Very touchy subject. Personally, I am extremely Pro-Life, I love children to the point where if I think about someone sacrificing their child for a selfish reason just makes me cry.
There is, of course, when people say abortion is necessary for the health of the mother. How exactly are we defining "health"? Are we describing it as a status in society? are we describing it as money?
I distinctly remember a girl in my high school telling me that if she got pregnant she would have an abortion because she "didn't want to get fat". Do we define that as health?
Then there is the argument about rape victims and incest. Well for one, rape is a horrible thing to happen to anyone, but I always held the belief that a child would be something beautiful to come out of something so negative. Incest, well is just wrong in general, but if the baby is going to live a healthy life why destroy it? Are we going to start labeling such children "abominations"? Not to mention is is a small SMALL percentage of women who get abortions for those two reasons.
I'm not even going to go into the psychological effects that having an abortion could have.
So that's my opinion . . . any thoughts?
Abortion: a right? or another form of contraception?
(86 posts) (17 voices)-
Every girl loves a man in fancy pants! =)Posted 4 years ago #
-
I agree for the most part.
But if someone gets raped, the child is an eternal memory to that misery.
In that case, i would make abortion possible.
Or if someone simply doesnt wants to raise a child, so many couples cant get children, have an adoption.
And if you dont want children, use a condom, duh.Not in cruelty
Not in wrath
the Reaper came today.An angel visited
this gray path
And took the cube away.Posted 4 years ago # -
I agree with you Nyubis.
should i write something here? oh wait i am...thanks anywaysPosted 4 years ago # -
The psychological effects of abortion would just add on to the psychological issues that come along with being raped.
And actually in studies 75 out of 85 rape victims choose to NOT have an abortion. They believe there is more to preserving a life then to commit another act of violence by destroying it.
Also victims of assault tend to be come more "introspective", they see the value to life and the value of preservation of life. They themselves have been victimized and do not want to victimize a child. Some women also see having a child as conquering the rapist, by NOT allowing the rapist to control them.
Abortion is not some magic wand that makes a person unpregnant, it is a traumatic and psychologically altering procedure that CHANGES people. Many women look at abortion as a medical rape, if she changes her mind on the operating table she is told "too late, you wanted this". She is surrounded by doctors in masks whom she doesn't know, and they are doing something foreign to her.
Here is a quote from an actual rape victim:
"I soon discovered that the aftermath of my abortion continued a long time after the memory of my rape had faded. I felt empty and horrible. Nobody told me about the pain I would feel deep within causing nightmares and deep depressions. They had all told me that after the abortion I could continue my life as if nothing had happened."
and another
"I, having lived through rape, and also having raised a child 'conceived in rape,' feel personally assaulted and insulted every time I hear that abortion should be legal because of rape and incest. I feel that we're being used by pro-abortionists to further the abortion issue, even though we've not been asked to tell our side."Every girl loves a man in fancy pants! =)Posted 4 years ago # -
I am completely Pro-Life. After studying Biology more i am even MORE Pro-Life. I mean, so many people think it's just killing something that's not "ready or finished" yet, therefore it's ok. But after studying biology you see that EVERYTHING IS THERE, and it's no better than killing your own 5 year old son.
Heh...i've been raised very aware to this topic so i have strong feelings about this hehPosted 4 years ago # -
This is being me back to my R.E. days back at school.
I believe that generally abortion is wrong. There are multiple cases where abortion would be fine with me:
>Rape victim
>Incest
>In giving birth it can seriously damage the physical/mental health of the motherThat last one is touchy. The physical is obvious, what would be the point if the child was born and the mother died? Not only would the child be without a mother but it would also affect many others (friends/family).
The mental health part is a bit trickier. If the child causes the mother (or maybe even the father - to an extent) to be depressed then I would feel extremely bad for the child. That's probably the worst thing that can happen to anyone: Being born into a world, unloved.
Even after all this, I still think that abortions should be legal. Why? Well, for the most part before abortions were legal in this country (the UK) many women seeked illegal clinics and this cause many deaths and diseases due to unclean practices. Ultimately, we do live in a democratic society, and the mother should have the choice.
Whether or not others feel differently about it.
Posted 4 years ago # -
In 1936, Frederick Taussig announced that there were 5,000 to 10,000 maternal deaths from criminal abortion annually in the United States.
In 1942, Taussig admitted that his calculations had been wrong, and that there was no way as many as 5,000 women were dying, much less 10,000.
From 1940 through 1970, abortion mortality fell from nearly 1,500 to a little over 100 (see table).
In 1972, according to the Centers for Disease Control, 39 women died from criminal abortions.
Those are U.S. Statistics.
Also 39 women, but how many CHILDREN died? People fail to see that big picture.
And for health? Abortion has been linked to breast cancer, depression, shortage of life, suicide, sterility, etc.And what about the child's choice?
We don't have the right to kill ourselves. We don't have the right to murder?
what about THOSE rights.Every girl loves a man in fancy pants! =)Posted 4 years ago # -
In the UK, the number was much higher in percentage (I remember it being quite high in R.E.). I understand that you believe the children should have a choice, but it's not that easy. And it is very easy to see the big picture, children die in abortions. Abortions aren't pretty, far from that.
I've never heard of the abortions been linked to diseases/conditions etc. thing before; but I know that abortions are not intended by nature. And I wouldn't be surprised if this were true.
Posted 4 years ago # -
In 1936, Frederick Taussig announced that there were 5,000 to 10,000 maternal deaths from criminal abortion annually in the United States.
In 1942, Taussig admitted that his calculations had been wrong, and that there was no way as many as 5,000 women were dying, much less 10,000.
From 1940 through 1970, abortion mortality fell from nearly 1,500 to a little over 100 (see table).
In 1972, according to the Centers for Disease Control, 39 women died from criminal abortions.
Those are U.S. Statistics.
Also 39 women, but how many CHILDREN died? People fail to see that big picture.
And for health? Abortion has been linked to breast cancer, depression, shortage of life, suicide, sterility, etc.
And what about the child's choice?
We don't have the right to kill ourselves. We don't have the right to murder?
what about THOSE rights.Exactly! *highfive*
Posted 4 years ago # -
In the UK, the number was much higher in percentage (I remember it being quite high in R.E.). I understand that you believe the children should have a choice, but it's not that easy. And it is very easy to see the big picture, children die in abortions. Abortions aren't pretty, far from that.
I've never heard of the abortions been linked to diseases/conditions etc. thing before; but I know that abortions are not intended by nature. And I wouldn't be surprised if this were true.The fact of the matter is, legalizing abortion is simply trying to create the myth that its a safe procedure. No abortion is safe, its a very dangerous procedure and rarely are the "patients" warned of the risks. By the way all the "back alley" abortions are different from what are "self-induced" abortions (which is where the majority of deaths come from). Back alley abortions have actually been more inclined towards physicians who are simply performing the operation illegally. It's not like these women are in alleyways looking for an abortion.
And how could you have so much knowledge of abortion and not be aware of the risks that it involves?Every girl loves a man in fancy pants! =)Posted 4 years ago # -
I've never actually thought abortion was a safe procedure, from what I know of it. It involves some pretty horrendous stuff, which involves swirling the foetus around like some sort of egg yolk or something to break it up and then pulling it out.
It's true what you say about the "back-alley" abortions, the majority were just doctors being paid to do the procedure illegally. But there was always a few that weren't exactly clean and whatnot, since this was illegally and not governed, women could run the risk of injury.All the knowledge that I have shown here actually consists of knowledge from my R.E. class back in the day and various articles I've read online/in newspaper. I know the general situation, but not too much about the specifics.
Posted 4 years ago # -
There are still doctors that aren't trained to do abortions. It didn't really STOP back alley abortions, it just made them legal.
That's why there are malpractice suits and doctors that are called "quacks" because they lack the training but still perform the procedure.Every girl loves a man in fancy pants! =)Posted 4 years ago # -
Interesting. I would've thought that there aren't any quacks in this day and age...
I think it's more evident over in the US, since you don't get free healthcare (do you?) but over here it's not that much of a problem since you get free healthcare (which we pay with taxes... so... not really free); and so the money issue is removed.
I'm assuming that there are quacks because women can't pay for abortions from certified doctors.Posted 4 years ago # -
It doesn't matter how the system works, there will always be people around to manipulate it to their own advantage.
There are quack doctors everywhere. Not just in the United States. And trust me its not like the quacks don't charge more then actual certified doctors, they usually get paid more, and want the money upfront because they can't file to insurance without their certification. And since they can't file to insurance they have to get the money upfront because otherwise they might not get paid.(For the record, I'm kind of aware of this because my father is a certified pediatrician so I've seen the kind of stuff he has to do to remain legal, and I also know how the insurance system in the U.S. works because of it.)
And also, our healthcare system wasn't that bad until Hillary Clinton got ahold of it . . . but that's another topic.
Every girl loves a man in fancy pants! =)Posted 4 years ago # -
FairlyObvious, I don't get it. You say that some doctors that do the abortion aren't qualified for such. How is that?
And why wouldn't the same thing happen for another surgical procedure? How can you guarantee that your doctor treating you for (G'd forbid) some cancer is qualified for such?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Not all doctors are trained to give abortions, thats a fact. When we were speaking of back alley abortions I stated that they involved physicians not random people in alleys.
And O.G., have you never heard of a "quack" doctor? It's a common term, its why there are malpractice suits. If there weren't issues with certified and uncertified doctors then malpractice wouldn't exist.
Quack doctors can also be pill pushers and can spend more time caring about their own welfare then the welfare of the patient.
Also, people do a lot more research when looking into surgery whereas most people when getting abortions just go to the clinic down the street. I've never heard of anyone seeking out the BEST abortion doctor there is, cancer is an entirely different subject, as are major medical procedures such as heart transplants.Every girl loves a man in fancy pants! =)Posted 4 years ago # -
Brad told me that I might want to point out that uncertified doctors, are put under the title of "doctor" because they may be doctors who 1) did not pay their malpractice 2) didn't get recertified (meaning they haven't kept up with their training) they may also have been removed from the field in a previous state, and simply moved and started up another practice. That happens. Lawyers do the same thing, its one of the reasons both the Clintons are disbarred, they didn't keep up with their mandatory education so that they could be more effective lawyers.
Lack of training or training that is not up to date is a risk to everyone involved.Every girl loves a man in fancy pants! =)Posted 4 years ago # -
I'd like to see what everyone thinks of this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66jpPCIzza8&feature=related
It's Ron Paul speaking on abortion, and I think he hits pretty much every single point that I would make on abortion throughout the video.
Doodle, sketch, draw, design, fill notebooks with elaborate scenes, funny character designs, and gameplay ideas.
Find your own personal style and run with it. Craft characters and stories that you love.
Enjoy your own work, and don’t be afraid to show it off. Create.Posted 4 years ago # -
I think everyone here pretty much agrees that abortion isn't right.
But I still think it should stay legal, as the choice should still ultimately be the mother's.
Posted 4 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.