So in todays world, We have Christians bombing abortion clinics and right wingers say thing that the constitution needs to ban abortion, when being conservative means not letting the gov into your personal affairs. a little hypocritical?



My issue with this is, there should be a seperation of church and state right? So how could you base a amendment on something supported solely by religion? Also, who is to say if a fetus is aborted, that the soul that would have gone into that vessel wouldnt just go into another body?


Well thats my view on it...... Feel free to rip me to shreds now.

People who are fiercely pro life, ie to the point of violence and continuous picketing do not think at all about the future. The planet is overpopulated as it is, we don't need any more unplanned babies clogging up our natural resources. It's a womans body, she has control of it, including her bodily functions which is all pregnancy is.

We need to start loving the people that we already have, and make the world a better place before we should even consider having children.

I used to feel sympathetic towards the Army of God. The abortion clinic bombers. But murder is murder either way so cannot morally support them.

Abortion is like child sacrifice to me when it is done just as a matter of convenience or to preserve a lifestyle. When it is done to preserve the mother's life or not harm her then that is different. The rest to me are just baby killers IMHO

As a form of population control or eugenics it is pretty disgusting as well.

yes but again.... how can you say that soul wont flourish somewhere else? Christians can't push the "theory" on the whole country.

Not interested in pushing the theory that is just my honest view. Just because the soul ends up in heaven does not take away from the baby murder aspect of it at all IMHO

It is up to the woman to choose, it is her body.

i dont mean to say the soul would just go to heaven, how do you know they wont end up in another body here on earth?

None Christian... had 2 miscarriages before having one healthy baby.. and then losing the ability to have any more, ever. And you know what? I say its a womans choice and anyone who has a problem with it can stuff a can in their pie hole and get over it. One thing I HATE about pro-lifers is their narrow mindedness. Holding up signs saying "You have a choice" but the fine print always says "but it has to be OUR choice, not yours". Any woman who gets pregnant and wants to abort likely has a good reason.. her OWN reason, and she doesn't need anyone telling her different. Clinics provide information for alternatives, and give counseling if they see the need.. thats their job, not the religious fanatics standing in the parking lot trying to intimidate poor girls.



A woman who has no stable job, no home, and no way to take care of herself for the 9 months it takes to bare a child.. yes.. having a child in those conditions DOES hurt the mother and, in the end, the child. And its not for you or anyone else to tell her shes a bad person for making HER choice.

And the Christians who are out there with their posters and fliers calling these women sinners.. The church tells us not to use condoms.. until the church is willing to pay for all the children born because of that closed minded ideal.. they can shove it.

I read the OP but that is not my view.



Forget about sin then. What about responsibility? If you cannot raise a child then you have no business getting pregnant. Ya, use condoms or something. She is a bad person and a murderer. This one issue is my hot button. If I had a chance to vote against it I would in a heartbeat as long as it allowed for preservation of a woman's health and allowed them for that reason only.

You do realize that in many states birth control is a social stigma.. parents refuse to tell their children, schools are only allowed to teach abstinence, not birth control, and girls are practically encouraged to have children as young as 14.. There are programs in schools where I live to help pregnant teens get their GEDs... and these are posted as if the system is asking them to get pregnant. How about you vote on something important, like mandatory sex and pregnancy prevention education?

Interesting how you and others call it a fetus. Just a little globule really, a tiny insignificant ball of flesh. How about this IT'S A BABY!!!!!!!!!

Actually it is by definition a fetus.

"Why is it when it's us it's an abortion, but when it's a chicken it's an omelette?" - George Carlin

Hah.. I like that.

Abortion is a tricky, sensitive issue. Firstly, I believe the only instance in which a woman should get an abortion is if she was raped. Otherwise, she's just being irresponsible. Sure, 14, 15, 16, etc year olds opt for abortions when they get pregnant, but that's just because they don't use birth control, don't know what in the world they're doing, cannot support a baby by themselves, and don't understand what the consequences of their actions will be. I think abortion needs to be attacked at it's source; educating people about safe-sex methods, getting rid of the myths about sex (i.e. standing up during sex means the woman won't get pregnant, withdraw method is a way to not get a woman pregnant, douching after sex prevents pregnancy, etc[btw, none of those work]), and making birth control available to everyone. If we just took time to educate people, we wouldn't have the issue of abortion at all, or it would at least be drastically reduced. But, I digress. As for abortion, I don't feel that a child is truly "alive" until it can survive without nourishment from it's mother, which is around 35 weeks at the youngest. Babies before that cannot survive without nutrition, oxygen, and a blood supply from it's mother, so in all honesty it is just a parasite. As harsh as that sounds it's pretty much true. Yes, it's a baby, but that doesn't make it a God. Abortion beyond that point is relatively painful to the mother, just plain gory, and is emotionally straining. But, if a woman chooses to abort a child, that is her decision and her decision alone. No one else has control over her body but the woman in question. Also, we cannot have an amendment based off of a Christian concept, because 1. Not everyone is a Christian, so not everyone agrees with Christian beliefs 2. We have separation of church and state and 3. We have the freedom of religion, and if we imposed a Christian rule, then we would be compromising that very privilege. In short, we cannot impose this law because we would be taking away constitutional rights from those who do not conform to this Christian concept. We might as well say that mass has to be held in all schools, or that an entire class has to be devoted to Bible study, or that no one can eat pork. How long until one concept turns into more, if not all the concepts? It's not something we can risk if we wish to remain a free nation. Furthermore, it depends on what one considers an abortion. Miscarriage can be caused by drinking, drugs, smoking, malnutrition, and trauma to the mother. Cannot those be considered "abortions" as well, because the mother is in complete control over her own actions?

Also, there are instances when an abortion is necessary in order to save the mother's life. Ectopic pregnancies are when a fetus grows in a place other than the uterus, most commonly the Fallopian tubes. In this situation, if the baby is allowed to grow, the Fallopian tubes will rupture, causing the mother to bleed to death in a horrifically painful way. Is that fair? The ONLY way to save the mother is to abort the baby, so can it be considered "evil" if the mother has to do this to save her own life? I think not, because the baby would die anyway. One life, or two? If abortions are not legal, then what happens to these mothers? Do they just suffer and die because religious people cannot keep their opinions to themselves?

Not until about 30 weeks of developing is a child any more than a ball of growing flesh and tissues. In the first few days, the baby is merely a ball of a few dozen cells until it implants itself into the uterine wall where it will continue to grow until it reaches maturity. The baby doesn't even have a gender until it's about 6 weeks old. Most of the major organs develop within the first 30 weeks of a pregnancy, but the baby is far from "complete". The skeleton is barely formed, the child is hairless, the lungs have yet to fully develop, and many more. So no, the entity in question is not a conventional "baby" until it's nearly ready to be born. Until then, it's a developing fetus, or more simply, a ball of growing flesh and tissues.

Let's take a minute and examine your logic. You are equating a human baby with a chicken's egg. OK - that's point #1. George Carlin as a source? That's like getting Andrew Dice Clay to do a class on homosexuality.

#2. Your labels - Which would you rather kill given a choice, a fetus or a baby? Everyone kills the fetus because killing a baby is unthinkable. So by creating a nice "label" for the baby, you can eliminate it's value. Why not start labeling invalids, or mental r******s or whatever. Then we could do like the Nazi's and just start killing everyone we don't like. save the word fetus for medical and science classes and let's talk about babies in the real world.

#3. Overpopulation, the Starving, and Allocating Resources: instead of complaining about these issues, how bout we start pointing the finger of personal responsibility? USE SOME FLIPPING BIRTH CONTROL!!!!!!! It's free for you, all of my hard earned tax dollars make sure of it.

I am in favor of abortion, only because a woman who doesn't want a baby, doesn't deserve one.
Making a woman who doesn't want a child have one, only hurts the child. IMO
I also don't think abortions should be performed after 12 weeks gestation. That's 3 months, the woman has had plenty of time to make up her mind.
I couldn't possibly go so far as to say 30 weeks. My oldest child was born at 27 weeks, he spent 2 weeks in a neonatal unit, only because he couldn't regulate his body temperature, his lungs and everything else were fine. He's 19 now and in college.
So I wouldn't go that far.

Yet, a growing baby and a growing chicken are nearly the same thing. Is there that much difference between a chicken and a human embryo? No. Not at all.

Chick:
http://biology.clc.uc.edu/fankhauser/Labs/...0x_PC231462.JPG
http://www.usd.edu/esci/age/_images/natura...pment_chart.jpg
http://www.learner.org/channel/courses/bio...ize/1876_fs.jpg

Human:
http://embryo.soad.umich.edu/carnStages/allStagesButtons.gif
http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/on-line/li...0-0-0-0-0-0.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...c_Pregnancy.jpg

Really, they're very similar, even though we're more emotionally attached to the human embryo.

#2. Human embryos are mere balls of growing flesh until around 30 weeks of development. Until then, they CANNOT survive without being nourished and protected within the mother. They're more akin to parasites than living babies. See my previous post for a more detailed description.

#3. Teenagers ARE NOT encouraged to use birth control. Some religions are even against it. Catholics cannot use birth control, so if they have sex, they're going to get pregnant. Maybe if the church changed it's views we would be able to stop teenage pregnancy. Most teenagers ARE NOT educated about sex and birth control, so they don't use it, or the media and their friends tell them that it makes them seem less "masculine" if they use condoms. It's the media, religion, and society's faults that we have such a high rate of teenage pregnancy. The most effective way to stop this is to attack it at it's source, which is EDUCATION. If we educated the population, we wouldn't have the need for so many abortions.

Exactly, instead of complaining about what they kids are taught in sex ed, make sure they are taught exactly what they need to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Have free condom machines in schools. I can't believe the people who think that kids won't fool around if they are kept in the dark. And the parents who are surprised that their little baby is either pregnant or got a girl pregnant, come on! They are lucky if they are JUST pregnant, with the STDs flying around out there, we really need to educate our youth to ensure that they aren't going to be dead in a few years from AIDS and HEP C. Even Syphilis is making a come back because kids aren't educated enough.

Seperation of church and state? There is no seperation of church and state if you want to know the truth. I will tell it plainly from my point of view. When I was once a devout christian I remember sitting in church during the first election Bush was running. The preacher stood upon his mighty pulpit saying descreet things such as "the election is coming up and we can't tell you who to vote for but I think you know who should vote for." after service we found our way to our cars where someone had convienently stuck pictures of aborted fetuses on our windshields with inscriptions like "if you vote democratic you promote murder." The church has been imploring their followers to do many things for a long time. They follow the church blindly like sheep to the slaughter it is a more suttle form of the crusades. Politicians as well feed on people religious beliefs to get their seat on the throne the people shooting up abortion clinics are just flunkies for the bigger picture of what is happening. It is a vicisious cycle and the very reason I have made near future plans to move out out of this country if only to escape it in my lifetime.

I personally wouldn't have one but I defend another woman's right to have an abortion if she wants........

It's such a personal issue that Goverments and Churches and Pro-life groups and do-gooders should not stick their noses in this OR have a say in the matter, as far as I'm concerned......If a woman wants an abortion, for whatever reason, she'll get one, no questions asked......

I would rather it's in a safe clinical sterile environment but that's just my opinion.....

Agreed 100%. I wouldn't be able to do it.

If we make abortions illegal, how many young girls are we going to lose from botched illegal backstreet abortions or self abortions? I remember back to when I was 16, old enough (I thought) for some things, but definitely not able to raise and support a baby. If I got pregnant at that age, a decision would be a VERY scary thing to make.

There is an option that no one else has mentioned and that is adoption. I, being adopted myself, am very pro-adoption; however more and more kids are having babies and keeping them. Whilst a childless family remains childless, despite wanting one so bad it aches.

I don't like abortion, but not having it or making it illegal creates more devastation and grief.

For whatever reason a girl wants an abortion it doesn't matter to me. I would rather the person getting the abortion to have a better life then to have her life ruined by a baby. I could care less about a fetus or whatever you would like to call it.

They should be safe, legal, rare and performed early in the pregnancy.

I don't want kids but I don't know if I would be able to have an abortion, never been in that situation thank goodness.

Hearts
Ok I do understand that this is a debate thread but I will not come back after posting this and debate it what I wrote here, I do not want to live the pain of heart I am now in having to write this to show your hearts and make my points clearly heard, respect to all Pavot…

My Thoughts upon Murdering of hearts, please do hear me out, this not what you may be thinking, I have killed hearts in my lifetime, the first time I was only Eighteen, in High school, in Love, living in my own apartment, a full time job and going to School as well, I was a man, but my Parents as they decided to forcibly make use and they did make us have an abortion, it killed a lot of hearts a baby (Fetus-Life) it killed our hearts then, and still does to this day, thirty plus years after the apportion and will until we die, we take such things such heart choices to our graves and live in these heart choices daily and nightly awake and in our dreams, only if you are willing to sever and I mean to numb and change your hearts forever should you make what I believe strongly for any reason not the right choice as in to take a life.

The next time that I killed, my heart and hers and her families, was a few years after, my wee young family desperately needed the food and I went out and took a life, I took carefully skilled aim and the bullet ripped through her sending her many feet into the air as her back bone broke in two, her sisters stood there in great horror and shock and turned and fan off and I let them, numb myself and very sick within my heart, this Man’s heart, I destroyed her precious life and her children’s and her families, I hear her cry out in great pain and agony to this day it is haunting I watched the life leave from within her eyes her spirit went…

If you think that you are a tough hearted person, if you think you can face that mirror and look into those eyes I am betting I know you will kill more than the heart of that wee baby, I struggle in my writing and my many struggles emotionally and physically show in my daily writing in the moods of, but let me tell you this, what that wee baby is going to show you of your own heart, is your own call my friends, that wee life and life it is will show you your heart every day for the rest of your life, and I do, God my dear friends I do want that baby to shows you the Love of your hearts and not the horrible tormenting pain within, it is love now but if you change it to pain it will be your own call and you will live it daily for the rest of your lives, I am a huge strong Man a tuff son of a B. I have chased down bears in wilder youth and fought many battles but I have never even expected that I would I would crumble and hate my own self for taking those two lives the life of my own wee baby (Fetus-Life-hearted one) never showing my hearts love and life and a does life killing her and her families hearts.…

I suggest you print off these words I wrote and every time or that one time you have to make that dissection you read the wise world of this old Indian Grandfather…

Pavot

Pavot, your heartfelt words always make me stop and think.

This is why it is the choice of the woman, not her parents, the father, or the governments. No one can make that choice but her. She is the one who has to live with it.

Too bad a fetus is just a gummy bear.

That was utterly beautiful, Pavot. Truly words spoken from the heart....

I have some problems with this & I'll get called a few names I'm sure & someone will say I'm heartless so be it. Your a male & I don't think that from a man's POV you can honestly say what it is to lose a baby, untill you gave birth to one yourself. For a women who has been raped she'll tell you that she doesn't feel that way.can you imagine haveing to carry the child of your attacker?... Having that constant reminder of the violence and humiliation forced on you by society? Every time she looks at the child though no fault of her own shes going to hate that child, & she's going to see herself being raped all over again.

There are ways to prevent unwanted births. Starting with birth control, not having sex is yet another way. Some will say that birth control is also killing a unborn baby, at some point people should mind thier own bussiness. Whats next stop masterbation?


Untill you have walked in someone else shoes then you have no right to say anything. People need to stop trying to tell other what to do with thier bodies.

I am not saying I agreeing with abortion I am saying that it's not another person right to tell them what to do with thier body.

And I have held the Dear friends in my arms that have been raped and beaten to a pulp, and I have held their wee babies and watch then grow to be beautiful hearted caring Loving people... I am a Man yes but I know my heart and the hearts of others well…
Pavot

I have as well but you & I know nothing of giving birth to child.

They say that birth is the most painful thing a woman will ever experience. I've never had a baby, but trust me, if you've ever watched a pregnant lady give birth, you can tell it hurts... a lot.

it's should be a womans choice.

It sure does Lady, trust me I've done it 5 times......

Having a baby is the ultimate gift a woman can give to herself and that's why it's very important that SHE make the choice, whether to have an abortion or not.....I would hate to be in a situation where I was forced to do something either way......

Unfortunately, plenty of women are forced.....Young girls by their families or even married women forced by their husbands because they don't want to have another child......

God bless you Clovis, I have said much on this issue, it pains me to say more , What you said. Amen.
Love Omnaka

What's so special about humans? We're self aware, so we give ourselves this special status in the animal kingdom. Chickens consume less, are less violent(and tastier) so why the double standard? Why is it ok to thin out the numbers of a species in the wild but when it's us it's a great evil? Why is it ok to chop off the arms of a tree if they're blocking our view? Why is the most violent destructive arrogant life form on the planet given a special status over the other life forms on the planet?




But it still is a fetus. If your wife is pregnant you don't say we have three kids instead of two and one on the way do you? You don't go around calling tadpoles frogs do you? A clump of cells in a womb isn't a baby, it's the result of a chemical reaction that a woman has a right to terminate. We do have labels for the mentally r******ed, but they're still a full grown human being, and nobody has the right to take their personal liberty, which isn't given to you when you're concieved, but when you finally reach an age where you're capable of making decisions.




I'm not responsible for consuming resources beyond those I consume myself. I don't have kids and I don't want to bring any to this disaster we call Humanity. Of course, everyone should be using contraceptives, but I can't force other people to use them. I also can't use magic powers to stop condoms from breaking. The focus on schools here is on personal responsibility, so a woman, no matter how promiscious she wants to be, shouldn't have to have an abortion. But should she have the right to one? Of course.

All life is sacred to me, it is part of my faith, but I am not within my rights to tell a woman what she should do in a situation that concerns her life and her body. Maybe someday all babies will be welcome in the world and there will be no need for abortion. In the mean time women should have the right to proper medical abortion if that is what they want. Making abortion illegal doesn't stop abortions, women still have them they a just unsafe and they die or end up unable to have children ever. I remember when abortion were illegal. My brother worked in the country morgue and he told me he saw young women there everyday from botched abortions. I don't think we need to go back to that. Women have a right to proper medical treatment.

The abortion of a healthy child, while in my eyes not morally condamnable because the life of individuals is expendable, is still a blatant offence to society in its ensemble. Abortions are depriving the organism which constitutes the State of its cells, which are necessity for a State in order to act. Abortions of, let's say, mentally or physically impaired children, on the other hand, are relieving a burden of the State in its entirety. Thus, for me, an abortion is not a question of morality, but of sheer pragmatism

Greetings,
Mucker

I think it should be the woman's choice up until the child would be able to survive outside the womb. You can call it killing of children, babies or whatever, I don't really care what you call it, that doesn't change what you are doing. This world is messed up enough as it is, if the women getting abortions now had the children instead the world would go to hell even faster than it already is. We'd find ourself in a world where even more children are having crappy childhoods, even more children dying, even more pressure on the resources we have.

What is a bigger mystery to me is that almost any time I encounter a pro-life person they seem to want to teach abstinence as well. Of course I've also yet to meet many pro-life people who are so pro life they are against capital punishment. I know this is of course not a very good statistical foundation as I've not really talked to that many and all of them were from the US.

I think this world would be a better place if people focused on the rights of those people who are already here than those who might be here. The only thing we need to think about regarding the people who will be after us is that we don't leave them a world more ****ed up than the one we got.

Life begins at conception not at birth. Baby or fetus or embryo it is still human life that is destroyed and a murder when done with the intent of ridding life as a matter of convenience. When done with the intent of self defense that is another matter. Intent is important.

The whole it is a woman's choice is a pretty narrow view implemented by the feminist movement. What is true to me is that it is not a choice but a responsibility. Both mother and father are responsible from the moment of conception. They should be responsible from the moment of sexual intercourse as well.

As far as rape that is the toughest issue since how much will it harm the mother to have the baby in some cases? In other cases as Pavot stated that there are beautiful lives made and no regrets once the child is up and running and then becomes a responsible loving adult. What I disagree with is using the rape issue to then go ahead and say that all abortions are OK. Simply no, all the taking of life, in any case it is taken, is not OK in every case. Someone breaks in your house and you have the legal right to stop them dead in their tracks is the law but if you did not have to kill someone it does not matter what the law states or does not state your intent was murder and you committed murder.

It is a complex issue because society itself does not promote responsibility. We cannot simply criminalize abortion I admit until all the factors are in place. The major one being a responsible society and responsibility being instilled every member of society starting from the time they are children. I will still vote against it in any referendum. But the bottom line is not what is legal or illegal for me because that is politicizing the issue. The bottom line for me is that it is murder and people should be responsible.

Abortion will come back and haunt both the father and mother and will do so for years or might even begin years after the fact. Post Abortion Syndrome is a fact even if both APA's do not recognize it as a medical condition or have it listed on either the DSM-IV-TR or the ICD-10. There are always consequences to our choices and that is the responsibility that comes with free will. The gravest consequences IMHO are those that involve making the choice of taking of a human life when self defense was not the reason.

I BELIEVE THIS TOO ,BUT LETS SAY A GIRL GOT PREGNANT DURING A ONE NIGHT STAND WITH A GUY SHE NEVER MET PROBABLY WONT EVER SEE HIM AGAIN AND SHE DECIDEDS SHES NOT READY TO BE A MOTHER SO SHE ABORTS, BUT A COUPLE GETS PREGNANT AND THE WOMAN DECIDEDS SHES NOT READY TO BE A MOTHER AND WANTS TO ABORT BUT THE GUY WANTS TO HAVE THE BABY AND BE A FATHER.
I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS A FEW TIMES, BUT THIS IS WHERE I GET CONFUSED BECAUSE I BELIVE IT THE WOMANS CHOICE.WHO GETS TO DECIDE?SHOULD THE GIRL STILL GO FOR IT OR IS IT DECIDED IN COURT OR SOMETHING?

I repeat my post because i think this was a worthwhile post and not really on the issue of WHEN a fetus is a life or not.

There ARE other things to consider aside from personal opinions and besides those opinions of those who are not necessarily in the position(men) to make the decision (while I certainly do appreciate the earnest emotions of Pavot and those who feel the same).

Perhaps we need to look at it from a different perspective. What if you were the parent of a young person who became pregnant through WHATEVER reason (thought she was in love, promiscuity, duped by a heartless male, rape - it really doesn't matter) Would you be so judgmental, condemning, and righteous that your child would rather "take care" of the issue herself, quietly and without humiliation, via an illegal, backstreet abortion or do it herself out of desperation to rid herself of this? And perhaps DIE from such an action? Or would you prefer she (unknowing to you or knowing) was able to get the medical care and counseling before, during and after in a legal, safe, and proper environment?

I also posted the following as I am surprised no one mentioned it or even commented on my post:

I think this is a good question and one I've wondered myself. The same goes for adoption too. If a mother puts the baby up for adoption and the father feels ready to raise a child on their own, what then? Part of me thinks, in a perfect world, the mother-to-be would discuss it with the father-to-be FIRST, like my birth parents did and reach a mutual agreement.

Then I think that the infant is part of the mother's body and it is part of her (probably my innate motherly instincts talking here) and she should decide what she wants and what is best. I argue with myself over that one though.

I once read that if men were the ones to get pregnant, there would be a lot less premarital sex or unwanted babies in the world. I don't know how true this is but it is food for thought. Its probably a big part of what makes the vast difference between men and women.

Although I disagree completely with the notion that a child's worth can be defined purely by its use to the state (what a terrifying thought!), it is worth pointing out the flaw in even this logic - a child brought into the world with parents who are incapable, financially and mentally, of raising it places a massive burden on the state.

Also worth pointing out that the human embryo/chicken embryo analogy is just wrong... the eggs you buy in shops are unfertilised. No matter how long you leave an egg without making an omelet, it ain't going to turn into a chicken...

This is a pretty simple answer for me. People have the right to CHOOSE. Why should anybody anywhere have any control at all over whether or not a woman has an abortion or not. I especially disagree with anyone who says rape victims should still go through with it. Nobody should be able to decide whether or not a woman will have to sustain a tremendous burden, but the woman herself. That's all there is to it.

It is easy to scream pro-life when you are well off and stable and only have planned or accidental yet not detrimental pregnancies. Try being the raped teenage girl. Tell her to her face "you will have this baby whether you like it or not. I don't care if you got raped and have no means to support the child. This is my view and you should do what I say because I am right."

Nobody and I mean nobody should be able to vote on some bill abolishing abortion entirely. That is just too extreme. You can't force a sickly or raped woman to go through with something that is a danger for the potential mother. I also feel that the other extreme is bad too though. Such as just being irresponsible and going around having promiscuous sex with no worries. But I understand that with free choice this means everybody. The best thing to do would be to educate the kids better to avoid unwanted pregnancies.

And it seems to be somewhat of a cycle. Many more girls that are not well off or are in poverty are getting pregnant than the other girls. And these girls are many times themselves the result of unwanted pregnancies and fatherless homes. Their moms can hardly care for them. And when this happens the same thing ends up happening to these young girls that happened to their mothers.

Thank you for being one of the few to have a well balanced view that takes more into account than the average opinion does. I agree with you on the above point in quotes. Education and responsibility though should not be the sole domain of schools or the media. The best examples of education and responsibility should come from the parents but in more cases than not it isn't. Too many leave the raising of their children to the media, schools, or even their nannies then turn around and wonder why they have their teens are getting pregnant. Then they turn around and say things like the best solution is free and legal abortions for all at anytime. The best solution is not a reactive solution as the one who never maintains their care but ends up with it breaking down always until it does for good and the whole time they are playing catch up. The best solution is a proactive solution, preventive maintenance in the car example, and in society this is teaching our children to be responsible.

There is a plethora of other factors too such as teenagers even existing when for time immemorial before the industrialization children went from kids to adults without no intermediate stage. Now days some remain with a childish mindset well into their 30s and beyond. But all these arguments such as the health of the mother or teens are lame excuses to have abortions easily available. If one were to look into the majority of people having abortions they are not minors but adults. In 2005 within the US only 19% of those having abortions were teens. Only 6.1% of people had abortions due to the risks towards fetal or maternal health. It is a pretty sick picture that the rest outside of that 6.1% are facilitators of murderer.

http://www.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/phil...on_abortion.htm

That's your opinion, Clovis. Some would argue that the child is not really "alive" until it can survive without the mother. It's kind of like saying tumors are living creatures because they grow and develop, granted not into a child, but they grow nonetheless. And what of Molar pregnancies, when the egg is not fertilized but tissue continues to grow and develop inside the uterus anyway? According to your logic, couldn't this being be considered a "child"? <-- not attacking you here, I'm just saying you're making a big assumption by saying this, because not everyone believes that.

So you're saying a woman shouldn't be in control over her own body? Why not just say women should be slaves to men? Everyone has rights to control their own bodies, and that applies to women as well. Over 50% of teenage mothers end up on well fare, so couldn't one say that it's better for the mother to not have a child, because it only holds her back in her life? Shouldn't the father have to uphold his position and take care of the child too? It takes around $350,000 to raise a child to be 18, not including fees for schooling, and a lot of mothers get abortions because they cannot sacrifice that much to raise a child. They just can't, so why make another life suffer? What's better, two lives suffering in poverty, or one barely making it by?

It very much hurts the mother to be raped. STDs can be easily passed on through unprotected sex, and I really don't think rapists are going to be free from STDs if they're running about raping people for goodness sake, and STDs can be life threatening and can cause major problems to the mother and her baby if she conceives because of the rape. HIV/AIDS, syphilis, chlamydia, scabies, gardnerella, lice (crabs), trichomoniasis, chanchroids, gonorrhea, herpes, hepatitis (A-E), candida, and HPV are only SOME of the many STDs that a woman could get from being raped.
HIV/AIDS: http://www.avert.org/aids.htm
syphilis: http://www.cdc.gov/std/syphilis/STDFact-Syphilis.htm
scabies: http://www.medicinenet.com/scabies/article.htm
chlamydia: http://www.cdc.gov/std/Chlamydia/STDFact-Chlamydia.htm
gardnerella: http://www.healthscout.com/ency/68/435/main.html
pubic lice: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dpd/parasites/li..._pubic_lice.htm
trichomoniasis: http://www.cdc.gov/STD/Trichomonas/STDFact...chomoniasis.htm
chanchroids: http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/n/non_specif...diseases-4a.htm (not exact, but this is what it causes)
gonorrhea: http://www.cdc.gov/std/gonorrhea/stdfact-gonorrhea.htm
herpes: http://www.cdc.gov/STD/herpes/STDFact-Herpes.htm
hepatitis: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/index.htm
candida: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candida_(genus)
HPV: http://www.cdc.gov/STD/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm
There's also Rape Trauma Syndrome, which is equally as detrimental to the mother's mental state of mind as STDs and unwanted pregnancies are to her physical being.
http://www.medicineau.net.au/clinical/psychiatry/rts.html

Rape is incredibly common and SHOULD NOT be taken lightly. Rape is NOT over-exagerated. Rape is traumatic and incredibly harmful to the women (and men) who are victims of rape.
http://www.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/tows_2...0020215_b.jhtml
http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/9691/r4.html
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/2402/myths.html
http://www.student.richmond.edu/~stealinghome/facts.htm
So, to put it simply, rape IS harmful to the mother, whether she has a baby because of it or not. It should be HER constitutional right to get rid of this baby if she chooses, because it was given to her against her will. We have free will, so we should be able to abort children if we so choose. Plus, every time you kill even an insect, you commit murder, so why do we spray insect-killing pesticides? We're committing murder, so why do we do it? For the betterment of our society. If we don't allow abortion, we'll only become overpopulated that much quicker.

I have to deal with hypothetical situations like the one you illustrated nearly every day. I've been taking martial arts for over 6 years, and the whole basis of our school is teaching children, teens, and adults how to defend themselves, even if that means killing your attacker. In my 6 years of taking martial arts, I've learned more ways to kill someone than I ever thought existed, but the point of that is if you're in a situation where someone is attacking you with intent to harm you, you have every right to disarm and fight against that person. If it comes to killing, then so be it. I would rather kill a man than be mugged, raped, and thrown into a ditch and have to care for a child later on. It's not murder, it's self defense. EVERYONE has the right to defend themselves, do they not? I feel they do. It's the attacker's fault for attacking oneself after all, and if they get hurt that's their own fault. They could have chosen to not attack, but they didn't, so therefore they have to pay the price. Yes, I know it's harsh, but no one said life was going to be happy rainbows and sunshiny meadows all the time. Now, I don't advocate for killing people who attack one, because if I was attacked I highly doubt I would have the heart to kill someone, but if it was a matter of life and death, I would choose to kill to save myself. I will not allow myself to become yet another female victim that was raped, killed, or kidnapped that we oh so often hear about in the news.

I agree in that people should not be allowed to kill unless they are doing so in self-defense, but cannot the same thing be said for self-preservation? If a mother has an ectopic pregnancy ( http://www.kidshealth.org/parent/pregnancy...cy/ectopic.html ), the baby must be aborted or she will die. Is that wrong? Is it better to let the mother horridly bleed to death, while the baby will die anyway? No. It's better to save one of them rather than have both of them die because of religious morals that they may not agree with. The mother's life, and her family's, can very much be compromised by adding an unwanted child. It puts stress great stress on the mother, whether we want to accept that or not. And what if a woman who has always dreamed of being a mother with her life-long partner is raped, has a child, and is so consumed by hatred and despair because that child is not her and her partner's life-long dream, that she never wants to have a child again, or goes so far as to kill the child? Mental problems to arise because of unwanted children.

""Maternity or additional offspring may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by childcare. There is also the distress for all concerned associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically or otherwise, to care for it." Doe vs. Bolton, January 22, 1973 44"

Now remember, I'm not attacking you or your beliefs, Clovis, but merely trying to make a point and address other concerns in reference to your post. If you believe abortion is murder, than fine, I cannot change your beliefs, but I would like to prove that allowing unwanted children to live can potentially be as harmful, if not more, than aborting the child in the first place. Women have the right to do what they want with their bodies, and making abortion illegal is not allowing women their full constitutional rights, even if people see it as murder.

These beautiful words need to be repeated for this might be the only good that comes out of this thread. Post Abortion Syndrome is real and affects both men and women. Men will be haunted by the choice in the decision making they had that led to any abortions. Here is some information on Post Abortion Syndrome.



http://www.allaboutlifechallenges.org/Post...on-Syndrome.htm