I fully agree with you mate, abortion cannot even be considered "killing" something. Because that "something" isn't someone to kill in the first place. It's just getting rid of a simple reaction in woman's organic tissue like you said yourself.

Last edited by NkdMasterX at 6:02 pm, May 27 2010

________________

A fetus younger than 12 weeks is not considered a "person" yet because it does not react to stimulus and does not act on its own (aka move, kick...). The general medical opinion is that if it does not move on its own (brain-waves included in "movement"), it has no detectable consciousness and thus is not "alive".
That is why (in many countries) it is allowed to abort a fetus up to that age. Afterwards, it is considered a crime if the life of the mother was not endangered.

Personally, I believe that every human has the right to decide if they want to produce offspring and if they accidently did (even if it was an accident that occured due to unreasonable risk-taking), it is within their rights to abort.
But I consider it an insult if a man, who will never be in this situation since he can just as well walk away, talks about "murder".
Abortion not only hurts the new "life" it takes, but also the woman that makes the decision and if I were to decide, only women would be allowed to build laws around this.
But this is the woman in me talking, not reason.

I also believe that women should have the choice.You know though men don't have much rights when it comes to these kind of matters when shouldn't they really? I mean half of his genes are in that fetus, he is also responsible for its 'creation'.It affects his life as well. Most men won't walk away though and having the child will also affect his life as well because if he is a decent man then he will be also supporting the child. In my country also the father has to pay child support and so on. So on the contrary I believe men should have rights as well and they don't have enough rights when it comes to children. There is this perception amongst some people that mothers tend to care more for their children and also when it comes to child custody women seem to have the upper hand which is unjustified for me because I believe men can love their children as much if not more than their mothers. Women are being affected more in terms of delivering the baby etc but after all that is over I believe both are being affected equally and that should be taken into account.


________________
Angel Beats--best anime of the 2010 spring season

A fetus is not a living being during the first trimester in my opinion because it does not think or feel or function at all on its own so saying that taking out a lump of lifeless flesh is murder is quite a stretch in my mind. Abortion should be a woman's choice since it's her body and her burden to deal with; however, three months is more than enough time to make a decision to abort a fetus and I find it unethical to do so after that. In short, women should be able to choose to have an abortion in the first three months, but not after that (unless there is a severe health issue).

Guys stop complicating things, with it's a fetus and it's not alive crap. the fact of the matter is prevention is better than cure. one should not get themselves in a situation where they require an abortion. there are so many contraception so shouldn't a person think about it before starting a potential life, the terminating it. I am against, those who have had multiple abortion as if it was normal.

when it's rape or life and death situation then it become a different story.
If it rape, the person is emotionally strong enough and has the right support maybe, just maybe they should have that child it could become a blessing.



________________
.
http://westsiders2.deviantart.com/

Your statement has a "a person trapped in a well shouldn't be saved because he shouldn't have been playing around the well in the first place" tone to it.

People are not robots. People make mistakes. Expecting anything else is just plain insanity. Woman who have abortions performed on them rarely TRIED to get pregnant; if they're aborting, they usually became pregnant because they didn't use or didn't know how to use contraception, or said contraception failed to work as intended.

Does anyone really get pregnant and then abort it over and over? I can only imagine that as being a rare or almost non-existant scenario. The whole process isn't exactly pleasant for anyone involved, I wouldn't imagine it as being cheap either if you're doing it several times over... If anyone is actually doing that...do we really want them to reproduce?

Last edited by mattai at 1:14 am, Jun 22 2010

________________
"It is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."

Of course, men can love their children as much as women.
I was never talking about the love of a parent which can only be understood when experienced (in my opinion).
(And we are talking about abortion here, so no need to stress the time after the child is born.)

Even though the child consists of both it's parent's DNA, it grows inside the womans body for 9 months. This is an undeniable difference in connection, I believe.
Biologically speaking, woman also invest way more then men into bearing offspring. They feed the fetus with their body and carry it around with them until it is ready to be born.
Men contribute in giving sperm. After this, there is no rational need for them in the process of childbearing. Not that they don't want to, but they don't have to.
A woman has to live with that organism growing in her body. Men don't.
There is no argument, nothing a man can do, that changes this fact.
Thus giving the woman the right to decide, I think.
(Also, men produce a lot more sperm then woman produce eggs and could reproduce many times a day. Woman can reproduce over the course of 3-4 days maximum every month.
For a man, a lost chance is one in a million. Not so for women.)

Hmm but you are only thinking in the short time effects regarding abortion. If you take into account the time after the child is born and who has to pay for the child's needs, take care of the child and so on then men should also have a say on the matter. Because say if woman doesn't want to carry out abortion, but the man wants her to because he believes at that time he is simply not able to cope with paying for the child's needs etc then that is a logical enough reason for the man to have a say, because even if he doesn't want to at that stage he still will have to pay child support for that child that the woman decided to have. Ofcourse biologically they don't have anything to do during those 9 months but you should take into account what happens after because when you are making the decsion about whether to abort or not, people would think about the long term effects.


________________
Angel Beats--best anime of the 2010 spring season

That is why we have a judiciary.

In cases of rape, incest, or extreme deformity/prenatal complications, I think it definitely should be allowed. Should not be allowed if the girl/woman decides to have some 'fun', then has a change of mind and wants a refund.

I'm for abortion simply because not giving them the choice unjustly removes their basic human rights.

I'm against abortion. Even if you say that, "It's just blood," that blood already has a life. Don't say that you can't support the child. You could give life to it, then give up for adoption. Just don't kill someone who has not done anything wrong.

However, abortion is at times approved due to medical reasons like during pregnancy when there's a need to choose between the life of the mother and the child.

You are incorrect in calling it a "person". It's not a "person" until it has been birthed. Until that event occurs, the organism does not have a right to life. The germs on my hands have life. I feel no empathy for them when I end that life with antibacterial soap. A zygote is no more complex than the germs on my hands. I don't feel any remorse for ending that life either, especially when I have the choice between aborting that organism or forcing a woman to undergo the dangers, pains and trauma of childbirth.

Also, giving a child up for adoption places a burden on our government which is already suffering from immense national dept. The bare minimum to raise a child in the US is $118,590 USD*. An abortion costs around $350. I don't know about you, but I'd rather my tax dollars go towards preventing another "ms. teen mom" and then use the rest to send her off to college. Independent studies show that those who complete a post-secondary level of education enjoy a much higher quality of of life then those who don't**. If you wish to deny people that opportunity for a decent living by continuing to support the "pro-life" agenda, then I would consider you far more of an evil person than any supporter of aborting unborn organisms.

*statistics come from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Estimates are based on 1990-92 Consumer Expenditure Survey updated to 2001 dollars using the Consumer Price Index.

**Study: Higher Education Improves Quality of Life for Recipients, Society
‘Education Pays’ Report Showcases Importance of Access to Educational Opportunities;
http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/185478.html

you are also incorrect in saying that baby(organism in your definition) doesn't have the right to live.Its not your choice to decide what should live and what shouldn't

don't make the unborn baby has the same level as the organism zygote.

Well, I'm against abortion and wouldn't mind for my tax money used to raise another life into this world.

if a mother does not want her child, do you really think she would take care of it?