SoulSilverMstr411
Hikikomori
It's a crime against nature. Letting a child die while in your care is punishable by imprisionment, and yet abortion is perfectly legal? That's ****ed up right there.
-
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Abortion, Right or Wrong?
- Thread starter Rezon
- Start date
Jestonster
Member
If you want to see f*cked up, go visit an orphanage in Romania... Children are kept in small rooms packed like sardines and are often malnourished and dirty. It's even worse for mentally challenged children: they sit in their feces and urine all day until maybe they will get the privilege to be fed.
The "lucky" ones that do escape run to a life on the streets standing in the middle of the road asking for money and after that fails, they resort to living in sewers. Having to do everything on their own they must become drug dealers and child prostitutes in order to feed themselves. They have children and it's a never ending cycle.
...I would abort my child before it would ever go through that because that is not the way to live.
Of course in the U.S. this wouldn't be as extreme but every child deserves a loving family that is capable of raising them and if they aren't guaranteed that, don't let it suffer..
The "lucky" ones that do escape run to a life on the streets standing in the middle of the road asking for money and after that fails, they resort to living in sewers. Having to do everything on their own they must become drug dealers and child prostitutes in order to feed themselves. They have children and it's a never ending cycle.
...I would abort my child before it would ever go through that because that is not the way to live.
Of course in the U.S. this wouldn't be as extreme but every child deserves a loving family that is capable of raising them and if they aren't guaranteed that, don't let it suffer..
So, Hammer, you're saying all people keeping lives from being born are unfair?
Well, in that case, rapists are simply making use of female fertile egg cells and their own semen - A.K.A. He's promoting the living of a life.
By your own argument, rapists are doing the world a favor by promoting life.
Whoa there big smart guy way to miss the point. I thnk abortions are bad cuz they pervent a life on purpose. People who rape arent doin it cuz they want to hav a baby. Dont confuse people who prevent lives wit ppl who "promote lives".
And in general, I (amusedly) noticed that people who use "God doesn't like the killing of babies but it's ok if the person was raped" argument tend to completely ignore the whole point of their argument when defending it.
Yeahhhno.
The reason people avoid answering this stuff is because WE'RE RIGHT.
See how contradictory life can be when you set this whole "always right" "always wrong" B.S.?
By the morals assumed here (that abortion is murder), what happens in the case where the mother would die unless there was an abortion?
What happens then?
If you say it's ok to have an abortion, then you're saying the mother's life is more important than the baby's life. That's not fair.
If you say it's not ok to have an abortion, the mother dies. That's placing the baby's life at higher value than the mother's.
Who's right here?
NOBODY.
To all those making these ultimatums with your "God" and your "right/wrong", STOP.
If I haven't proven to you that the logic you use is flawed, then you need to get off these debate threads and just take a good long look at the idiocy you're believing.
Is ur rant over yet?
If the mother was goin to die thats only fair cuz she was gonna kill the infant if she got a abortion/. hae you ever heard "an eye for an eye"? Look it up.
Everyone here only argeus that god isnt real and my argument doesnt work becuz of that. Keep ur religious opinions to urself, dont tell me im wrong cuz my religion is wrong, thats ignorant.
ImJessieTR
I WON'T kiss Ash...
lbsweet96 said:Sorry, but are you joking? That is what every person on this thread has been arguing. I can't believe you are actually telling me what to argue. How can you even see the computer screen from all the way up there on your high horse? If you are not willing to defend yourself against every arguement then I'm done with this debate. This thread has gone WAY downhill.
I'm only on as high a horse as BOYS/men having the audacity to tell a woman how to live her life.
Here are things I see from "pro-life" folks: an unscriptural justification for embryonic personhood, an unscientific justification for embryonic personhood, an unwillingness to have a consistent and rational definition of personhood (as including a single cellular organism would necessitate an animistic worldview, which isn't bad, but hardly anyone in these debates is that consistent), an irrational willingness to elevate a dependent being over an independent being, an audacity to claim giving a kid cereal is the same thing as feeding off the blood supply, an appreciation for harming/killing medical professionals, encouragement for a life decision they have no intention of doing themselves (adoption, either dropping off or picking up) ... shall I go on? There's also your women-can-get-hurt-during-the-abortion argument, as if birth has no risks and neither does any other surgical procedure. It must be nice to have such strong opinions from little factual basis. Perhaps you'd like a hug?
Last edited:
If the mother was goin to die thats only fair cuz she was gonna kill the infant if she got a abortion/. hae you ever heard "an eye for an eye"? Look it up.
Complete lack of ethics and morals aside, did you ever stop and think that if the mother dies during childbirth, the child usually does too? And that if the pregnancy kills the mother before childbirth, the child is guaranteed to die as well? So you're needlessly allowing someone to die because... why?
You are placing the value of a fetus who has the potential to become a life, who drains the mother, endangers her life, and will be a drain on her for the rest of her life (or at least for 18 years after childbirth), above the mother herself, who is alive, right now, and whose conditions on becoming pregnant are completely unknown. She could have been raped, her protection could have failed, there's any number of possibilities. But no, the mother should die because of something that's not her fault. You're basically advocating murder, while at the same time condemning abortion because it's murder.
Also, I think you missed the last part of that "eye for an eye" statement.
Everyone here only argeus that god isnt real and my argument doesnt work becuz of that. Keep ur religious opinions to urself, dont tell me im wrong cuz my religion is wrong, thats ignorant.
Here's the thing. Not everyone is Christian. It is unfair to make a law based on religion that affects everyone. If the government were to introduce Sharia law on the entire population, I can guarantee you'd be up in arms.
Also, why would we keep our religious opinions to ourselves? You sure didn't.
Last edited:
Okay, then, so everybody that is or has ever been a guy should get the fuck out of this debate. At least, that's what ImJessieTR implied. See kids, she does this so she has less opponents that might overwhelm her. She tells people what to argue so that she will never be speechless. So girls, good luck debating with that handicap.
ImJessieTR
I WON'T kiss Ash...
The moment you can get pregnant, you can tell women the ethics of pregnancy. I don't mind having opponents. Come up with a verifiable rationale and I'll be more than happy to listen. Continue to have a "humans are magical little fluffballs that deserve nothing icky" attitude, and I'll continue to mock it.
I'm not telling you what to argue. You seem to enjoy spouting nonsense all on your own. I'm just suggesting things that would HELP your case. And it's something you ABSOLUTELY CANNOT PROVIDE. You are arguing things you know absolutely nothing about, from a female perspective, from a scientific perspective, from a philosophical perspective, or from a religious perspective. At least nothing you can verify. What I'm tired of are arguments based on misogynistic biases (religious or secular), not FACTS. Science can be very clear cut. Show me evidence that a unicellular organism can be rational and logical and I'll hear you out. Then I'll ask what are we going to believe about every other unicellular organism. If you wanna tell me "Well, they might be sentient but I'm just going to kill them anyway", I'll go with you on that, but then don't pretend you don't take part in arbitrary morals.
I'm not telling you what to argue. You seem to enjoy spouting nonsense all on your own. I'm just suggesting things that would HELP your case. And it's something you ABSOLUTELY CANNOT PROVIDE. You are arguing things you know absolutely nothing about, from a female perspective, from a scientific perspective, from a philosophical perspective, or from a religious perspective. At least nothing you can verify. What I'm tired of are arguments based on misogynistic biases (religious or secular), not FACTS. Science can be very clear cut. Show me evidence that a unicellular organism can be rational and logical and I'll hear you out. Then I'll ask what are we going to believe about every other unicellular organism. If you wanna tell me "Well, they might be sentient but I'm just going to kill them anyway", I'll go with you on that, but then don't pretend you don't take part in arbitrary morals.
I cant think of a name
uck you!
If the whole logical foundation of your argument is based on God, and he isn't proven to be real, your argument is weak because the entire foundation is unproven.Everyone here only argeus that god isnt real and my argument doesnt work becuz of that. Keep ur religious opinions to urself, dont tell me im wrong cuz my religion is wrong, thats ignorant.
I could easily say that my God says we shouldn't drive, but can I take away everyone's drivers license because of that? NO!
@ M.C. Hammer - I'm attacking your case because it's based upon God, and you say we should never have abortions. Never having abortions implies making a law against them, and we have a cool little thing called "separation between church and state."
I don't need to go into how hypocritical your case is either, as others have already done it for me.
Next, I'll show you how stupid "an eye for an eye" is. In fact, it's illegal AND immoral. Huh? Who would have thought the idea that says murder is ok when the other person has murdered first is WRONG?
An eye for an eye never ends. It turns into an eye for an eye for an eye for an eye... etc.
Don't bring broken, ignorant points into this topic, please.
@ ImJessieTR:
I understand that this debate is much harder to do when the males here "won't ever have any idea of the pain you guys go through" or whatever you said, but your arguments are sorta falling into ranting at this point.
Plus, you used large words (seemingly on purpose) to a point at which most couldn't even begin to understand. I'd suggest "dumbing down" your speech a little bit, as even though some people have less life experience as you, by purposefully blocking them out with complicated speech, it appears that you're afraid of what they might say.
Now I'm really not trying to argue with you here. We're both pro-choice, and considering the title of the thread, this leaves us with no need to argue.
But I do think some of your points might need a bit more thinking.
For example, I can see a potential argument against your "men having the audacity to tell a women how to live her life." If the person considers a baby another life, then they do have the right to fight for the child's life, even if it alters the way a mother would live her life.
It's sorta like if a woman was a murderer. Surely, men have the right to tell her to not live her life that way.
(Again, though, I'm not saying I believe in this. Call it... friendly, constructive criticism).
And, as said before, the whole "oh go get pregnant you'll never understand the hurt we go through" bogus gets repetitive and has little place in this argument.
There's obviously no way for males to feel the pain/love/bond/loss of having children. So by using something that is physically impossible as a reason why you can just apparantly undermine all arguments males throw at you, you're attempting to limit this debate to only women.
Finally, (still @ ImJessieTR), we've already covered the fact that this debate has little to no "scientific proof." The title is whether it's right or wrong. Scientifically, the human race would be much better off if we had a large genocide and wiped out, say, 4 billion people. Then we'd have room to be open and have all the resources we could ever want!
-- My point is that not all morally correct things are found with scientific proof. I wouldn't recommend disregarding all arguments that don't have every single root of the tree in scientific background.
^_^
I don't need to go into how hypocritical your case is either, as others have already done it for me.
Next, I'll show you how stupid "an eye for an eye" is. In fact, it's illegal AND immoral. Huh? Who would have thought the idea that says murder is ok when the other person has murdered first is WRONG?
An eye for an eye never ends. It turns into an eye for an eye for an eye for an eye... etc.
Don't bring broken, ignorant points into this topic, please.
This is EXACTLY why abortions should be allowed for anybody. Just because somebody is having sex doesn't mean they want to have a baby. While I admit it promotes the chances of them having a baby, and that means they're playing with the odds, it's not fair to force mothers to have children when they don't want them (as you so kindly just agreed with me). Plus, if the mother didn't even want to have the child in the first place, what would possibly make her decide to be nice to the kid? Unwanted children are far more likely to live in abusive and unloving households. You're telling me you'd rather put a child through pain and suffering and abuse?"People who rape arent doin it cuz they want to hav a baby."
@ ImJessieTR:
I understand that this debate is much harder to do when the males here "won't ever have any idea of the pain you guys go through" or whatever you said, but your arguments are sorta falling into ranting at this point.
Plus, you used large words (seemingly on purpose) to a point at which most couldn't even begin to understand. I'd suggest "dumbing down" your speech a little bit, as even though some people have less life experience as you, by purposefully blocking them out with complicated speech, it appears that you're afraid of what they might say.
Now I'm really not trying to argue with you here. We're both pro-choice, and considering the title of the thread, this leaves us with no need to argue.
But I do think some of your points might need a bit more thinking.
For example, I can see a potential argument against your "men having the audacity to tell a women how to live her life." If the person considers a baby another life, then they do have the right to fight for the child's life, even if it alters the way a mother would live her life.
It's sorta like if a woman was a murderer. Surely, men have the right to tell her to not live her life that way.
(Again, though, I'm not saying I believe in this. Call it... friendly, constructive criticism).
And, as said before, the whole "oh go get pregnant you'll never understand the hurt we go through" bogus gets repetitive and has little place in this argument.
There's obviously no way for males to feel the pain/love/bond/loss of having children. So by using something that is physically impossible as a reason why you can just apparantly undermine all arguments males throw at you, you're attempting to limit this debate to only women.
Finally, (still @ ImJessieTR), we've already covered the fact that this debate has little to no "scientific proof." The title is whether it's right or wrong. Scientifically, the human race would be much better off if we had a large genocide and wiped out, say, 4 billion people. Then we'd have room to be open and have all the resources we could ever want!
-- My point is that not all morally correct things are found with scientific proof. I wouldn't recommend disregarding all arguments that don't have every single root of the tree in scientific background.
^_^
Keep calling me kiddo, please, its super mature.
Lulwut? That point makes no sense and it has nothin to do with my argument, so plz stop wasting my time with ur faulty arguments.
So long as you provide me with things to mock, I will be unable to refrain from doing so.
I really didn't have a new point, I was just making my post a little more relevant to the discussion instead of simply telling you why I was calling you out. But it seems you still don't have an answer for why your religious views cause you to greatly look down upon abortion when rape is not the case, but when pregnancy is the byproduct of rape, abortion is okay.
Is ur rant over yet?
If the mother was goin to die thats only fair cuz she was gonna kill the infant if she got a abortion/. hae you ever heard "an eye for an eye"? Look it up.
It wasnt much of a rant. Rants tend to be bias and make little sense. That poster actually had a point. One of which I don't think ever cross my mind.
How does that make any sense? He states nothing about the mother looking for an abortion in the first place but rather looking at abortion as an option to save a life. Do try to think a little deeper. Besides an eye for an eye wouldn't really work for the later.
This is still going on?
No one but science can determine life. I challenge those who think fetus's are not alive to give me a proof that an organism with the 46 human chromosomes cannot do the following. These are they scientific premise of life.
1. Homeostasis:Every single cell in every living thing carries out homeostasis.
2. Organization: All life made of cells, even the fetus.
3. Metabolism: All cells do this, he fetus develops organs to do this on a large scale.
4. Growth: A fetus doesn't stop growing until 20.
5. Adaptation: Adaptation is observed overtime, and on a species-wide scale.
6. Response to stimuli: A fetus will respond to stimuli. You out alcohol in its system it will develop improperly.
7. Reproduction: Cellular reproduction. It will develop sexual reproduction.
A fetus possess all these traits. It is alive. There is no room for argument.
A fetus is also human. It posses the 46 human chromosomes from conception. As for the "person" argument, it still does not justify anything. A man in a permanent vegetable state would not be concidered a "person". It still does not validate killing him.
All abortions do is temporarily relive pain at the cost of a life.
I don't care if they're allowed to do anything, it doesn't make anything right.IF YOU WANT TO KILL YOUR FETUS INSIDE YOUR BODY, it's alright. It's not an easy thing for a woman, but they're allowed to do it.
Its life before and after birth. Just becuase your too blind to look at an ultrasound doesn't mean a fetus has life.Once it's born, killing it is a horrible thing. D: cause it's actually in life now.
No one but science can determine life. I challenge those who think fetus's are not alive to give me a proof that an organism with the 46 human chromosomes cannot do the following. These are they scientific premise of life.
1. Homeostasis:Every single cell in every living thing carries out homeostasis.
2. Organization: All life made of cells, even the fetus.
3. Metabolism: All cells do this, he fetus develops organs to do this on a large scale.
4. Growth: A fetus doesn't stop growing until 20.
5. Adaptation: Adaptation is observed overtime, and on a species-wide scale.
6. Response to stimuli: A fetus will respond to stimuli. You out alcohol in its system it will develop improperly.
7. Reproduction: Cellular reproduction. It will develop sexual reproduction.
A fetus possess all these traits. It is alive. There is no room for argument.
A fetus is also human. It posses the 46 human chromosomes from conception. As for the "person" argument, it still does not justify anything. A man in a permanent vegetable state would not be concidered a "person". It still does not validate killing him.
And what is your solution? Killing them off before you can see them? Why don't we so shoot them now to put them out of their "misery"? Abortions don't solve anything except reducing population rates by killing.If you want to see f*cked up, go visit an orphanage in Romania... Children are kept in small rooms packed like sardines and are often malnourished and dirty. It's even worse for mentally challenged children: they sit in their feces and urine all day until maybe they will get the privilege to be fed.
All abortions do is temporarily relive pain at the cost of a life.
While I agree that the fetus is indeed a living being, I still believe it should be legal to kill the baby. I mean, if the mother doesn't want it, the mother was a rape victim, or the mother's, father's, and baby's life will be ruined due to poor living conditions, then why go through with and raise the child? I mean, the baby is still a part of the mother in it's first trimester-- that means the Mom can do whatever the hell she wants to her own body.
And really, those of you who hate the idea of abortion--is it really going to affect you that much if Sally aborts her baby? What about Janet, who was raped two months ago? What about John and Jane, a young couple whose condom broke during sex, the ultimate display of love? Should they be subjected to flipping burgers all their lives because they didn't have the time to get a proper education?
Is it really going to tear you to bits and destroy YOUR life if these people get abortions? It's their own decisions--you have no right to make decisions for them.
And really, those of you who hate the idea of abortion--is it really going to affect you that much if Sally aborts her baby? What about Janet, who was raped two months ago? What about John and Jane, a young couple whose condom broke during sex, the ultimate display of love? Should they be subjected to flipping burgers all their lives because they didn't have the time to get a proper education?
Is it really going to tear you to bits and destroy YOUR life if these people get abortions? It's their own decisions--you have no right to make decisions for them.
While I agree that the fetus is indeed a living being, I still believe it should be legal to kill the baby. I mean, if the mother doesn't want it, the mother was a rape victim, or the mother's, father's, and baby's life will be ruined due to poor living conditions, then why go through with and raise the child? I mean, the baby is still a part of the mother in it's first trimester-- that means the Mom can do whatever the hell she wants to her own body.
And really, those of you who hate the idea of abortion--is it really going to affect you that much if Sally aborts her baby? What about Janet, who was raped two months ago? What about John and Jane, a young couple whose condom broke during sex, the ultimate display of love? Should they be subjected to flipping burgers all their lives because they didn't have the time to get a proper education?
Is it really going to tear you to bits and destroy YOUR life if these people get abortions? It's their own decisions--you have no right to make decisions for them.
Yeah... this is my complete arguement too... its the own person's decision, not yours... and condoms and birth control can fail
ThePokéman09
Well-Known Member
While I agree that the fetus is indeed a living being, I still believe it should be legal to kill the baby. I mean, if the mother doesn't want it, the mother was a rape victim, or the mother's, father's, and baby's life will be ruined due to poor living conditions, then why go through with and raise the child? I mean, the baby is still a part of the mother in it's first trimester-- that means the Mom can do whatever the hell she wants to her own body.
And really, those of you who hate the idea of abortion--is it really going to affect you that much if Sally aborts her baby? What about Janet, who was raped two months ago? What about John and Jane, a young couple whose condom broke during sex, the ultimate display of love? Should they be subjected to flipping burgers all their lives because they didn't have the time to get a proper education?
Is it really going to tear you to bits and destroy YOUR life if these people get abortions? It's their own decisions--you have no right to make decisions for them.
That's the legal issue, not the moral issue.
Just because it's legal doesn't make it right, although I do agree that abortion is right.
A non-sentient fetus is not a person. And for those who say a vegetative-state person counts as a person who can't be killed at will is wrong.
A few years ago, there was this woman (Terri Schiavo or something) whose family was locked in a huge legal battle over her life. Her husband chose to have the feeding tube removed, and that was the end of her.
It's euthanasia, so those that and abortion don't realy fit together.
Last edited:
I don't care if they're allowed to do anything, it doesn't make anything right.
Lol, I don't care if it's not 'right.' It's legal, which means people can do it.
It's right for the woman. You can't say anything about it.
Its life before and after birth. Just becuase your too blind to look at an ultrasound doesn't mean a fetus has life.
No one but science can determine life. I challenge those who think fetus's are not alive to give me a proof that an organism with the 46 human chromosomes cannot do the following. These are they scientific premise of life.
Maybe you didn't hear me many other times. I know the fetus is technically alive. .but that's not the point. The thing has no rights. Just accept it. If the woman feels like she can't handle having a child, then she has every freaking right to abort the thing. Don't act like you can control their lives. It's their lives. Not your's.
This is still going on?
You're surprised?
I don't care if they're allowed to do anything, it doesn't make anything right.
I can't argue with steadfast denial.
Its life before and after birth. Just becuase your too blind to look at an ultrasound doesn't mean a fetus has life.
Seeing an ultrasound proves nothing. I have seen ultrasounds of my little brothers. So?
No one but science can determine life. I challenge those who think fetus's are not alive to give me a proof that an organism with the 46 human chromosomes cannot do the following. These are they scientific premise of life.
1. Homeostasis:Every single cell in every living thing carries out homeostasis.
2. Organization: All life made of cells, even the fetus.
3. Metabolism: All cells do this, he fetus develops organs to do this on a large scale.
4. Growth: A fetus doesn't stop growing until 20.
5. Adaptation: Adaptation is observed overtime, and on a species-wide scale.
6. Response to stimuli: A fetus will respond to stimuli. You out alcohol in its system it will develop improperly.
Good so far...
7. Reproduction: Cellular reproduction. It will develop sexual reproduction.
A fetus possess all these traits. It is alive. There is no room for argument.
This is where you fall short. Cellular reproduction in a multicellular organism is growth. By this logic, I am giving birth every time I grow or gain weight. (And I'm a male, so this would be kind of awkward. o.o") Reproduction in the sense of living creatures means giving birth.
A fetus is also human. It posses the 46 human chromosomes from conception. As for the "person" argument, it still does not justify anything. A man in a permanent vegetable state would not be concidered a "person". It still does not validate killing him.
I'm for legalizing euthanasia for people who are in chronic suffering because of an incurable condition with permission from either the patient (if (s)he is able to consent to it) or the family of the patient (if the patient can't give consent).
EDIT: Had to reword this a lot.
And what is your solution? Killing them off before you can see them? Why don't we so shoot them now to put them out of their "misery"?
No. Of course we should fix awful living conditions, but until we can do that it would be, dare I say, merciful to painlessly end a life before it is forced into such conditions. I can also imagine being shot would cause a lot of pain to something that can feel pain.
Abortions don't solve anything except reducing population rates by killing.
I beg to differ. The mother does not have to carry a leech for nine months, give birth to it in an extremely long, painful procedure, then go through either 18 years of providing for the unwanted child (who may well end up abused because the mother didn't want him/her) or go through the procedure to send it through what may well be an already-overcrowded adoption center.
All abortions do is temporarily relive pain at the cost of a life.
It is not a life. See above. If a mother who makes a mistake or none at all either cannot or doesn't want to give birth to what is, essentially, a parasite in her body, she should have the choice to abort it.
Last edited:
In the event that a fetus is considered alive, it is certainly obvious that it has no basic thought process or the ability to make decisions.
Whether the mother is loving, caring, and will have the baby to keep, if she is loving, yet can't keep the baby and will be giving it up, or is only filled with hatred toward the thing that's stuck inside of her and she can't get rid of, the baby will never know.
It cannot decide for itself if it wants to put itself in that situation.
And more importantly, YOU cannot decide for the baby either.
So there's no moral basis in saying "OMG TEH BABY WANTZ TO LIVEZORZ" because, as you (you is referring to anybody who is currently arguing pro-life with this case) said, we can't tell what the baby is "thinking" because it's not "thinking."
We cannot create laws based upon something we do not know. Pro-choice allows both sides to win. Those who believe that, if their baby knew what would happen to it, would genuinely want to live, can have the damn baby.
Those who don't think that or need abortions for other reasons, can have the baby.
Whether the mother is loving, caring, and will have the baby to keep, if she is loving, yet can't keep the baby and will be giving it up, or is only filled with hatred toward the thing that's stuck inside of her and she can't get rid of, the baby will never know.
It cannot decide for itself if it wants to put itself in that situation.
And more importantly, YOU cannot decide for the baby either.
So there's no moral basis in saying "OMG TEH BABY WANTZ TO LIVEZORZ" because, as you (you is referring to anybody who is currently arguing pro-life with this case) said, we can't tell what the baby is "thinking" because it's not "thinking."
We cannot create laws based upon something we do not know. Pro-choice allows both sides to win. Those who believe that, if their baby knew what would happen to it, would genuinely want to live, can have the damn baby.
Those who don't think that or need abortions for other reasons, can have the baby.
as long as the fetus is "the fetus", its not so much a baby as a parasitic life form that basically eats the mother from the inside out. this microscopic leech grows inside her for nine months, sucking more and more of its carriers life force. you may not believe this, do to the advances in modern medicine that aid in the following processes, but pregnancy and childbirth are INCREDIBLY dangerous for the woman. look through the ages- womens hips have become less wide, thier bodies less suited for childbirth. generations back, it wouldve been somewhat easy to survive, but in modern times, if a woman went through pregnancy and childbirth shed have little to no chance of survival.