Abortion: Your Views...

[Meier Link]

My view on abortion varies with the circumstances. I think it's alright, if and only if...

• Pregancy occured due to faulty contraception, like a condom that ripped, or a pill that didn't work. If a cuple DID take the responsibity to try and avoid the pregnancy, shit luck shouldn't leave them stuck with a baby they didn't want.
• Pregnancy occured due to rape. I mean really, who the hell would want to deliver a rapist's child?
• The pregnancy puts the mother at risk for any reason.

There are probably other situations in which I'd say it's acceptable, but those are the ones that come to mind.

The only point I would like to object to this one is the first bullet on your list. But then again to everyone is intitled to their opinion and I am not saying you are wrong by anymeans.

There are only 2 ways to be safe about not getting someone pregnant, that would to be to abstain from having sex or permanant sterilization. That's it, any other form of birth control being used has a human factor involved with it and is not a guarenteed form of birth control.

Knowing this the people that use contraceptives and what not should also know that there is a chance that even the most perfect condom has a less then 100% chance of success. Basicly what I am getting at here is the people having sex should know that it is not an absolute preventative for pregnancy so they assume the liability if the female becomes pregnant.

In short, in my opinion and I have said it 100 times, if you are going to have sex get ready to face the conciquances. It is a risk and the people should own up to it if they have an "accident".

Thats another term I don't understand, "an accident". Sex is suppose to be for procreation not recreation so how the hell is it an accident by any means. It is what the human body (or creature) act of mating is suppose to do.

[Heartless Angel]

Procreation, recreation, comon man, they rhyme! Now you're just splitting hairs!

No, I get what you're saying. But I more see abortion as a problem when some teenager goes and gets knocked up by being irresponsible, and sees that as a solution to the problem. If someone took the time and put in the effort to stop that from happening, I don't see it as as big of an issue.

The financial thing Rameses said I don't so much agree with, but that's just me. If it's just a financial issue, you can give the kid up for adoption. If it was unexpected due to fauly contraceptive or something, then the other circumstances make up for it, and I'd say it's alright again, but using financial issues as a crutch to make up for irresponsibilty, that I don't totally agree with. There are many situations that could vary wtih financial issues, so in some cases I'd probably say that's good enoguh reason, in others I wouldn't.

[RamesesII]

The only point I would like to object to this one is the first bullet on your list. But then again to everyone is intitled to their opinion and I am not saying you are wrong by anymeans.

There are only 2 ways to be safe about not getting someone pregnant, that would to be to abstain from having sex or permanant sterilization. That's it, any other form of birth control being used has a human factor involved with it and is not a guarenteed form of birth control.

Knowing this the people that use contraceptives and what not should also know that there is a chance that even the most perfect condom has a less then 100% chance of success. Basicly what I am getting at here is the people having sex should know that it is not an absolute preventative for pregnancy so they assume the liability if the female becomes pregnant.

In short, in my opinion and I have said it 100 times, if you are going to have sex get ready to face the conciquances. It is a risk and the people should own up to it if they have an "accident".

Thats another term I don't understand, "an accident". Sex is suppose to be for procreation not recreation so how the hell is it an accident by any means. It is what the human body (or creature) act of mating is suppose to do.

Of course it is meant to be procreation but did you or anyone for that matter have that in mind when the first had sex, no of course not it has its different stages we do it for 'recreation' when we are in our early 20's then procreation late 20's and 30's then of course recreation after that again.

'Accident' purely refers to the fact that precautions were taking while having recreational sex and instead of hitting the 99% protection ratio we got the remaining 1%.

It also depends on what frame of mind you believe or where brought up with, teh best form of contraception is of course as you stated abstinence and there is nothing wrong with that especially if you are religious for example and believe no sex before marriage.

The financial thing Rameses said I don't so much agree with, but that's just me. If it's just a financial issue, you can give the kid up for adoption. If it was unexpected due to fauly contraceptive or something, then the other circumstances make up for it, and I'd say it's alright again, but using financial issues as a crutch to make up for irresponsibilty, that I don't totally agree with. There are many situations that could vary wtih financial issues, so in some cases I'd probably say that's good enoguh reason, in others I wouldn't.

Yeah but you may not understand for a woman having this baby grow in you for 9 months and then putting it up for adoption is extremely difficult that is why it is better off aborting in the early stage, I have many a conversation with woman and 99% say they could never give up a child for adoption after having it with them for 9 months its just their nature, and that works in the way for surrogacy as well.

Ok for example if you buy a car or something similar and you put 9 months of extremely hard labour into crafting it and taking care of it etc you don't just want to give it away at the end, now believe me that example is no where near the same concept of pregnancy.

[KainsBro]

I do not agree with abortion in any situation, you cannot kill a child based on the fact that you do not want him. Adoption is always an option. Yes, if someone gets rape, its terrible, no woman should go through that. The baby didn't choose how he was conceived, you cannot blame the kid for that. And yes, I mean baby, not Fetus, Fetus has a way of cheapening the meaning of what is living inside the woman. Its a living being, not just some lump of tissue. Its also unconstitutional, we ALL have the right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, who are we to deny a child that? Who made us God to choose life or death for a baby? Let nature take its course!

[Heartless Angel]

The constitution grants rights to any US citizen, and anyone born in states is a US citizen accoding to the constitution, unfortunately, prior to birth, that condition is not yet met. And there are plenty of pregancies that endanger the life of the mother, so by your own views, you'd condemn a pregant woman to death because you don't believe she has the right to condemn the baby.

[Sasquatch]

The constitution grants rights to any US citizen, and anyone born in states is a US citizen accoding to the constitution, unfortunately, prior to birth, that condition is not yet met.

I hope you weren't respond to the "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" comment, seeing as that's nowhere in the Constitution. Maybe you're thinking of the Declaration of Independence, which does not dictate that certain rights only belong to people who were born in a certain country, or even born at all. Hence, "all men are created equal" not mentioning anything about birth, and "endowed by their Creator" not mentioning government.

And there are plenty of pregancies that endanger the life of the mother, so by your own views, you'd condemn a pregant woman to death because you don't believe she has the right to condemn the baby.

So you're trying to use less than half a percent of cases to allow the other 98%, which are only for convenience? You're supporting a person's right to brutally murder a child, and you are trying to play the morality card?

It's a pretty black-and-white issue. If the belief is that an unborn child is a person, then it is wrong to kill them -- because you don't like them, because they hurt you, because they make you gain weight, because they may cost more money, etc. If it's not a person, then there is absolutely no problem with the murder of any unborn child.

[Heartless Angel]

No, i'm actually reffering to the citizenship law that states the conditions for becoming a U.S. citizen, who are the only ones given the rights and protection of the constitution.

To the second; no, I'm trying showing the people who try to use morality as an arguing point, that not all situations have a good moral asnwer, and that situations in which abortion is alright exist, "No, never, it's wrong" is a procrustean solution to the argument.