Abortion Views

[kAb]

I have started this topic after consulting with balaam over the Abortion topic which was closed due to the pontential flame.

This topic is for mature people only, who will open themselves to other people's views.

If any flame occurs, the topic will be closed immediately.

I know that there are many intelligent people on this board, so lets try not to ruin this. I know its a delicate topic, but lets all be mature about it.

I'll start it off..


In a rape case, i believe abortion should be available for a certain period of time, as soon as the hands and individual features begin to form on the fetus (i think it is 8 weeks) i believe abortion is murder.

In other cases, where the woman had the choice to be protected but didn't bother to etc., no.

The problem is, not many people know about the pills you can take up to about 3 days after sex which prevent pregnancy. its not abortion and its extremely effective.

[Z]

this is my first post in a while....

neways, im against abortion. yeah its taking away a potential life, and who gives ne1 the right to do that? the parent? so does my father have a right to kill me now? no...
yes, there should be a time limit, such as a couple days or so (for this pill?)....yeah....thats my view. ill check back here later.

[MagicNakor]

The pills you're talking about, known as the "Morning After" pills, are generally used in cases of rape, and for the most part, won't be prescribed otherwise. They aren't meant to be a contraceptive, as they contain horribly high amounts of hormones, and have a number of associated risk factors. Plus, they've only got a 75% chance of working. Of course, this differs between countries, and they could've been more refined since I got this information.

[2nd gen noob]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@3 July 2003 - 06:38
The pills you're talking about, known as the "Morning After" pills, are generally used in cases of rape, and for the most part, won't be prescribed otherwise. They aren't meant to be a contraceptive, as they contain horribly high amounts of hormones, and have a number of associated risk factors. Plus, they've only got a 75% chance of working. Of course, this differs between countries, and they could've been more refined since I got this information.

"Morning after" pills are used very widly among teenage females in the uk. i believe you can also get them free on the national health service too.

maybe this is not such a good idea for the uk...


anyway, on the topic of abortion, i am a catholic, hence my religion would dictate i be against abortion, however, my personal feeling is that in the majority of cases, abortion should not be used, however, in cases of rape/incest, abortion should be made an option

[balamm]

Just to be perfectly clear here, I don't want to be seen as sanctioning or condemning a topic.
My suggestion was that if one was started, it must be stated clearly that there would be certain expectations from the posters.
I believe that has been stated.
Due to the sensitive nature of this topic however, the potential for some discomfort does exist.

I would suggest, if you are not in any way comfortable reading the views expressed here, that you find another thread more to your taste and forget this one.
The ultimate choice of what is appropriate is not mine. If the site admins, or owners want it closed, it will be closed.

Thanks for your consideration

[ShockAndAwe^i^]

It's just not taking a potential life, it's taking a life.
A potential life is "wasting your seed".
Women are using it as a first and secondary means of birth control.
This has become a horrible tradgedy of astronomical proportions.
I know several woman who have had abortions and it's terrible what it has done to them.
Even after many years it's still with them in their everyday life.

@KAB

In a rape case, i believe abortion should be available for a certain period of time, as soon as the hands and individual features begin to form on the fetus (i think it is 8 weeks) i believe abortion is murder.

Then you think it's allright to terminate the child/fetus?
I don't think that's consistant with the fact that theirs a life at stake.
What about 8 weeks and 1 day?
I'm torn on this and I think I would give the woman the choice after being given much information.
No partial birth abortions- period.
The name of that procedure is a joke.

Here are some links with lots of info

Abortions since 1972 and the Characteristics of the women who had them
World Abortion Statistics
All statistics for all states
Abortions compared to war Deaths
Abortion Facts

[ilw]

The only moral arguments people really set forward against abortion before the time limit used in the West (i think it varies but not by much) are usually religiously dictated. Religious views that have been passed down for at least hundreds if not thousands of years, the fact that we now understand many of the processes that are involved in childbirth and can and have in most countries made a reasonable moral decision based on those facts has in many cases not changed the way religion (and therefore religious people) view abortion. IMO before the time limit imposed a foetus is nothing more than a cluster of cells, similar to any other complex cluster of cells. It has no nervous system and experiences nothing whether dead or alive.
IMO women should be made fully aware of the risks and problems associated and then its fully up to them.

Shock&Awe: (your Abortion Facts link needs a tiny bit of modification) As for Abortions compared to War deaths, so what? I don't really understand the point of that, why not compare war deaths to murders or miscarriages? That would be a similar statistic and would maybe get some more funding for these problems.

The topic that sparked this off was because I got that link from the BBC website which showed that the USA's decision to try and stop abortion in the developing world would probably kill hundreds/thousands of women. I was also particularly distressed to find out that of the promised 15billion for AIDs, Bush was essentially flushing 5billion dollars (which could be IMO much better used) on programmes that were designed to stop the spread of AIDs through abstinence programmes (and related religious programmes).

[human_pet]

I think abortion should ONLY be available for women who are bound to have sickness after the pregnancy,but they should abort the potential baby before the foetus is alive...

[ilw]

Originally posted by human_pet@3 July 2003 - 12:38
I think abortion should ONLY be available for women who are bound to have sickness after the pregnancy,but they should abort the potential baby before the foetus is alive...

I think everyone is agreed you pretty much can't abort the baby once its 'alive' . Obviously there are different opinions on when this is the case and is probably the major area of contention here. Spiritual people will probably say the baby is alive from the point of fertilisation, scientific people will probably tend to give a later date for this eg nervous system/ heartbeat/ beginnings of brain development.

What about mothers who don't want the baby/will suffer during the pregnancy/will suffer (non medically) as a result of the pregnancy?

[clocker]

I think that the right to an abortion should be unfettered.

It seems to me that all of the concern lavished upon the fetus by the anti-abortion folks completely disappears at the time of birth.