Abortion - Under what circumstances should it be allowed?

[JDavidC]

It's been quite a while since the previous abortion debate thread closed, almost a year. I think it's time to restart this debate.

First, a link to the previous debate thread on this topic.

http://www.serebiiforums.com/showth...at-Big-Abortion-Debate-(READ-THE-FIRST-POST!)

I've decided on the current title, as this is an area full of murky shades of grey, and the 'right' thing to do in many circumstances is anything but clear.

1. The rules:

Define terms commonly used in abortion debates precisely the first time you use them. Bear in mind that others may not agree with your definition, but at least they will understand what you mean if you define the term. A major issue in this revolves around the precise definitions of the following words:

-Sentience.
-Person.
-Personhood.
-Human being.
-Unborn human.
-Baby.
-Child.
-Life.
-Woman's body. In case you're wondering, I added this at the request of The Fighting Pikachu. Where does a woman's body end, and an unborn human's begin?

A term that I saw used elsewhere is 'zef', which refers to an unborn member of the species 'homo sapiens' that is a zygote, embryo, or foetus, and is how I define 'unborn human'. One interesting thing I will point out is that foetus (yes, I use UK spelling) is Latin for 'little one'.

Also, if you want to argue for a specific point, try to state clearly the goalposts required for an opposing debater to debunk your argument, and stick to them. Moving the goalposts once they have been reached will mean you can be called out on special pleading. www.yourlogicalfallacyis.com lists this and other logical fallacies.

Finally, be VERY careful with how you treat other people in this debate, this is an extremely emotive issue, and SPPf rules are in full effect here.

2. The issues:

This is an extremely messy subject to deal with. No matter what decisions are made regarding abortion law, when unwanted pregnancies strike, there will be pain, suffering and death on a massive scale. Rights will often, if not always, be violated, and a big issue revolves around prioritising rights when they come into conflict.

- Personhood (someone who is effectively a human like those that have already been born, with a working brain that has higher intelligence than animals) is a big issue that is often what separates many pro-life people from pro-choice people. A lot of people in the latter category would go pro-life once they feel their definition of personhood has been achieved. Another issue is the maximum obtainable intelligence. Anencephaly, for example, can pretty much destroy intelligence, and there is an issue of whether such humans would be considered people.

When does a member of the species 'homo sapiens' become a person that is defined as 'sentient'? Contraception/abortions before this happen are obviously A-OK, as no person dies. However, abortion AFTER this happens results in a person having all of their rights (dependent on their right to life) taken away from them by one or more other people (usually including the mother), and being euthanized/executed (I make no apology for using such strong terms here). Arguments have been made for different times during the gestation period, starting at conception, but even extreme cases where personhood is not even reached AFTER the human is born.
- Quality of life assessments and attempting to predict the future, leading to euthanasia without consent (which applies to some abortions). Is this right or wrong? Holland is an extreme example of this, lots of cases of euthanasia without consent occur there. What happens in cases of REALLY severe disabilities like anencephaly? Is it right to abort if stuff like this happens?
- Illegal/coerced abortions. Restricting the law on abortion will lead to a rise in mothers attempting to seek abortions by other means (and maybe even others coercing them to do so if the pregnancy is unwanted by someone other than the mother), while relaxing it will increase the amount of anti-choice abortions through coercion by others who do not want the pregnancy.
- Value of human life. This debate revolves around this. When things such as intelligence and quality of life are used to judge whether or not someone should live, it devalues a lot of human life, which can prove extremely dangerous.
- Human rights: Rights to life versus rights to liberty come into play. What are the correct priorities, and why?
- Tackling the issues of unwanted pregnancies by other means. This is important to everyone, especially pro-life people, who want choices other than abortion to be viable. If you go with a specific position, you may also want to state how the underlying issue of unwanted pregnancies may be tackled.


3. My views (yes, these are opinions):
- Personhood begins at conception (I can link to some of my previous arguments if you want something more than this opinion).
- Right to life always trumps right to liberty, as all other rights depend on the right to life. Nobody has the right to take away someone else's right to life via euthanasia without consent, including abortions.
- Quality of life assessments are subjective, and are ultimately flawed for two reasons. Quality of life is determined by the person experiencing life, not other people. Quality of life assessments are attempts to predict the future, which is EXTREMELY unpredictable as real life is a highly chaotic system. Google 'Chaos Theory', and it's a mathematical theory which is where the 'Butterfly Effect' comes from. Real life is a prime example of a highly chaotic system.
- Attempting to put value on human lives, instead of saying all humans are equal, is an EXTREMELY dangerous practice, which sets up inequalities that will ultimately lead to indifference/hatred. Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party are a prime example of this. It also encourages people stereotyping disabled people as sub-human trash, like Hitler did with Jews. I find this mortally offensive and extremely dangerous.
- The more liberal abortion laws get, the more anti-choice abortions, and abortions-on-demand with lying for reasons of abortion (including threatening suicide, which is a valid proviso in a proposed abortion law change in the Republic of Ireland!) will occur. In the UK, people exploit a law that allows abortion-on-demand for disabled zefs, even if said zef could have the disability cured after birth! That's outrageous and it turned my stomach when I read about it in a 2012 Parliamentary debate (please say if you want a link to this debate). Reading about that literally turned my stomach.
- Ultimately, my view is this. Abortions should not be allowed EXCEPT if the mother is at risk of dying. This minimises the overall damage, even though it does lead to a lot of extremely severe drawbacks. Full-scale sex education, including abstinence, risk of contraceptives failing etc, along with brutal punishments for rapists, as well as enhancing alternatives to abortion are absolutely required, particularly for a position like mine.

Note that these are merely my opinions, if you want an actual debate with me, start challenging my opinions, and I'll come back with arguments.

 

[Blazekickblaziken]

Well, this is a very complicated topic that is much more than life vs. Choice.

First I want to look at one of the causes of unwanted pregnancy. At least here in (some parts of) the US, sex (and I'm referring to real life sex, not depictions in the media.) Is seen as something extremely taboo. Many people like abstinance only education thinking that it'll stop kids from having sex. Which it won't, because these kids still have a sex drive and they will have sex. And when they do it's likely to be risky since they probably won't use any kind of contraception. Kids who get taught abstinence only sex education are more likely to have sex at an earlier age and take bigger risks when having sex than people who get taught actual sex-ed. Now let me explain how this is relevant, if we don't teach people how to be responsible with their bodies (telling them to wait until marriage for sex ISN'T teaching them that) we can't exactly then punish them for making bad choices.

But I'm not ignorant and I know that's not the whole story. There's a whole slew of reasons why people might want an abortion. Rape, incest, birth defect, maybe they had their tubes tied (or the male equivalent) and it failed, or just plain because they don't want the baby.

While you think that life is unpredictable, it's not particularly. Yes, unexpected things can happen, for good OR for worse, but it's not the norm and I stauchly believe that making laws about what might happen instead of what is likely to happen is irresponsable. Generally speaking, the social class you were born into is the social class in wich you will stay, and moreover an unwanted pregnancy (depending on the circumstances) can negatively impact that.

Maybe the child has a birthdefect, and maybe the parent doesn't want it. Maybe it's a form autism (and not the high functioning kind), cerebral palsy, mental retardation, ect. These kids are a giant responsibility, and many of them won't ever be fully Independent. Many of them may outlive their parents and who's going to take care of them? Most likely the state, in an understaffed home with overworked nurses, and lord knows what kind of treatment they'll recieve.

You might not want to put a value on a human life, but the thing is, it might not be cuantifiable, but humans do have a value. Each individual uses up resources, money, time, space, and these resources are not limitless. It might seem cruel, but that's the world we live in and we have to make decisions based on that (in thelarge general sense.)

You might think abortion is just about "saving a life" but I think it's about the circumstances that led up to the conception and the real life existance of the person that comes from it, that is the conception.

There are lots of subjects I didn't touch upon, like adoption, but abortion is such a complicated issue that entails so many things I barely know how to talk about tuem.

 

[JDavidC]

I've had to switch to using IE because Firefox is still not working properly with this website.

Well, this is a very complicated topic that is much more than life vs. Choice.

First I want to look at one of the causes of unwanted pregnancy. At least here in (some parts of) the US, sex (and I'm referring to real life sex, not depictions in the media.) Is seen as something extremely taboo. Many people like abstinance only education thinking that it'll stop kids from having sex. Which it won't, because these kids still have a sex drive and they will have sex. And when they do it's likely to be risky since they probably won't use any kind of contraception. Kids who get taught abstinence only sex education are more likely to have sex at an earlier age and take bigger risks when having sex than people who get taught actual sex-ed. Now let me explain how this is relevant, if we don't teach people how to be responsible with their bodies (telling them to wait until marriage for sex ISN'T teaching them that) we can't exactly then punish them for making bad choices.

I will agree, people may as well get full on sex education, particularly as sex is part of human nature. Not understanding highly important things such as this about your own body is something that needs to be dealt with. If people don't understand their own nature, how are they meant to make the right choices? I'd be all for full-scale explanations, including classes in Biology that explains everything in detail. Abstinence can be taught as the fool-proof method of not getting unwanted pregnancies, but there are lots of other methods that, while not risk-free, can reduce the likelihood of unwanted pregnancies (condoms for example). Furthermore, sex education can be used for the opposite reason, for getting wanted pregnancies. The rhythm method can be used both ways, for example. Sex being seen as a taboo subject needs to stop, people need to know about it when they hit puberty, because the drive will start to kick in, whether they like it or not.

But I'm not ignorant and I know that's not the whole story. There's a whole slew of reasons why people might want an abortion. Rape, incest, birth defect, maybe they had their tubes tied (or the male equivalent) and it failed, or just plain because they don't want the baby.

Sadly, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Like I said, this issue is messy, and a new baby popping up can put a massive strain on things.

While you think that life is unpredictable, it's not particularly. Yes, unexpected things can happen, for good OR for worse, but it's not the norm and I stauchly believe that making laws about what might happen instead of what is likely to happen is irresponsable. Generally speaking, the social class you were born into is the social class in wich you will stay, and moreover an unwanted pregnancy (depending on the circumstances) can negatively impact that.

In the long term, it is unpredictable. Weather forecasting, for example, is limited to several days ahead, due to the chaotic nature of weather. What I think many people fail to predict is this: the effect of love (not simply the emotion, but the intellectual side of it as well) at getting people out of bad situations, and how this applies to real life. I could talk about how I was written off as a person who would spend the rest of their life in a mental institution after a diagnosis of Autism at 2.5 years old, and my parents having none of that, but you could just play the 'anecdotal evidence' card, and stop me there.

I'll give a link to the Wikipedia entry for Chaos Theory this time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory
You will see many examples there that apply to real life. I cannot see how real life is predictable in the long term, particularly if people try to fight 'fate/destiny' with everything they have. I feel that people massively underrate what love can do if it is used properly. If you think that life is not particularly unpredictable, I'd like to see some evidence that will work against Chaos Theory, which is my evidence of unpredictability.

The goalposts I will set up for you to defeat my Chaos Theory argument is this: Find at least two logically written scientific research papers that argue against Chaos Theory being valid, and link to them. If they do appear to be well thought out (and you can add your own reasoning as well), then you win the argument against Chaos Theory.

Maybe the child has a birthdefect, and maybe the parent doesn't want it. Maybe it's a form autism (and not the high functioning kind), cerebral palsy, mental retardation, ect. These kids are a giant responsibility, and many of them won't ever be fully Independent. Many of them may outlive their parents and who's going to take care of them? Most likely the state, in an understaffed home with overworked nurses, and lord knows what kind of treatment they'll recieve.

This is one of those issues pro-lifers, in particular, will have to deal with. Adoption, along with people trained to handle people with different natures (including those with disabilities), needs to be looked into and stepped up. Right now, there is too much of a focus on providing for neurotypical people, but not those with disabilities, and sexual orientations other than heterosexual. People don't need to be fully independent to have a good quality of life, and having different brains can give rise to different abilities that neurotypical people may not have. Autistic people often make good computer programmers, for instance. It makes me wonder, if people with certain disabilities, with uncommon strengths are turning up, is a result of Darwinian evolution as a response to changing needs of society. People need to focus on abilities, not just the disabilities.

You might not want to put a value on a human life, but the thing is, it might not be quantifiable, but humans do have a value. Each individual uses up resources, money, time, space, and these resources are not limitless. It might seem cruel, but that's the world we live in and we have to make decisions based on that (in thelarge general sense.)

Well, that's what population control is for, if things start getting that bad. Do you have any evidence to suggest that the world is running out of resources, or any evidence to suggest that there may be plenty of resources left? Obviously, people popping out babies left, right and centre all over the world would eventually lead to a major crisis.

You might think abortion is just about "saving a life" but I think it's about the circumstances that led up to the conception and the real life existance of the person that comes from it, that is the conception.

From my point of view, I'm looking into stopping as many deaths as possible, both by restricting abortion the way I outlined in my opening post, and also by tackling the root causes, as well as going for viable alternatives.

There are lots of subjects I didn't touch upon, like adoption, but abortion is such a complicated issue that entails so many things I barely know how to talk about them.

Well, you can always use Google to get some research done if you want to talk about more. I used it quite a bit myself in the previous debate that I linked to in my opening post.

 

[Maedar]

First of all, there is no such thing as "personhood". The GOP can debate that all they want, but they'll never make it true.

Second, abortion should be allowed as defined by Roe v Wade.

And that means, ALL the recent anti-abortion laws put forth by the states are in direct defiance of it, and are thus unconstitutional and illegal. End of story.

But the Republicans are still willing to spend a fortune to defend them in court, only for them to be struck down, then send the bill to the taxpayers, all while accusing the President of "wasteful spending". Their bills are going to be struck down, and the Supreme Court isn't even going to hear the arguments. Why are they doing this? simply because they want to challenge the ruling, as they've been doing for four decades, with no success.

Honestly, I doubt any of them can even remember at this point who Roe and Wade were.

 

[Nightmareisalive]

Hmmm in today's world abortion has become more of a birth control than anything else. Nurses have given examples of seeing the same woman coming in for an abortion a couple of times because they don't want protected sex and use abortion to get rid of the child they don't want. So now in today's world we have a culture were it's OK to have unprotected sex without consequences and we all know getting pregnant isn't the worst thing that can happen from it.

I'm against abortion in all forms except for when the mothers life is in danger. I think the use of abortion has become part of the no consequences culture that has become part of the UK. For anyone outside the UK this is the idea people can use things such as human rights or other laws to get out of being punished for doing something wrong so get away Scott free. To have sex you are taking a risk and if you are going to have sex you better be prepared for what happens after. If you don't want a child use protection, it is easily available and there are many forms of it, many people use multiple forms of protection when and after sex to avoid getting pregnant so there is no excuse to have an abortion if you took the proper steps before hand.

Really the people who say it's a woman's choice to have a baby should also remember it was her choice to have unprotected sex in the first place. She made a decision to have sex and so therefore must accept the consequences of her decisions. It reminds me of someone who drinks drives. It takes two things to happen, a drunk person and car, they take a big risk (driving a car while drunk) and there can be a real problem in the end (crashing the car). Now when that happens they can't turn around and say "Oh I didn't mean it or I'm don't want all this can you just drop it" and the same is with a woman having unprotected sex. It takes two to happen, they are taking a risk and they can have a problem at the end of it. I never understood why a woman should be able to get an abortion if they are unable to take the consequences of what happens with sex.

One other problem with abortion is that there is discrimination in foetus in some cases. When people find out that the baby will have birth defects, be disabled for life they might have an abortion so they discriminate against disabled people since they would never want a disabled child. Other problems are people will have abortions if the sex of the child wasn't what they wanted. This of course causes sexism since abortion would happen on the sex of the child.

 

[Maedar]

Oh, so again, we go with the "it's all the mother's fault".

"It takes two to tango", as the saying goes. This is not Iran, and we do not live under Sharia Law. Maybe if we had laws that cracked down on deadbeat fathers who stiffed on child support (as in, repossessed their things and froze their bank accounts if they refused to pay), we wouldn't have so many problems.

 

[Nightmareisalive]

Oh, so again, we go with the "it's all the mother's fault".

"It takes two to tango", as the saying goes. This is not Iran, and we do not live under Sharia Law. Maybe if we had laws that cracked down on deadbeat fathers who stiffed on child support (as in, repossessed their things and froze their bank accounts if they refused to pay), we wouldn't have so many problems.

Well the deadbeat fathers are a problem people should really try and solve and there are ways to stop it in the first place but I can't see how that has much to do with the topic of abortion. The deadbeat fathers usually come after a child is born.

It does take two to tango so both should be willing to use the right protection and take responsibility but I was really talking about women who use abortion as a form of birth control were the other partner is not needed.

 

[Garbodor.]

I am against abortion full stop. No one has the right to kill any human, no matter in what stage of development they are in.
If women think just because a child is growing inside them that they have the right to kill it then they are just radical feminists (which have spread in some country's like a virus).
Abortion is murder, there is no other way of looking at it.

Now, if a women has been raped, then she does not have to raise the child, she can put it up for adoption. Even in rape cases, the unborn child needs to be protected at all cost.

Where does this line of legality of child murder going to stop? Maybe in a decade they will say it's okay to kill a child if he or she is less than 6 months old (after birth)...

The solution is simple, abortion should be treated at murder. Any women who kills a child because "the condom broke and that's why I got pregnant" excuse and any other excuse should be punished and given capital punishment. How would you feel if you yourself was a victim of these damn women? what if by some unfortunate circumstances, your mother was a killer like them? You would not be here now to read this comment.

 

[Blazekickblaziken]

I'm going to quickly respond to adoption. The adoption system is riddled with so many problems. Kids bouncing from foster home to foster home, abusive foster parents, lack of people wanting to adopt these children. The adoption system is already under strain as it is. And unless the kid is a healthy, white, baby, the outlook is not very good for it. You're not white? You get to wait longer. You're over 10? You get to wait longer. You've got a disability? You get to wait longer. People do say that the kid you're aborting might be the next Einstein or the next Mozart. What if the next Mozart or Einstein is already in the system? One more kid in the system just means that some one else will have to wait that much longer.If abortion was made illegal, with all the number of new kids, this system would be strained to it's breaking point. If the system can barely function now, how could it function then?

Also while these problems should definitely be resolved, outlawing abortion while they are is kind of like outlawing chemotherapy while you discover the cure to it. (I know it's not a particularly good analogy, but I think you get the point I'm trying to make. Also not that I think abortion should ever be made illegal.)

Also, to Nightmareisalive, getting an abortion is never as simple as "being unable to handle the consequences of sex." In the grand scheme of things, it's a complex multilayered issue, like I've been pointing out. Also some women get abortions because the men who got them pregnant (remember the part where women can't get pregnant on their on? It takes two to tango as they say.) Decide they don't want to be a daddy. I'd appreciate it if you didn't make comments insinuating the woman was irresponsible for getting pregnant when 1) you don't know the context behind the pregnancy (rape, lack of education, handicapped child, or yes irresponsability) 2) that woman didn't get pregnant by herself.

And before anyone asks why abortion is treated as a woman's issue if it takes a woman and a man to make a baby I'd like to point out two things, 1) men don't get pregnant and 2) Generally speaking (yes I know there are exceptions, that's what generally means) the whole consequences of sex are usually shouldered by women.

 

[Grey Wind]

just radical feminists (which have spread in some country's like a virus).

Whatever your opinions on abortion are, I think we can all agree that this is total BS.

Now, if a women has been raped, then she does not have to raise the child, she can put it up for adoption. Even in rape cases, the unborn child needs to be protected at all cost.

No. No no no.

Rape is one of the most horrifying experiences that can happen to somebody. To lose complete control of your body and be molested by another human being (even worse if it's somebody close to the person) is horrific. Any victim of rape will be paranoid and unstable afterwards, and will want to move on with their life. Forcing a woman to carry around a reminder of their horrific experience for nine months is barbaric. And that's not even getting into the emotional trauma of actually seeing the child; loving it because it's your child, and hating the sight of it because it was brought into the world because of such a traumatising experience.

Where does this line of legality of child murder going to stop? Maybe in a decade they will say it's okay to kill a child if he or she is less than 6 months old (after birth).

The solution is simple, abortion should be treated at murder. Any women who kills a child because "the condom broke and that's why I got pregnant" excuse and any other excuse should be punished and given capital punishment. How would you feel if you yourself was a victim of these damn women? what if by some unfortunate circumstances, your mother was a killer like them? You would not be here now to read this comment.

Easy tiger. You're as bad as the "radical feminists" that you're condemning.

Abortion is not a split-second decision and treating it as such is callous and myopic. Women who have abortions are not foaming at the mouth and crying for the death of all children. It's a horrible and incredibly difficult decision to have to make and nobody WANTS to have to be in that position. Aborting a child is an incredibly difficult thing to go through, and painting every woman who does so as some sort of monster isn't helping anything. How about you actually think about what you're saying and put yourself in their position instead of spouting out emotionally manipulative and tactless statements that don't get this debate anywhere?



I read an article awhile back that claimed that abortion rates in countries where abortion is illegal are almost the same as countries where it's legal. Can anybody find anything to back this up? I'll have a look later but I don't have the time to dig through my tumblr for the link right now.

 

[Nightmareisalive]

@Blazekickblaziken

Well if a woman has sex with a man unprotected then realizes that they guy doesn't want kids that the fault lies with both parties. The man should of made it clear he doesn't want children at all and if that is the case he shouldn't have sex or at least make sure to use all the protection they can get to avoid it happening. If the woman gets pregnant then the man should stick around and look after the child. He is a coward otherwise since he's running away from his responsibility and people don't respect cowards. For the woman they should use protection if they don't want children and should use the morning after pill to help make sure she doesn't get pregnant, they should also make sure beforehand that the guy doesn't want any children so then they don't end up getting pregnant then only after realize the other party has no interest in looking after the child.

Lack of education is no way an excuse for an abortion. If you are going to have sex you should know what could happen and it's not that hard to look up information about it. The old excuse they didn't teach it in school or no one told them what could happen doesn't work. It's easy to find out how to stop getting pregnant and what happens if you do get pregnant. If you are unaware about sex and all the things that can happen after then you are not mature enough to have sex in the first place.

To have an abortion because the child is handicapped is discrimination. You can't use it as an excuse since you are discriminating against a person because of their handicapped. Also were do you stop with what is handicapped? different people may have different views in what it means to being handicapped in some countries being a girl can be seen as being handicapped so then an abortion of a girl is seen as a good solution.

Irresponsibility in no way is an excuse for an abortion. If you aren't responsible with sex you shouldn't be having it. Simple as that. If you are irresponsible and have sex then be prepared for what happens next.

Rape is more difficult to deal with. The child though had no part in it and so why should it be punished for what happened? also there are cases where a woman has been raped and had got pregnant and had a child. Many of them know how horrible rape is but they aren't going to blame an unborn child on it.

 

[JDavidC]

Even though I adopt a heavily pro-life stance on abortion, I do see where others come from. As I said before, this IS an extremely complex issue that collapses into so many shades of grey that it is not funny, and it is one of the reasons I effectively mentioned a three-pronged strategy:

- Unwanted pregnancies, how do you plan to reduce these?
- Abortions themselves, when should the mother be allowed to decide for this, and why? Pro-lifers will have to deal more heavily with the other two questions due to the stance they adopt.
- What alternatives to abortion would you propose, and how would you enhance them?

I think both pro-life and pro-choice people will want to focus very heavily on the 1st and 3rd points. It is the 2nd point where they clash. Part of the idea of this debate is how you answer the 1st and 3rd question, when you answer the 2nd.

I'm going to go into the 1st question now.
- Mandatory comprehensive sex education when puberty starts. Humans deserve to know how their bodies work, they NEED to know how it works, and how to use their bodies responsibly. The study of biology is only a part of it.
- Getting harsh on rapists, and forcing rapists to pay child support for any child conceived due to rape, even if that child is later adopted. I'm not so sure about how I'd go about getting tough on deadbeat parents.

Moving on to my 3rd question:
- Adoption. I don't know how this works in any country, but a government system which can store details on adoption volunteers, allowing people who want to put their children up for adoption to find someone nearby who can do it would go a very long way. In many cases it would be better than foster care homes where children may not get all the attention they need. This is certainly an area that would need to be looked into and enhanced when dealing with the fallout of unwanted pregnancies.
- Education about disabilities. A big problem many people face is they do not know how to handle people that are different from the neurotypical norm, and end up falling apart or just giving up. This is not acceptable. Anyone who ends up with a child with a disability must be given free education by experts on how to deal with the disabilities (I should point out, I personally loathe the US system of PAYING for healthcare with the passion of a thousand burning suns). Disabled people would have a much easier time of their already difficult lives if other people knew about the differences, not to mention it would make it easier for some special abilities that typically are only possessed by these disabled people stand out and get used for the good of society.
- Free counselling for those with unwanted pregnancies, and advice on all the alternatives to abortion. Counsellors should be familiar with existing adoption systems and so on in order to be able to provide good advice. Free access to psychiatrists/psychologists for getting through difficult pregnancies must also be provided. They may not be able to magically cure depression, but they can certainly help.

If it interests anyone, I'm currently trying to lobby my MP in the UK to push for a radical change to abortion laws in the UK to what I outlined in the opening post. If anyone has any ideas on how to tackle all three issues (not just abortion itself), I'd be interested in comments.

 

[Maedar]

You mentioned sex education, and that's a big problem. Republicans oppose that too.

Rick Perry - who supports completely outlawing abortion, btw - also supports teaching only abstinence, an idea that has proven time, and time again, to be a complete and absolute failure when attempted. (This is not the only area where he is incompetent.)

The GOP would have to make many compromises on their beliefs if their stance on abortion is to work. (I say "would have to" because I know they never will.)

 

[Blazekickblaziken]

I'm not saying that lack of educatio justifies abrotion. I'm explaining a reality of the situation. We as a society(in the US anyways) don't like comprehensive sex ed, bexuase it makes us uncomfortable or whatever. Comprehensive sex ed is good because it allows people to make informed decisions. Among these informed decisions are to wait to have sex and to have protected sex. We, in the US, like abstinance only sex ed because it sounds pretty or something. This leads to engaging in risky behavior like unprotected sex because they are either uninformed OR worse misinformed. If we teach kids from a young age that sex is bad, and you shouldn't do it, and you shouldn't talk or ask about it, then how can we expect them to educate themselves and make informed decisions. Besides, in many of these cases, sex isn't planned, it's just something that happens.

The point is, we are responsible for educating our children so that they make good judgement calls, if we don't do this, we have a bit blame for the bad judgement calls they make. But this is only one aspect of the whole abortion issue, to which there are many, many aspects. About 80 years worth of aspects.

Also, regarding children with handicaps I don't think you understand how big of a responsibility they are. If we're talking about the more severely handicapped children, we could be talking about someone who will never be able to cook, bathe themselves, change, be left alone for any period of time. They will have many, many doctors appointments, and therapies. Also be prepared to be in school fighting for your child's rights, because when budget cuts happen, guess where one of the first places they like to cut is? Think it's a challenge to give a haircut to a 5 yearold, try giving one to a 5 year old in the body of an 18 year old. Now imagine going shopping, or taking them to the dentist. Living with that is a challenge.

And what happens after the parent dies? Does the child get sent to a home? You won't be there to watch your child anymore. So now you have to have faith in thesystem to give all the same care and attention to your child that you did. Noone who's gone through what I've described above is naive enough to think that'll happen.

My point is some parents can't or don't want to handle that. And that's the last person you want caring for that child. Could you live your life hoping that your child dies before you because you're too scared of what might happen if they don't? I'm not saying that you should have an abortion if your child is handicapped, but if someone does it's not our place to judge

 

[Nightmareisalive]

Well I know sex education is a big thing in the UK or at least in my school at least. We had a class called learning for life and work and it dealt with a range of matters including pregnancy. Also science in third year also dealt with pregnancy so I think for us at least we got a good understanding of the subject. For America it would be a great step if people stopped seeing sex as a thing you aren't meant to talk about. Parents are very tough on the subject since most don't like their children learning about it. It will only be possible if the subject became part of the education system where a test on knowledge of the subject is needed where to pass on is the only way to pass the year. Parents may argue against it but sometimes they get blinded for what's best for their kids.

I understand where you are coming from Blazekickblazeiken though I think that's more of an USA problem where resources aren't properly provided for parents with disabled kids than anything else. I think the matter would be easier if the government helped people out with disabled people, help give knowledge on the matter, support when needed and a care system that can look after a disabled person's needs would help take the strain of the parents.

Also to Jdavidc what about condoms being made available in schools for unwanted pregnancies? I remember one of my teachers talk about it and it does seem like a good idea. People in secondary school are going to be more likely to have unwanted pregnancies so condoms being made available in schools were it is easily accessible while it may not stop them having sex will at least help drop the rate of pregnancy.

 

[WizardTrubbish]

I'm pro-choice. I may not always agree with it, but it's not my job to tell a woman what to do with her body. It's her body, not the government's. Besides, prohibiting abortions will only lead to a black market that we saw before Roe v. Wade. Much like we saw with prohibition, the war on drugs, and would see with gun control, banning something does not stop people from doing it.

While I'm pro-choice, I believe that we should teach our children proper sex education and provide easy access to birth control to limit the need for abortions.

 

[Garbodor.]

Whatever your opinions on abortion are, I think we can all agree that this is total BS.

Why is this total BS? If you have seen some of the statement made by those radical femenist then you would see where I am coming from.

Rape is one of the most horrifying experiences that can happen to somebody. To lose complete control of your body and be molested by another human being (even worse if it's somebody close to the person) is horrific. Any victim of rape will be paranoid and unstable afterwards, and will want to move on with their life. Forcing a woman to carry around a reminder of their horrific experience for nine months is barbaric. And that's not even getting into the emotional trauma of actually seeing the child; loving it because it's your child, and hating the sight of it because it was brought into the world because of such a traumatising experience.

Where did I say rape is not a horrible experience? Yes, it's one of the worst things that can happen to a person but I look at this situation in a different angle. I look at it in view of the unborn child. Not even rape is not an excuse to kill a child because that child has done nothing wrong. I understand the women must be going through hell, but who ever said this was a easy situation? but choosing between a women suffering and saving a life and a women having a abortion and suffering less, I will choose saving the life choice. The women will still suffer after being raped no matter what happens, so why a innocent life be taken in the process?

Easy tiger. You're as bad as the "radical feminists" that you're condemning.

Abortion is not a split-second decision and treating it as such is callous and myopic. Women who have abortions are not foaming at the mouth and crying for the death of all children. It's a horrible and incredibly difficult decision to have to make and nobody WANTS to have to be in that position. Aborting a child is an incredibly difficult thing to go through, and painting every woman who does so as some sort of monster isn't helping anything. How about you actually think about what you're saying and put yourself in their position instead of spouting out emotionally manipulative and tactless statements that don't get this debate anywhere?



I read an article awhile back that claimed that abortion rates in countries where abortion is illegal are almost the same as countries where it's legal. Can anybody find anything to back this up? I'll have a look later but I don't have the time to dig through my tumblr for the link right now.

I don't care how many abortions are done in a certain country relative to others. I could not care less about statistics I am saying abortion is wrong full stop. There should not be a single abortion. Comparing me to a radical feminist just because I stated abortion is murder? Please don't label me like that, I will not label you with such horrible things.
I want to save a life than not save one, I will save lives even if it meant I had to give up my own. Life is precious to me, just because you see life as something that can be bargained over it does not mean my comments are "tactless".

If you want to throw articles at me then show me statistics showing the percentage of abortions which are done due to rape.

 

[WizardTrubbish]

Why is this total BS? If you have seen some of the statement made by those radical femenist then you would see where I am coming from.

For example?

Where did I say rape is not a horrible experience? Yes, it's one of the worst things that can happen to a person but I look at this situation in a different angle. I look at it in view of the unborn child. Not even rape is not an excuse to kill a child because that child has done nothing wrong. I understand the women must be going through hell, but who ever said this was a easy situation? but choosing between a women suffering and saving a life and a women having a abortion and suffering less, I will choose saving the life choice. The women will still suffer after being raped no matter what happens, so why a innocent life be taken in the process?

What SS said was right, it is completely barbaric to require a woman to carry a reminder of the trauma she suffered for nine months. Also, think of some of the most extreme scenarios. What if a thirteen year old girl is raped? Should she really be forced to go through child-birth?

 

[MidnightFennekin]

I'm all for abortion. What if the baby will have complications that will make its life short and painful? What if the woman is risking her life for the baby? What if she got raped? What if she's young?

However, I dislike it when older woman just do it because they don't want the baby. Why not just put it for adoption? That way, it can still live a life...

Though since I'm a male, I might not understand it all...

 

[Garbodor.]

For example?



What SS said was right, it is completely barbaric to require a woman to carry a reminder of the trauma she suffered for nine months. Also, think of some of the most extreme scenarios. What if a thirteen year old girl is raped? Should she really be forced to go through child-birth?

The worst thing I ever heard one say was that even normal sex can be considered rape!The statement was so moronic and what was even worst was the fact she works in a college... She claimed once a women start having sex it's difficult for them to stop and they might not want to have sex???!! thus you could see it that rape.
Other things they say (which I saw on bbc question time) is that a daughter kissing her father is perverted. She was trying to link that to the fact so many underage girls are becoming sexualized and getting pregnant underage ( She did not say this directly but insinuated it)

Now regarding your second comment, I think I have made myself very clear have I not?
Under no circumstances should it be allowed to take a life no matter in what stage of development they are in. Yes women will suffer, but she will suffer regardless of the abortion. Now assuming having the child will be more traumatic and will be more worst than abortion (How would you know that anyway?) then It does not make such a considerable difference so that the child should be killed. The child is innocent just like mother.

Now, even if I were to capitulate and say okay in this case abortion is okay (which I will not) then still abortion should be illegal in all other cases. Women should not use abortion as plan b if the after pill does not work and they are pregnant just because "they were not careful" during sex.

I'm all for abortion. What if the baby will have complications that will make its life short and painful? What if the woman is risking her life for the baby? What if she got raped? What if she's young?

However, I dislike it when older woman just do it because they don't want the baby. Why not just put it for adoption? That way, it can still live a life...

Though since I'm a male, I might not understand it all...

What are you on about? you are "all for abortion" just because at some cases some child may have complication? How would they know the child will have complication if it is not even born yet? Do you even know the legal age to murder a unborn child? Don't be so quick to make your decision, this is mostly all the time about saving perfectly healthy babies from being killed because a women got pregnant during casual sex. abortion should be illegal in all cases. Think more carefully before making your mind on such a serious issue. This is about life and death.