Yet Another Abortion Thread
 

since pro-lifers weren't invited to the party, here's a thread for us (but don't worry, pro-choicers, you are all welcome here....just keep it civil, please) we all know i am pro-life, but with heavy connections to pro-choicers and those who have had abortions. all my friends are liberals. don't understand why. ;)

i've said this in other abortion threads, but i guess i can say it again here. keep in mind this is my opinion, ok? ok...this may seem harsh:

i think that while ppl have their reasons for having an abortion, it does boil down to what is best for them, not really the child. "oh, i can't handle the pregnancy" or "oh i can't handle the thought of giving my baby up for adoption" or all the "what if's".....followed by "it was best for the child" and every so often a small acknowledgement that it was "best for me, too." it's just a selfish thing. and i think terminating a pregnancy b/c something may be "wrong" with the baby is horrifying. so....special needs children are unnecessary? they shouldn't be given the same rights as other children? wow....hi, hitler. nice ta know ya. [**not calling ANYONE hitler....merely making reference that he wasn't in favor of special needs, and i doubt there are many who want the same values as him**] that whole thought process gives way to thinking that if a baby is healthy, someone would think more about giving birth to them than if they were "unhealthy".....do you at least see how that could be interpreted, and how SCARY that is? so what, we're gonna eventually be able to figure out ppl's IQ in the womb, and if it's not high enough, and if i don't know for sure how i feel about having this baby, that would be the deciding factor???? "well, he's gonna be stupid and hard to manage......eh, too hard for me and he might have a hard life, so looks like abortion time" :eek: ya know what? everyone goes through hard times in life, whether you are healthy or not. your nose could be too big, you could be too fat/skinny, flat chested, scrawny, and KIDS ARE CRUEL. that makes life hard. or, you or a loved one becomes ill with a fatal disease, or someone is hurt in a car accident, ISHT HAPPENS. for ppl who are all about ppl having the right to choose, why not give ppl the ultimate right to choose how to live their life by allowing them to LIVE in the first place?
it's not as if i don't sympathize or feel compassion for these women going through these things.....i just find it funny when democrats/liberals refer to themselves as "bleeding hearts" and then they can't even have a heart for a defensless child. then there's ppl getting in the way of JUSTICE b/c a pregnant woman was killed, and the baby dies as well....but they only want the murderer sentenced for ONE life not TWO, even though TWO were lost. why? b/c it might over-turn roe vs. wade. appalling.

it's at this point, i would like to add the phrase "in my honest opinion". thank you.

i realize not everyone sees things as i do......that abortion is selfish. i realize that some ppl see it as a brave thing for a woman to spare her child this harsh world and the harsh reality that it may have to face. but, if we look at every un-wanted or un-planned pregnancy that way, then we should have never known malcolm x, nancy reagan, nat king cole, faith hill, nelson mandela, and sorry for bringing up the name, but Jesus. (i refer to a list of adopted celebs on adoption.com...it's an interesting site). but i do agree that not every woman is up for being a mother raising a child. however, that does not mean that a woman cannot give birth.

that's all of my rant for now....until i am flamed, i guess. ;) comment away.

Ok, very interesting points and a pretty logical argument. ( I consider myself pro-choice.)

I have two questions for you:
1) I realize that the majority of abortions aren't from violent rapes, but let's say a woman gets an intruder in her house, and he rapes her. That kid is spawned out of an act of hatred, first of all, which sucks for the kid. He's going to grow up either a) raised without his biological father or b) adopted, but either way with NO KNOWLEDGE of his paternal health history. How is that ok? A lot of times there are medical things you need to know about in your background that that kid has no way of knowing.

2) You said abortions happen for selfish reasons, which I would probably agree with. What if a woman is told that she will almost certainly die if she carries the baby...you still think that's ok? I mean, ok yeah that is selfish, but if she dies during the pregnancy than the child probably will too. Or if she or the baby is guaranteed to die during delivery....I guess I just don't see how you could justify that as not a reason for an abortion.

(Hope you see this post as just curious questions, no flames ;) )

Good, logical points from both of you. I'm pro-life, and here are some of my humble opinions. First of all, I'd like to say, just because I'm pro-life does not mean I'm judging anyone about their views on abortion, or even if they've had abortions themselves. I would never presume to be better than anyone, and I certainly am in no position to judge anyone else for their actions. So here are my opinions on the matter:

Also, I have posted a very similiar thread like this in other forums on abortion, so if you've read it before, don't be mad.

I'm pro-life and feel that abortion should be outlawed except for the cases of rape, incest, and valid health problems. Fortunately, I'm a man, so I don't ever have to be in this situation personally, but I do plan to marry and have a family, so (God-forbid) something like this ever happened, who knows what I would do. Hopefully I would trust in God and be strong.

First, AXJules, I know a lady who was happily married and was raped by an intruder. This woman conceived a child, and decided to keep it, even under the awful circumstances. Also, this woman was happily married and was raped by someone of a different race than she, so it would be obvious to everyone that this was not her husband's child, and everyone that knew about the rape would know that this child was a result of it. Still, in the face of extreme hardship, this woman trusted in God, and knew that her baby was a human being, had been conceived for a purpose, and that it was not her baby's fault that she had been raped. She had the child, and the girl grew up to be smart, loving, talented, and beautiful. I'm sure if you asked this girl "Would you rather be alive, even though you don't know your biological father, and even though you know the horrible situation, or would you have rather your mother aborted you?" This girl knows that she is blessed and is thankful her mother kept her and spared her life, even in the hardest of situations.
I also know many children who have been adopted, and know no knowledge of their parental history. They too, are happy to be alive, inspite of the hardship of not knowing their biological parents.

On the health issue, as I've already stated, I'm not for outlawing abortions in valid health situations. I do however, would like to give more real-life examples. One of them, is my mother and myself and brothers. I'm a quadruplet. I was born in 1983. This was a monumental health risk to my mother, and statistically and medically proposed monumental risks to myself and my 3 brothers. Mom trusted in God, and did not have any abortions, even though many health-care proffesionals advised her to. We all turned out fine, and I'm thankful everyday that they chose to keep us alive. God really took care of us.

Reagan's Feelings on Abortion
 

Abortion is advocated only by persons who have themselves been born." ---President Ronald Reagan

Found this quote on the internet--- It's great!

AGDiva, I have a question --

Accepting as true your assertion that abortion is a selfish act by the woman who has one -- do you feel that is a basis for creating laws against having an abortion? Are you saying that because abortion is selfish it should not be legal -- or are you just saying that abortion is selfish and that has nothing to do with whether it should be legal or not?

these are horrible situations that i wish never existed. but they do, i know. i feel that when a child is conceived, he's supposed to be.....so it's a hard thing to think that, ok, this situation is ok to have one.....but 1/2 of me is like, "yes, absolutely"....and then the other 1/2 is like, "whoa, no"....so i'm on the fence. i definitely see both sides very clearly, so it makes it hard to make a definite decision. and as far as the mother's life being in danger, it's the same way, i guess. b/c i know of a lot of circumstances where the mother was told that she would absolutely not survive labor, but she went ahead and then she did survive (take pike1483's story.....wow)....it's mind boggling. so really.......i supposed those are the only two situations where the decision should be left up to the mother.........if she has enough faith or strength to endure it, she will....if not, she won't. but just b/c she doesn't want it, isn't "ready", the baby could be less than perfect, hell no. make some sense?? hope so! :)

just saw this one valkyrie......and that's.....a good question......geez. ;)

i don't think that b/c it is selfish it should be made illegal. i think that just merely emphasizes how morally wrong it is. to do something or not do something simply b/c of inconveince to yourself is immature, for one thing, and just not responsible for another. i think it should be illegal b/c it takes the life away from a human being, and that to me is really wrong.

i'm trying to not make this a novel, so i'll stop there.....but did that answer your question??

I am pro-choice.

AlphaGamDiva said that abortions are selfish. I agree with that.
But choosing to have a child is selfish also.
Why do people have children. Because they want them. That's pretty damn selfish right there
I just don't think calling an abortion a selfish act is a good argument.

wow....lol.....b/c when i see a mother of 5 in the grocery store, the first thing i think is, "DAYUM, that b*tch is selfish to be giving up her time and her energy to be taking care of those kids!"

I agree that having a child is selfish -- how is it not? Yes, you're giving up time and energy taking care of someone else, but I think that reproduction is an inherently selfish act -- people have kids because they want them -- how is that any less selfish than not having a kid because one doesn't want them?

I think that having many biological children is especially selfish -- you're creating a huge drain of resources.

Think about it for 5 minutes.

Why does she have 5 kids? Because she wanted them. Not because someone forced her to. I commend women for the having the energy and patience to care for many children, but if she didn't want to give up HER time to take care of nshe could have chosesn not to have children, but she didn't now did she? So yes, having children is selfish act because it something that the mother/parent wants for them, not something they want for the children.

Exactly!

I'll agree that the decision to do either is selfish. I have my own selfish reasons for wanting children, just like you have your own for not. However...procreation is part of the definition of life itself. I don't think birds are selfish for having little baby birds or flowers are selfish for spreading their pollen :)

Edited to note that the word "selfish" looks very strange when you type it several times in a row, and that I misread what Valkyrie was saying so I'm removing her quote from my post!

no, i read that and thought about it before i responded.......we just disagree as to what makes someone truly "selfish," and the difference btwn that and just doing something you want to do. being selfish means you only think about yourself...thinking way more of what you want than someone else. being a mother is the complete opposite of that. yeah, you wanted the child, but i don't think that makes you selfish. it means you're willing to love and care for another human being......which is NOT selfish.

just b/c i want some ice cream doesn't make me selfish, does it?


ETA: co-sign that writing "selfish" so many times is like a really bad tongue-twister

Life: The quality that distinguishes a vital and functioning being from a dead body

Since PM_Mama said no religion in her thread, I had to come over to MoniMoo's thread. ;)

I think a lot of the core argument with making abortion against the law, is that many people are using religion as their reason to why it should be outlawed, which is fine as I am religious and respect those beliefs, but part of the foundation of this country is one of separation of church and state. I enjoy my religious freedom, and those who chose other religions or no religion, should be able to enjoy that same freedom.

If a woman becomes pregnant in a nonplanned violent way, and she chooses to have that baby, that is great. If she has a medical condition and choses to take the risk of her own life and health, that is great as well. However people who chose otherwise, for mental or physical reasons, shouldn't be forced into someone else's choice. These are very personal choices, and the government shouldn't be regulating it.

Lastly, I am for choice, regardless of what I would or wouldn't do in a situation. With better education and access to health care, there would more than likely be a lot less unplanned pregnancies. I don't like abortion being used repeatedly as a method for dealing with irresponsibility. If contraceptives were readily available, and people knew how to use them correctly, it would make sense that there would be less instances of needing an abortion. It is frightening how many college students, female and male, have no clue at what point in a woman's cycle she is able to get pregnant. Hey maybe even the STD rates would go down as well?

Oh and this other thing that gets me. There are so many children in the world that don't have families, homes, or the opportunities for a good life. If abortion is illegal, that is just going to increase. Yes they would be given life, but what kind of a life? Why not cut down the birth rate(with sex education), and give these kids the chance they deserve?

Settle down. don't want to lock this topic. Good debate so far. Leave personal attack out of the topic.

ETA: Damn people, I just deleted 3 replies. Keep on the topic please.

The Viceroy Has Spoken.

Well, apparently the moderators did not like my last comments, so I'll try to be more politically correct and not hurt anyone's sensitive feelings.

I still believe that the idea of having many biological children being selfish is wrong. I'm from a large family, and I don't think we're selfish at all because we use up a lot of resources. My family pays for those resources with money we earn ourselves.

And once again, China uses the argument that having large families is selfish because it uses lots of resources, so China forces couples to have abortions and limits the number of children they can have, because China cares more about resources than human life.

This is NOT a personal attack. Please don't delete my thread, moderators, I'm simply pointing out that I disagree with the logic valkyrie uses. I never personally attacked her--- I personally attacked her views on abortion. There is a difference.

The Viceroy Has Forgiven Your Sins.

I was speaking more to the scientific definition of a living thing: the ability to consume food/fuel to create and use energy, to procreate, to grow, and to respond to stimuli.

Thanks Moe

According to that decision, a computer virus is living.

It's not perfect, but it is the accepted scientific definition. Viruses (the non-computer kind) are a very gray area - pretty much any time you see a definition of life the virus is mentioned as a "is it alive or not". Viruses aren't able to reproduce without help from a host cell. Change cell to computer and no.... computer viruses are not alive :)

Okay... just out of curiosity, if having children is selfish due to the use of resources, for exactly what are the resourses there? The cockroaches who will survive an atomic attack?

The issue of abortion will NEVER be resolved. There will always be those who fundamentally believe in the sanctity of life starting at conception. There will always be those who feel that "embryonic selection/reduction", potential disease, rape, incest and such are all acceptable reasons for an abortion. And there will always be those who find themselves inconveniently pregnant and choose to abort.

I think we can all agree that these three parts of the whole debate will never come to a compromise, because of the value system of each individual.

I've stated before that I will never understand how hundreds of thousands of dollars can be used to keep a wanted 22-week fetus/baby alive, while the brains of an unwanted 32-week fetus/baby can be lawfully sucked out & used as spare parts.

I just find the entire argument riddled with hypocrisy.

(moe.ron - I tried to keep this as unthreatening as possible!)

It does if you don't want to share your ice cream ;)

Anyway, I understand what you're saying. But I also don't think there is such a thing as a completely selfless act. There are different degrees of selfishness.
If someone chooses not to have children because they either don't want them, don't have financial means to support them, etc. Does that make them selfish? (Not speaking about people who have abortions here, people who take mesures to ensure they don't have children like tubaligation, birthcontrol, vasectomy)

My cousin for instance, has one ovary. Doctors told her it would be difficult to reproduce. Well now she has 3 that she can't take care of. Her reasoning is that well because it's so hard for her to haev children she's just going to keep having children as long as she can because that's her right. Even though she can't take care of the ones she has. That seems pretty selfish to me.

Abortion is selfish. Thats fine.

Pro-lifers that forgive abortion for incest or rape lose moral credibility. It goes back to the whole, its not the kids fault argument.

Pro-lifers are better off arguing in absoute terms.

And so are pro-choicers. Any legislation infringeing on a woman's manipulation of her own bosy in reference to the fetus is a bad idea.

HA! i eat pumpkin ice cream, so normally no one wants me to share, so i'm not used to it.....but i will if i must. ;)

i don't think that just b/c someone doesn't want a child makes them selfish. it's not the lack of desire for a child, it's what happens after/during the pregnancy that reveals that characteristic. if you get your tubes tied or a vasectomy or whatever, that's all fine and dandy.....ppl need to know their limits, whether their limit is none or 10. from what you mentioned about your cousin, it seems she hasn't realized her limits....but i have to respect the fact that she is having these children (b/c i can see her point of view....she prob feels more blessed with 3 kids than burdened). i don't want to make a lot of assumptions on your cousin b/c i don't know all of her situation and how much these children are lacking in care.....and while i know that kids need more than love to survive, she does show them love by having them and (hopefully) caring for them as best as she can. a lot of ppl grow up in less than wealthy homes and are successful and accomplish great things.

i can see your point as well, though, b/c it does seem selfish to just have kids until your living in a van and all that. but if you're so pro-choice, isn't it her choice to have them as well as abort them? (trying DESPERATLY not to sound catty.....promise.....i'm sure you're just trying to say what i was saying with the whole "selfish" thing.....and while we're on it, let's get a count of how many times the word "selfish" has been used in this thread!)