Abortion rights

I never said that the government should have control over the situation. I just think that the woman should realize the consequences that can come from an abortion. Some go into depression, some have medical issues. The world just needs to be more educated on abortion and the results that can come of it. I believe that if the baby is risking the life of both the mother and the fetus, it may be necessary for an abortion. Then two lives would not be lost. A mother should have a choice, but only if its earler than a certain stage of development.

What wrote:I again emphasize the fact that I am in no way stating my opinion one way or another with this post. I am simply attempting to get people to think more from various perspectives.

Playing devil's advocate, eh What?

I agree with APUSH1989, that abortion should be legal but used in moderation. But more than that, I think that laws should be added that keep a woman from having an abortion in her third trimester, unless there are extenuating circumstances, such as the baby having a severe genetic disorder or the carriage being dangerous to the mother.

What I don't agree with is the family values people are trying to impose on abortion. It is not the right of the woman's husband, family, or local senator to tell her whether she has to carry the baby. It is her decision, because it's her body. It would be a great disservice for women everywhere if it were required of them to get permission from others whether to carry a baby.

Thank you soozin. I kind of felt backed into a corner all by myself. Laws protecting the fetus after a certain stage of development are the only laws that I think can interfere with a woman's decision. And again, women might change their minds if they knew all of the problems that can result from abortion. They should just know of the risks that they are taking with their own body. I am not an advocate of abortion, but I am not condemning it either. That is where I stand.

APUSH1989 wrote:I am not an advocate of abortion, but I am not condemning it either. That is where I stand.

Nicely said. I like your open-mindedness.

As do I, soozin, as do I.

APUSH1989, I wasn't trying to "back you into a corner" as much as trying to show, like I said, various perspectives.

Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 2 wrote:The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

APUSH1989 wrote:In some cases I can understand abortion. I know with a rape or with complications it can be understandable. I just disagree with the use of abortion to escape the fact the a person was careless with a sexual encounter. Some people in our world today use abortion too carelessly. I do agree with the use of it in the case of complications or rape. That would be very traumatic.

I understand that you're open-minded about this, but I have a few things to point out.

You can take every precaution against pregnancy and still end up pregnant. Nothing is 100% effective. And yes, there are those who will take abortion perhaps a bit too lightly, but there are others that won't and who will choose that option after much thought. There are always those who will destroy life carelessly, whether it be in it's very beginning stages or if that life has been lived for many years. We are human, and that's just the way human nature goes.

APUSH1989 wrote:I never said that the government should have control over the situation. I just think that the woman should realize the consequences that can come from an abortion. Some go into depression, some have medical issues. The world just needs to be more educated on abortion and the results that can come of it. I believe that if the baby is risking the life of both the mother and the fetus, it may be necessary for an abortion. Then two lives would not be lost. A mother should have a choice, but only if its earlier than a certain stage of development.

Even if the baby were born or if you didn't abort the baby and had a miscarriage, there is still always the chance of negative effects. Plenty of women go into depression or other dangerous mental states after birthing a child, and there is always the risk of the mother losing her life after birthing. And yes, a woman should be aware of the dangers of both, but ultimately I believe that it is her choice to make the choice.

Alright, this is my first post, but just so you know, I read these boards a ton, nearly everyday.

My stance on this is for medical emergency only and that has more to do with the way I was brought up:

Society as a whole is becoming less accountable for their mistakes. So you have sex and the condom breaks; take accountability for once in your life and own up to the fact that you have made a mistake.

Who, please tell me, has the right to define when life begins? I thought from the time of conception, life was beginning to take form... so therefore, how can we as people rightly define when a life begins?

I understand that there are medical instances where it should/could be done: Rape, Death to the Mother, etc...

But, the way I look at it, for once in your life, take accountability for the fact that you made a mistake. It's a life, and even with me admitting that I would allow it for medical purposes is against my religion, but that's where I stand.

loneshadow wrote:But, the way I look at it, for once in your life, take accountability for the fact that you made a mistake.

I agree with you 100% on this. Technology does not give anyone an excuse to be more carefree (for the lack of a better word). Does society even have any morals anymore?

Looking back on my previous posts, I am slightly embarrassed by my lack of self-control. I think perhaps I actually DID read the 11 pages of argument, and the anger just boiled into sarcasm by the time I started writing. Haha, my apologies to BananasOrTacos for the personal attacks on intellect.

I had a thought recently (I know! That's twice in one day!), that perhaps we are barking up the wrong tree. It seems that the argument has been beaten to death (if you don't think so, just go read the past 11 pages), and we still have people that believe what they believe, and are angry with eachother for not disagreeing. Understandably so, for they could end up being their doctors or pharmacists in the future, but still, we don't seem to have made any progress.
I still believe that life starts at conception, that abortion is wrong, and that people are not God, that they should choose between life and death for other, lawfully-innocent human beings. And other's believe that life doesn't start until the after the 1st trimester, or after birth, or just before birth and slightly to the right...(the point is that there are varieties of opinions on the matter). We can both make arguments for our positions, and argue till we are blue in the face. Since we cannot agree on dogmatic beliefs, can we go somewhere else in the discussion. My vision is that we are arguing in the middle of the stream, rather than either damming or opening up the source. In other words, we are arguing about symptoms--let's argue about the cause.