[Insert abortion here]

mind_dependency:

So you think that people should be more responsible, and you'd rather people didn't choose to have abortions at all. But you realise that abortions will happen no matter what and you'd prefer that people get them done at a doctors than just throwing themselves down the stairs?

I can totally accept your opinion in that case. There are a few people on here who seem to have very un-realistic views on the world but i can see your not one of them.

That's the main importance to what I think, but you're right, I do realise that abortions won't stop happening.
The people on her are more passionate about their opinions (just like you are) rather than unrealistic, it's just the difference on personal opinion that seperates them vastly.

Misanthropist:

mind_dependency:

So it's repsonsible t put kids up for adoption?

Adoption isn't exactly a great outcome for kids, it's not like they all get adopted. And if abortion was banned worldwide and all those unwanted children were put into orphanages it would be ridiculous.

Also it isn't cheap to put your kids in an orphanage, it isn't cheap to have a kid with all those check ups, tests etc... There's the 9+ months of your life that are messed with for something you don't even want.

In my mind putting a child up for adoption is more responsible than killing it.
I never said abortion should be banned worldwide, because if it was people would just find more dangerous ways of getting rid of what they didn't want.

Adoption has serious consequences. They go there whole life with the thought that they are unwanted and trying to find there parents.
You don't "kill" babys that haven't even had a life or actually realize life exists.

Opheliac_666:

Misanthropist:

mind_dependency:

So it's repsonsible t put kids up for adoption?

Adoption isn't exactly a great outcome for kids, it's not like they all get adopted. And if abortion was banned worldwide and all those unwanted children were put into orphanages it would be ridiculous.

Also it isn't cheap to put your kids in an orphanage, it isn't cheap to have a kid with all those check ups, tests etc... There's the 9+ months of your life that are messed with for something you don't even want.

In my mind putting a child up for adoption is more responsible than killing it.
I never said abortion should be banned worldwide, because if it was people would just find more dangerous ways of getting rid of what they didn't want.

Adoption has serious consequences. They go there whole life with the thought that they are unwanted and trying to find there parents.
You don't "kill" babys that haven't even had a life or actually realize life exists.

That's my major arguement against adoption. Some kids wind up in foster homes that are terrible and abusive, or just live their entire lives in the system.

I'd rather abort a baby than give it a life of suffering.

NEW BRAUNFELS, Texas (Reuters) - A Texas legislator has proposed that pregnant women considering abortion be offered $500 not to end their pregnancies.

That disgusts me.
Let's bribe women to keep unwanted children.

druscilla; callmedru:

NEW BRAUNFELS, Texas (Reuters) - A Texas legislator has proposed that pregnant women considering abortion be offered $500 not to end their pregnancies.

That disgusts me.
Let's bribe women to keep unwanted children.

Well, I read somewhere that they want to start paying inner city women to have abortions.

WeFoundTheDuck:

druscilla; callmedru:

NEW BRAUNFELS, Texas (Reuters) - A Texas legislator has proposed that pregnant women considering abortion be offered $500 not to end their pregnancies.

That disgusts me.
Let's bribe women to keep unwanted children.

Well, I read somewhere that they want to start paying inner city women to have abortions.

Both of those ideas are terrible and disgusting.

I'm pro-choice. I believe that if the girl is raped, then it's okay. It's her choice.
But also, since I'm Christian, I believe that if two people have sex unprotected then it's wrong to get an abortion. It's their decision.

So I'm pretty much pro-choice.

I'm not going to read through all the posts, but it looks like most people on here associate abortion with slutty, knocked-up teens who want to avoid parental responsibilities.

What about if a couple find out that their unborn baby will have a serious mental ilness or disability? If that means giving birth to a child who will live most of their life in pain - is it kinder to end their suffering now?
Or - and I'm going to be criticised for my choice of example here - a starving family living in a third world country who know that their 6th/7th/8th child will be born into poverty and hunger?

I'm not completely decided on the issue myself. I think abortion can sometimes be the lesser of two evils, but it must always be seen as a last resort.

rehabreject:

I'm not going to read through all the posts, but it looks like most people on here associate abortion with slutty, knocked-up teens who want to avoid parental responsibilities.

What about if a couple find out that their unborn baby will have a serious mental ilness or disability? If that means giving birth to a child who will live most of their life in pain - is it kinder to end their suffering now?
Or - and I'm going to be criticised for my choice of example here - a starving family living in a third world country who know that their 6th/7th/8th child will be born into poverty and hunger?

I'm not completely decided on the issue myself. I think abortion can sometimes be the lesser of two evils, but it must always be seen as a last resort.

No, I agree with you.

Tigger:

I'm pro-choice. I believe that if the girl is raped, then it's okay. It's her choice.
But also, since I'm Christian, I believe that if two people have sex unprotected then it's wrong to get an abortion. It's their decision.

So I'm pretty much pro-choice.

I like how you're a Christian and pro-choice.
I think a lot of Christians seem to forget God gave us the right to choice.

I'm really not sure where i stand. Today we were doing an assessment on a certain issue and i chose abortion. I was looking through pictures and it's just sick what they do. Of course personally i wouldn't do it. But i'n still not sure whether it is right for other people to make that decision. In the end, a baby is a living human being whether it is in the womb or not.

natz_au:

I'm really not sure where i stand. Today we were doing an assessment on a certain issue and i chose abortion. I was looking through pictures and it's just sick what they do. Of course personally i wouldn't do it. But i'n still not sure whether it is right for other people to make that decision. In the end, a baby is a living human being whether it is in the womb or not.

It isn't a human being until the cells have developed to make it a human being.
Before that it's simply a mass of cells, like a flower or a bug, only less complex.
And most people don't care about picking a flower or killing a bug.
I think everyone has the right to make their own personal choice.

druscilla; callmedru:

It isn't a human being until the cells have developed to make it a human being.
Before that it's simply a mass of cells, like a flower or a bug, only less complex.

That sparks a whole new aspect of this debate: When does a foetus become a living human being? When can abortion be referred to as 'murder'?

Here are a few facts:
Week 6 - Movement of the embryo can be detected
Week 10 - Brain cells responsible for conciousness are now present (this could mean the foetus also feels pain - although there is no proof)
Week 11 - Beathing and swallowing movements can be detected
Week 12 - Gender is now obvious and foetus can respond to touch
Week 20 - Hair, eyebrows, eyelashes and nails are growing

In the UK, abortion is allowed up until week 24.

The BBC always seems to have information: www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/abortion

druscilla; callmedru:

It isn't a human being until the cells have developed to make it a human being.
Before that it's simply a mass of cells, like a flower or a bug, only less complex.
And most people don't care about picking a flower or killing a bug.
I think everyone has the right to make their own personal choice.

Flowers and bugs are not masses of cells.
A bug is an animal just like humans. It has an organ system and is therefore an organism. A flower is not a lump of cells, that is also an organism.
cell>organ tissue>organ>organ system>organism.

But I guess I could go by your logic. Everything on earth is just masses of atoms really. Why should it matter whether we destroy a bug, or you, or mount everest, because we're all just lumps of atomic structure.

The main problem with your post is that it is scientifically flawed. What you said about the flowers and bugs was all wrong.

"until the cells have developed to make it a human being"
define that stage please. I reiterate;
cell>organ tissue>organ>organ system>organism.
I guess I'm making it easier for you. Does an embryo become a human when it becomes an organism?
It begins as a sperm and an egg. This divides by mitosis to produce tissue, which goes on to form organs, and eventually an organ system, making the baby/foetus an organism. Have the cells developed enough to make it a human being?

Yeah?

Then why'd we kill them?. I mean, by 24 weeks, a baby/foetus has all those things. Yet we still let abortion happen then.

Bloodraine:

druscilla; callmedru:

It isn't a human being until the cells have developed to make it a human being.
Before that it's simply a mass of cells, like a flower or a bug, only less complex.
And most people don't care about picking a flower or killing a bug.
I think everyone has the right to make their own personal choice.

Flowers and bugs are not masses of cells.
A bug is an animal just like humans. It has an organ system and is therefore an organism. A flower is not a lump of cells, that is also an organism.
cell>organ tissue>organ>organ system>organism.

But I guess I could go by your logic. Everything on earth is just masses of atoms really. Why should it matter whether we destroy a bug, or you, or mount everest, because we're all just lumps of atomic structure.

The main problem with your post is that it is scientifically flawed. What you said about the flowers and bugs was all wrong.

"until the cells have developed to make it a human being"
define that stage please. I reiterate;
cell>organ tissue>organ>organ system>organism.
I guess I'm making it easier for you. Does an embryo become a human when it becomes an organism?
It begins as a sperm and an egg. This divides by mitosis to produce tissue, which goes on to form organs, and eventually an organ system, making the baby/foetus an organism. Have the cells developed enough to make it a human being?

Yeah?

Then why'd we kill them?. I mean, by 24 weeks, a baby/foetus has all those things. Yet we still let abortion happen then.

I was trying to point out that most people kill bugs and flowers, but don't think we should have the right to kill a mass of nothingness [basically].

druscilla; callmedru:

I was trying to point out that most people kill bugs and flowers, but don't think we should have the right to kill a mass of nothingness [basically].

I agree with you, on the mass of nothingness. The fetus can't think or reason for itself. It's not aware of anything.

WeFoundTheDuck:

druscilla; callmedru::

I was trying to point out that most people kill bugs and flowers, but don't think we should have the right to kill a mass of nothingness [basically].

I agree with you, on the mass of nothingness. The fetus can't think or reason for itself. It's not aware of anything.

Yeah but it's not like it stays like that forever. Aren't they technically potential human beings? Surely that has some sort of say in the matter. Shouldn't they have a right to life?

druscilla; callmedru:

I was trying to point out that most people kill bugs and flowers, but don't think we should have the right to kill a mass of nothingness [basically].

WeFoundTheDuck:

I agree with you, on the mass of nothingness. The fetus can't think or reason for itself. It's not aware of anything.

'mass of nothingness'

okay, what?
Wanna explain that to me in scientific terms?
p.s. 'mass of nothingness' is actually kind of fundamentally incorrect, since if something has a 'mass of...' it can't be nothing. And I'm not sure nothingness actually exists. Except in black holes or atoms.


'The foetus can't think or reason for itself. It's not aware of anything.'

neither can a newborn baby. but we kill those all the time, yah.

Well Im not crazy about it

BUT if its illegal women will get them from underground doctors who could kill the baby and them

Mgasp!:

Well Im not crazy about it

BUT if its illegal women will get them from underground doctors who could kill the baby and them

And anyway it's not our place to tell a women what she can and cant do to her body