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?
If I remember currently, there was a thread a while back in which we established that the Earth with it's current population was well over carrying capacity.
You're right about that, I'd say. I managed to dig up this article from the BBC (here) that suggests, amongst other things, that food production will have to increase by about 70% over the next 40 years if we want to adequately feed/deal with the increased population. We're already struggling to feed the hungry but, if we take things to the extremes, there'll come a point when land for farming and land for housing will be in competition - do we feed the people we can and let many go without homes/shelters or do we shelter/house as many people as we can and let them go hungry?
So? What's your point? There are millions and millions of children born every year to happy/willing/economically stable parents who can take good care of them
Apologies, my ignorance. I took it as population as a whole rather than simply those aborted.
Now I'm just wondering about the clash of the rights. Should a pregnant woman be allowed to drink alcohol? I mean, it's her right but it also causes huge damage to the "child". But that would also go off-topic.
Since it'd cause damage to the child (and technically also to the mother, though in much less dramatic ways ), I guess the child's right for health clearly goes first.
I do disagree though with mothers who are just partying every night and getting drunk, ending up having sex with some stranger, and wanting to have an abortion every single time just because they "made another mistake". It happens way too often and at that point it becomes ridiculous.
I agree that those cases are stupid, yet forcing the girl to carry out the child or abort illegally under her own risks isn't the right solution. Look up alexstargazer's post on top of page 139, it pretty much says it.
Something has been striking me lately, we always talk about 'abortion' in the medical intervention sense, but technically that word contains clinical as well as natural aborts. Let's not forget that supposedly up to 50% of the egg cells/embryo/foetus abort naturally and lead to miscarriage. Just in case someone said that abortion would be unnatural...
The concentration is terrible too, it would be one thing if the population were somewhat evenly spread, but compared to Asia, the western hemisphere is empty, this makes food availability and production skewed.
Let's not forget that supposedly up to 50% of the egg cells/embryo/foetus abort naturally and lead to miscarriage
This is very true, although it could be argued, why should a woman abort just because she doesn't want a baby when there's women who want nothing more than a baby who miscarriage?
This is very true, although it could be argued, why should a woman abort just because she doesn't want a baby when there's women who want nothing more than a baby who miscarriage?
Because it's a choice; it's impossible to offer same conditions for everyone in a matter we can't fully control. Some may consider it disrespectful towards those who can't get a baby but I feel we aren't always necessarily bound to consider everyone else's conditions when it comes to make a personal decision.
Um, sorry for doubleposting but I just noticed I misread the last part of your sentence, not sure what you meant and I hope my answer still fits in somehow, but if it doesn't make sense, you know why^^
So you're saying that a woman who miscarries/whose body aborts the embyro or foetus is committing murder? I mean, sure she can't help it, but it's (according to you) murdering/killing a person so she should be punished.
You're aborting a foetus - that's completely different from killing a baby.
The unwanted child can be sent to foster care right away very easily,
What do I have to do to empathize this? ADOPTION/FOSTER CARE AGENCIES WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO COPE WITH THE INCREASED AMOUNT OF CHILDREN IN THEIR CARE - OR, AT THE VERY LEAST, WOULD STRUGGLE TO FIND STABLE AND GOOD HOMES FOR THEM.
The unwanted child can be sent to foster care right away very easily, so that solves the **** and accident problem.
There are a few flaws.. first: see post above, bolded part. Second: emm.. unwanted? Kid might have a hard time accepting that. Third: the women concerned would still have to carry out and give birth to the child, and this would be bad for their career, as well as a huge psychological stress (and the risk of dieing from giving birth, though I guess this is rather low nowadays). I don't know how you imagine it, but it's not like they can "just" give birth to a child no problem and go on with life as if nothing happened.
'm against abortion unless both the mother and the baby are 110% confirmed to die if it goes through. Otherwise you're killing the baby, which just isn't right.
So if they both have a 99% dying, it's unacceptable to you?
You're aborting a foetus - that's completely different from killing a baby.
In my mind, I believe that life starts when the egg is fertilized, as I said before.
Therefore, I also believe that killing the baby before it is born, is destroying human life - God's greatest gift. You may not agree with me, but that's just fine.
