I would like to try and avoid a buch of rabid Catholics and Christians falling back only on the religious reasons and what have you. However, I do not see how that can be dodged.
My view? I'm for it. If a woman wants to get one, it is her choice. Some people seem to act like if one woman gets an abortion, it means that all the rest have to. If the child in question is not yours, butt out.
Also, on a lighter note, I say that abortions should be allowed when kids are up to 18 years old. That would solve a lot of headaches, eh?
So let's assume for right now that a fetus is not a person. Can anyone give an argument from that premise that a fetus still has a right to life? For clarity's sake a right to life would be an intrinsic worthiness of life that would compel us to not abort the fetus.
Abortion disgusts me. I mean if you are going to have a baby that you don't want, put him/her away to a foster home or put them up for adoption. Don't just kill the poor thing. It hasn't even lived yet, and then people decide to kill it. I think abortion should be against the law.
Well, since we've basically debunked potential life, that really leaves nothing. If it is not a person it doesn't have a right for anything. I still stick with my argument that two entities cannot have equal rights where one does not even have consciousness. I believe the fetus always vetoes it's rights to the mother, because it is dependent on her.
MaLfunction, as most of the posts can respond to what you've said, I'll give you a quick rundown.
Putting the baby up for adoption isn't always just that easy. Look at situations where incest is involved or if the mother is merely 12.
You said it hasn't lived (which is a point), and people decide to kill it. Can you kill something that is not alive? Meaning the fetus is not a person, yet.
If it were against the law, women would do it themselves and thus increase the mortality rate for home-abortion.
Well, it isn't about who is wrong or right. This is a debate. It's all about your opinion. I can make a stronger case to have abortion legal, but I still find something inherently wrong with it. I especially do not agree with partial-birth abortions. That is upsetting.
Thank god you came down as a voice of reason Asherlee. I mean, I was going to say the same thing more or less. Just more..blunt.
But I am going to throw in my two cents! I would put more in, but I am dirt cheap.
If it has not even had the chance to live yet, Malfunction, then it is not alive. Agreed? So you are not even killing it until a certain point. Before that, it is more like removing a growth.
To add to my previous post. I also strongly believe that a person's body is their temple and if she doesn't want something in it, then she should haven't to. So, I suppose there is no great way to have or not have abortion as an action to take. Making it legal is good, but I also have a problem with women using that as a method of birth control, though not directly.
I think alive and dead aren't the best choice of words here. It's more of when the zygote becomes a person. It's really tricky. Because I could argue that you are not a person until you become self-aware. That means 6 month olds are not persons.
All this leads right into stem-cell research. Which I think the benefits out weigh the negative consequences.
