are the closest to it. I do believe abortion should be legal, it avoids bringing unwanted children into the world and avoids backstreet abortions where the woman could easily suffer and die. The term unwanted children might seem harsh to some people, but in some cases these children would be punished, beaten and even killed by the parents if they were allowed to come to full term. There are parents in this world who have wanted children and still treated them as punch bags, how do you think an unwanted child will be treated?
    I do believe in that it should be the womans choice. As John mentioned, a womans bond to a baby is often much stronger than a mans. It is easier for a man to say get rid of the child, it is not part of us in the way that it is part of a woman. We cannot feel its first kick or the happiness that some pregnant women give off, knowing that they are carrying a new life. Some women who have undergone abortions because their boyfriend has pressured them into aborting have suffered emotional stress and depression.
    There was one choice that was not on the poll, but I feel it is important in todays modern age:
    Yes - if their is a risk of passing on severe disability.
    There are inheritable genetic conditions that are passed through families. Unborn children can now be tested to see whether they will be disabled by these conditions before the upper limit on abortions passes. While it is hard for the parents, they can have a choice of bringing up a child with a disability or aborting it. There was a programme on BBC Radio 4 called It's my story about this very subject. It is worth listening to and is available for listen again on the BBC site. You'll find it Here under It's my Story
    There is one thing I do not agree with on abortion and the whole abortion issue. That is the way that politicians, especially in the US, use it as an issue to gain votes. I find it cynical and disgusting that these people manipulate this issue to gain power. I really think that a majority of politicians, mainly men, don't really care about it. Just smile, say the right thing and get the votes

  16. #41
    Banned Achievements:
    1 year registered
    nurizeko's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-01-05
    Location
    aberdeen, scotland
    Age
    34
    Posts
    149


    Ethnic group
    Half scottish half Germanic, i got blood from austria, germany, scotland england, im a mongrol.
    Country: United Kingdom



    Yes.

    Period.

    I understand everyone has different beliefs and opinions and stuff, but what is essential about our way of life is not only should everyone be free to make their own choices, should be free to have an abortion if she so wishes, but what makes it beautiful is that you are just as free to disagree and not support abortion.


    So if you dont agree with it then thats cool, i respect that you have such a high respect for life, but, respect others, respect democracy and western values, and respect a person right and freedom to make their own choices.

  17. #42
    No Longer a Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-03-05
    Location
    Okayama, Japan
    Age
    43
    Posts
    374


    Ethnic group
    Native American
    Country: Japan



    Quote Originally Posted by Mycernius
    I do believe abortion should be legal, it avoids bringing unwanted children into the world and avoids backstreet abortions where the woman could easily suffer and die. The term unwanted children might seem harsh to some people, but in some cases these children would be punished, beaten and even killed by the parents if they were allowed to come to full term. There are parents in this world who have wanted children and still treated them as punch bags, how do you think an unwanted child will be treated?
    That is something to consider, but that also doesn't say that a child with a hard start in life won't find happiness. How many of those unwanted children are beaten? How many of those who were beaten never found happiness later in life? These would be questions I ask before drawing your conclusions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mycernius
    I do believe in that it should be the womans choice. As John mentioned, a womans bond to a baby is often much stronger than a mans. It is easier for a man to say get rid of the child, it is not part of us in the way that it is part of a woman. We cannot feel its first kick or the happiness that some pregnant women give off, knowing that they are carrying a new life.
    Not to be offensive, but I have seen some of the most glib answers off of some women, and especially young women. Answers that are offensive to even some pro-choicers.
    Quote Originally Posted by nurizeko
    Yes.

    Period.
    That's a bit authoritative, don't you think?
    Quote Originally Posted by nurizeko
    So if you dont agree with it then thats cool, i respect that you have such a high respect for life, but, respect others, respect democracy and western values, and respect a person right and freedom to make their own choices.
    But respect for one's right and freedom to make their own choices must be balanced against someone's right to life.

  18. #43
    もうすぐ卒業するんだ! Achievements:
    1 year registered
    ragedaddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-02-03
    Location
    The Midwest
    Age
    40
    Posts
    30


    Ethnic group
    Polish/Slovakian/Irish
    Country: United States



    I can understand both sides on the issue of abortion, and yes this is a very controversial topic to be dealing with. I chose to do a Dialectical paper on this subject matter in the US for my Ethics Class, and here are some of the arguments I came up with......

    One major reason why abortion should remain legal is because of its historical precedence, and how the constitution views this act. Historically, in the state of Texas, it was illegal to have an abortion except in the case of saving the mother’s life. However, in 1973 a monumental case took place in the Supreme Court, and this trial was known as Roe vs. Wade. Norma Corvey, also known as Jane Roe, was arguing against Dallas’s District attorney, Henry Wade, that it was against her rights of privacy as a woman not to be able to terminate her pregnancy. This was probably one of the most controversial as well as significant court cases in the 20th century, and the final decision was that the Supreme Court voted in a 7-2 decision which signified to deny a woman the right to abortion was unconstitutional. Justice Harry A. Blackmun was appointed the majority opinion’s Spokesperson, and he ultimately made his decision on this issue of abortion based on the 14th Amendment’s due process clause which was said to guarantee this right to privacy (abortion) and it should be upheld. Therefore, advocating for abortion to be illegal would be going against the constitution that our nation was founded on, so with this in mind abortion should still remain legal.
    (Goldman, Jeffrey. A case of Privacy: How the U.S. Supreme Court reached the decision that sparked a quarter-century of controversy, CNN.com, Retrieved October 12, 2005, from Encyclopedia Britannica Online. http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1998/roe...ories/privacy/)

    There is a huge debate on how one can consider abortion as an act of murder when there really isn’t a clear and concise explanation that determines whether a fetus is a human being. Many Pro-lifers believe that the when an egg becomes a zygote, it is considered to be a living being, but other pro-choice advocates argue that this fetus is just a part of the woman’s body until it is born. Historically, speaking the Anglo-Saxon law has never officially recognized as a fetus being a human being, so this makes a strong argument for people not being able to consider abortion an act of murder. It is very difficult for even someone to draw the line on the number of months maximum that should be allowed for an abortion, because the actual day of conception cannot always be measured accurately. Therefore, if a maximum time period was proposed then how could someone really prove that it is in fact 24 months, and what kind of proof would that have to present in order to go through with the abortion. I’ve heard arguments before that classifying a fetus as a human is rather ridiculous when if in fact it was taken out from the mother it wouldn’t be able to breathe on its own.
    (Morgentaler, Henry, "Abortion Is a Moral Choice" . The Abortion Controversy. Lynette Knapp, Ed. Current Controversies Series. Greenhaven Press, 2001. Excerpted from Henry Morgentaler, "The Moral Case for Abortion," Free Inquiry, Summer 1996. Reprinted with permission from Free Inquiry.
    Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. 12 October 2005)

    There was a recent report in the New Scientist, about the US and New Zealand conducted a study on when a fetus starts to feel pain. Before the study was conducted, the US Government made claims that a fetus could feel pain after 20 weeks. However, the study concluded that the fetus is in a sleep-like state, and that they really can feel any pain until they reach 29 weeks. There is another argument that the fetus does have a heart beat before it is born, so clearly it is very hard to clarify when or if in fact a fetus should be considered a living being. Therefore, this point signifies that abortion really can’t be seen as committing an act of murder when no one is really able to define when a fetus is actually considered a living being.
    (Coghlan, Andy & Young, Emma. Why fetuses don't feel pain. (This week: International news and exclusives) New Scientist, Sept 3, 2005 v187 i2515 p8(2) Retrieved from EBSCOhost on 10/12/05)

    In this section I will state arguments on why abortion should become illegal, and I will back up these statements with my researched material. A person not wanting an added responsibility or a person that feels that they aren’t mature enough really isn’t that good of reasons to have an abortion. There was a study done in 1987 which surveyed 1,900 patients at 30 abortion clinics on why young women as well as older ones wanted to get an abortion. The results showed that young women under the age of 18 didn’t want to have a baby due to the fact it would take away their personal freedom, and it would also interfere with school as well as personal goals. The older women wanted abortion due to the fact that they didn’t want to support another kid, and also they already had way too many responsibilities in their life. I suppose that there would be a little more understanding on what the younger girls are going through, but this lack of responsibility show not justify terminating a potential life. There are many consequences that happen in life for making poor choices, and taking the easy way out is not always justifiable. Starting in Elementary school Sex Education starts to be adding into the curriculum, so these young people know that having unprotected sex can lead to pregnancies. Therefore, if these girls and guys still decide that they will do whatever they please, then really they should have to face the consequences of having to raise a kid. The potential life should not have their chance at life due to the fact their parents are irresponsible. This topic deals with the theory of egoism, where these parents are thinking for the greater good for themselves rather than what is said to be a potential life.
    (Lunneborg, Patricia "An Unwanted Pregnancy Justifies an Abortion.” Abortion. Tamara L. Roleff, Ed. Opposing Viewpoints® Series. Greenhaven Press, 1997. Excerpted from Abortion: A Positive Decision by Patricia Lunneborg (Bergin & Garvey, an imprint of the Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc., Westport, Conn., 1992). Copyright ©1992 by Patricia Lunneborg. Reprinted with permission.
    Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. 17 October 2005)

    Right now, there is a great concern in the US that social security will soon dry up due to the fact that the birth rate is decreasing, so that means we have a lot more older folks to support through fewer younger workers. In fact the birth rate in the 1960’s was at about 24% compared to the current birth rate which is approximately 14%, so you can see there is a huge gap between past and current generations.
    (U.S.Source:World Almanac & Book of Facts, Births and Deaths; 2005, p73-73, 1/6p, http://26827.mctlibproxy.pals.msus.e...ph&an=16981937 Database: Academic Search Premier)

    It is said that many people really don’t even know that there really is an option for adoption, because a survey conducted at the abortion clinics showed that out of all the people who became pregnant only 2-3 % decided to give their kid up for adoption. That seems like a very low number, and this could reinforce that the option for adoption is not very emphasized in our society. Instead of aborting the fetus many people could help the birth rates from declining as well as making the couples who want to adopt happy. Therefore, with this in mind abortion should be made illegal, because there are better options such as adoption out there. This point sort of deals with Kant’s Kingdom of End’s in the way that not giving these fetuses a chance at life with some other loving parents treats the fetuses as a means to an end, because they really don’t have a say in any of this matter.
    (Muller , Jerry Z. "Restricting Abortion Would Be Destructive to Families.” The Abortion Controversy. Lynette Knapp, Ed. Current Controversies Series. Greenhaven Press, 2001. Excerpted from Jerry Z. Muller, "The Conservative Case for Abortion: Family Values vs. Family Planning," The New Republic, August 21, 1995. Copyright © 1995 by The New Republic, Inc. Reprinted with permission from The New Republic.
    Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. 13 October 2005)

    I will now state my position on this very controversial topic, which really involves understanding and respecting both arguments on the legality of abortion. I really feel strongly that the constitution should not be altered since it represents what guidelines are forefathers set for us, and challenging this in ruling in my opinion is wrong. I am not a woman, but with regards to abortion I could never choose to abort the Zygote (Fetus) which I fertilized. However, I feel that some people have legitimate reasons to justify an abortion, and so I cannot justify making abortion illegal. I am a member of a Catholic Parish, and I understand how they see things, but I also am a very logical thinker. The debate over when a human is considered a living being in my mind really can’t be established. I do have a friend who was a product of a rape, and he turned out to be a really fine guy. He graduated from college, never experimented with drugs, and is a pretty happy person. I guess my life would be different if his Mom decided to abort him, because we would have never had the chance to have met and become really good friends. It is true that our life is full of difficult decisions as well as responsibilities, and so we have to be the ones that examine the ethical and logical issues of an argument before making a decision. There are too many people who make impulsive decisions without thinking things through, and this later can come back to haunt them. Ethics is a very important subject to study, because it addresses all sides of the issue, and not just the single view that one has always had. Therefore, I understand why there are many people who see abortion as absolutely wrong, but I believe in our constitution as well as laws, so I feel that abortion should remain a legal act.
    ビール。。。Its what's for dinner......

  19. #44
    Conspiratorialist Achievements:
    Recommendation Second Class1 year registered
    Pachipro's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-01-05
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee
    Age
    64
    Posts
    187


    Ethnic group
    French/Irish
    Country: United States



    It is interesting that, to date, no one has selected any form of "No". Personally, I feel it should be legal and that it is a woman's right whether she wants to bring a child into this world or not regardless if she is pregnant.

    I know some will beg to differ with me on this, but in my own opinion, and based on alot of reading from different sources "outside the box" so to speak, I believe that the "soul" does not enter the body until the time of birth. Up until then I believe it is not a full fleged human being regardless of what it looks like in the womb or what the church might tell us to believe.

    I know for a fact that if abortion were legal back when I was born that I would not be alive today as my mother was only 17 at the time. Still, if she chose to abort me, then I feel that that was her right.
    Do What You Love And You'll Never Work Another Day In Your Life!

  20. #45
    Horizon Rider Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Kinsao's Avatar
    Join Date
    08-05-05
    Location
    England
    Age
    40
    Posts
    592


    Country: United Kingdom



    I don't believe that historical precedent should have a bearing on people's opinions on this issue. Important decisions should be based on reasoning and ethics, independent from from such things. Actions that might have been wrong under some circumstances could be OK under others, and vice versa. Things change.

    Oh, and by the way, Norma Corvey (Roe) actually changed her view and she became pro-life later on in her life, and said that she regretted very much what she had done regarding that court case and the resulting ruling.

    I have said before, that medical text books define life as beginning at conception. Making this into a grey area could have serious consequences for the lives and treatment of premature babies.

    Mycernius, I appreciate what you are saying about disability. But I feel that reflecting this attitude in abortion laws/debates sends out a message about what we, as a society, think about disability and people with disabilities. Of course, no-one can deny that disability is a "bad thing" in that we wouldn't wish it on people and would much rather it not happen to them... but it gives the message that people with disabilities are somehow inferior, not as good as "normal", healthy people. How would you feel if you have a disability and you know that people are getting rid of their babies because they maybe have that condition? I personally feel that people with disabilities are just as valuable and have as much to contribute to society as people who are lucky enough to be in good health. By getting rid of them you are not just denying them their existence, but you are denying a whole network of people the chance to interact with them and be involved in their life, in ways which can change many people, even if the person themself doesn't have the capacity to be aware of that.

  21. #46
    Banned Achievements:
    Recommendation Second Class1 year registered

    Join Date
    22-04-04
    Posts
    1,720


    Country: United States



    When does life begin?
    Do you have references for those medical texts?
    What are the different views?

  22. #47
    Banned Achievements:
    1 year registered
    nurizeko's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-01-05
    Location
    aberdeen, scotland
    Age
    34
    Posts
    149


    Ethnic group
    Half scottish half Germanic, i got blood from austria, germany, scotland england, im a mongrol.
    Country: United Kingdom



    But respect for one's right and freedom to make their own choices must be balanced against someone's right to life.
    But its the prospective mother's choice, welcome to the democratic west, despite mild incompetence of some politicians, we live in a free society, where we have so much freedom to decide and choose our own path.

    If a mother isnt ready for such a responsibility, and she chooses not to carry on with hte pregnancy, then that is her choice, you can disagree, but you will never have the right to dictate how she lives or what she does with her body.


    I think pachipro's got a very enlightened look on it, he's alive now so theres no risk to his life, so he can quite comfortably admit if his mother had aborted him, that was her choice, how can one have a right to life before their even born?, before their even a viable reasonably se;f-sustaining organism?.

    I know some folk dont like this being looked at from a biological point of view but it has to be.
    I believe if in the human spirit, i believe its earned as little bit as a time, and i think the current abortion laws reflect that well, i do believe by the time a child is born its on the earth for the long haul, and its life should be defended at the sacrifice of your own if you must, but inside the legal abortion time?...i think its purely the prospective mother's choice.

  23. #48
    The Hairy Wookie Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Mycernius's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-02-05
    Location
    Hometown of George Eliot
    Age
    49
    Posts
    916
    Points
    21,649
    Level
    44
    Points: 21,649, Level: 44
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 1
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    English
    Country: UK - England



    Kinsao, I see your arguement. I was not passing any judgement on those that choose this path. There are those that have lived with various disabilities and know that there is a high risk that it could be passed onto their children. Some will have children, regardless of the risk. They say that they have had a good life, despite being disabled. Other decide that they do not want to put any child through what they have been through. The Radio programme had a woman who is a carrier of a genetic disorder that causes severe learning difficulties. Her first son has this, so she decided to test any unborn children for the problem. She has aborted twice because both children would suffer the same as her son. She still regards herself as a mother of three and was very heartbroken at aborting them, but she felt it was better than having to let them live. What we have to watch out for is when the state starts to have a say in this. Just imagine what Nazi Germany would have been like if they had the technology to determine whether the unborn was fit to be born.

  24. #49
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Silverbackman's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-03-05
    Posts
    102


    Country: United_States



    I think it should be entirelly a woman's choice up to 4.5 months. Afterward I think it is immoral because it is closer to birth than not being born (as 4.5 months is the midway point between birth and conception).

    When I was younger I used to see no problem with partial-birth abortion but after watching how abortions are at such a late period (the case I saw was 8 months) it seemed very barbaric. If you look at the pictures at some of these partial birth abortions you would see this.

  25. #50
    No Longer a Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-03-05
    Location
    Okayama, Japan
    Age
    43
    Posts
    374


    Ethnic group
    Native American
    Country: Japan



    Quote Originally Posted by nurizeko
    But its the prospective mother's choice
    It is now (at least within Canada and Japan). However, the ethics of it simply being the mother's choice is questionable.
    Quote Originally Posted by nurizeko
    welcome to the democratic west, despite mild incompetence of some politicians, we live in a free society, where we have so much freedom to decide and choose our own path.
    Democracy is great. However we still have laws that should be based on ethics, and it is the ethics of this that is being discussed.
    Quote Originally Posted by nurizeko
    If a mother isnt ready for such a responsibility, and she chooses not to carry on with hte pregnancy, then that is her choice, you can disagree, but you will never have the right to dictate how she lives or what she does with her body.
    I have no right to prevent her from getting an abortion, if that is her wish, but it isn't just her body. If it were just her body, it would also have the exact same DNA as her. A fetus' DNA and mother's DNA aren't the same, and so it can't be termed as just a part of her body.
    Quote Originally Posted by nurizeko
    I think pachipro's got a very enlightened look on it, he's alive now so theres no risk to his life, so he can quite comfortably admit if his mother had aborted him, that was her choice, how can one have a right to life before their even born?, before their even a viable reasonably se;f-sustaining organism?.
    A fetus isn't viable, but we don't decide whether someone's life is worth keeping based on viability. There are people who couldn't live without our continued support. They need our money, our time, our energy, and special apparatuses to keep them alive. A fetus isn't viable apart from the mother, but then neither is a newborn viable apart from our continued assistance either.
    Last edited by Revenant; 07-11-05 at 11:47.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Abortion: Pro-life or Pro-choice?
    By Golgo_13 in forum Opinions
    Replies: 117
    Last Post: 30-08-18, 02:16
  2. Abortion Rights for underage girls
    By Mycernius in forum European News & Hot Topics
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-07-11, 08:01
  3. Catholic church vows to excommunicate abortion supporters
    By Maciamo in forum European News & Hot Topics
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 20-02-07, 18:28
  4. 1 pregnacy out of 5 ends up in abortion in Brussels
    By Maciamo in forum European News & Hot Topics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-09-06, 10:10
  5. Legal help
    By ax in forum Other Serious Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-01-05, 14:51

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •