abortion clarification

[nokhor]

i have a question for some of the pro-lifers out there. it's a position i've seen some people take and i don't quite understand it. the position is that abortion is wrong and it's murder unless the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother or it's a case of rape and incest then it's ok.

my question is, why is it ok then? if it is an innocent baby, why is it ok to murder an innocent baby if the mother's life is in danger by the pregnancy or if the baby is a product of rape or incest? the baby has nothing to do with the cirucmstances of it's birth. you wouldn't penalize the mother in such circumstances, so why would you penalize the baby?

[doc_bean]

Abortion tends to be a big gray area, hardly anyone is pure pro-choice either, sometimes people need to comprimise between their own idealogies, do you save the child or the mother ? Tough choice for anyone to make. Only zealots would find a choice like that easy.

[HoreTore]

hardly anyone is pure pro-choice either

Well, I'm one of them. Why? Simply because I do not in any way consider a fetus a human being or life in any way, and thus there is no "life" to kill, only a thing to remove. Kinda like an amputation....

[doc_bean]

Well, I'm one of them. Why? Simply because I do not in any way consider a fetus a human being or life in any way, and thus there is no "life" to kill, only a thing to remove. Kinda like an amputation....

You're pro partial birth abortions ?

EDIT: and just to make this a bit more controversial, suppose a woman is in labour, can she still chose to abort ? What abouta day before she's due ? A week ? Welcome to the gray area...

[BDC]

You're pro partial birth abortions ?

EDIT: and just to make this a bit more controversial, suppose a woman is in labour, can she still chose to abort ? What abouta day before she's due ? A week ? Welcome to the gray area...

That's not much of a gray area. No one would approve of that.

Now, 22 weeks in, that's a gray area...

[doc_bean]

That's not much of a gray area. No one would approve of that.

Now, 22 weeks in, that's a gray area...

It's dark gray

think the opposite view held by pro-lifers that the morning after pill should be illegal is as extreme, though might not appeal to people's emotions as much.


I should have also added that the child wasn't handicapped in any way and that the mother is not at risk.

[HoreTore]

Late abortions should not be legal because it is a big operation, abortions should take place within the first few weeks, when it's still minor.

But no, I don't consider anything as "life" until it is born, one way or another. It would be rather hard to abort a day before its due without giving birth to it and then whacking it...

[doc_bean]

Late abortions should not be legal because it is a big operation, abortions should take place within the first few weeks, when it's still minor.

But no, I don't consider anything as "life" until it is born, one way or another. It would be rather hard to abort a day before its due without giving birth to it and then whacking it...

See, you do have a gray area, you consider some abortions worse than others.

[ShadeHonestus]

First of all, 1.5 million fetus aborted/babies killed a year can't be wrong can it? It is after all big business a moral issue.

i have a question for some of the pro-lifers out there. it's a position i've seen some people take and i don't quite understand it. the position is that abortion is wrong and it's murder unless the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother or it's a case of rape and incest then it's ok.

For me personally, abortion is morally and ethically wrong allowing for the only exceptions in cases where a pregnant mother's life is threatened. Why?

Motherly Peril
This is a case where going to term would cause the mother's death or going anywhere close enough to term where c-section cannot preserve the life of the baby would cause the mother's death. This also goes to a sense of integrity in the Hippocratic oath. Both actions either to abort or not abort in this case goes toward the preservation of life.

Rape/Incest
When a woman is raped, she is robbed of her reproductive responsibility while an abortion robs her of motherhood. However, you will find it interesting that studies show women who have aborted after rape feel more violated by the abortion than the rape. In fact most resent their rape being used by pro-abortion activists. There is some literature out there which is written by people conceived in rape.

Often in cases of incest, the argument focuses on the genetic fitness of the child to be. When I think of this I'm reminded of a doctor's appointment we had during our pregnancy with my son. The doctor's came back with tests stating that there was a good chance he would have Trisome 21. The doctor said they could direct us to information that could help with our decision. Then proceeded to hand us abortion literature. When we asked about further testing the doctor stated that risks to the fetus would be high and not encouraged. Five months later, son was born, healthy as could be, no genetic defects or anything to worry about.

I thought maybe I was alone until I heard that the same thing happened to my brother, half a nation a way in Wa. state when expecting his daughter.

The Father
The fact that a fetus can either be aborted or carried to term completely of the mother's choice while the state forces responsibility upon the father when taken to term and robs him of responsibility when aborted is an incredible double standard. You offer the woman the choice of being responsible, but the father has none.

The reality
Abortion is protected under due process law, however unfortunate, it is legal and 1.5 million a year are performed. Abortion robs the population of yet another responsibility, it even reshapes the the oath of our medical personnel, it is a moral fiber which once cut resonates in importance greater than the singular issue.

In a Burger King kind of world where you pay your money and make your choice, a people should learn to deal with the consequences and not look to be set free from them.

[Crazed Rabbit]

i have a question for some of the pro-lifers out there. it's a position i've seen some people take and i don't quite understand it. the position is that abortion is wrong and it's murder unless the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother or it's a case of rape and incest then it's ok.

my question is, why is it ok then? if it is an innocent baby, why is it ok to murder an innocent baby if the mother's life is in danger by the pregnancy or if the baby is a product of rape or incest? the baby has nothing to do with the cirucmstances of it's birth. you wouldn't penalize the mother in such circumstances, so why would you penalize the baby?

You bring up a tough moral issue. The mother is not at fault, but then neither is the baby. I know South Dakota tried to pass a law outlawing all abortions, even incest and rape, except when a mother was going to die.

I certainly don't think it's ok, and nor do I think most pro-life people do, but I guess the thing is an incremental strategy, though Roe v Wade makes that hard, and they'd rather not start that harder fight when they already have to fight for other things.

That's not much of a gray area. No one would approve of that.

Plenty here in the US argue for the need to have partial birth abortions on demand, and scream about laws requiring notification of a parent when someone other than a parent takes a minor across state lines for an abortion.

I don't think there are any groups that think that. It's just horrible.

It is, but I fear you are incorrect.

And the decision is hers ALONE, the father doesn't have a say in this IMO, simply because either choice has very, very minor consequences for him, while it is life-changing for the mother.

And it isn't for the father, who will be forced to care for the child if the mother wants?
You seem to think which side of a few inches of flesh a person is on allows murder.

Crazed Rabbit

[Gawain of Orkeny]

What child? A child is a young human being, which has been born... No birth, no child :)

But still a human being and alive. This is where the grey matter comes in.

[ShadeHonestus]

And the decision is hers ALONE, the father doesn't have a say in this IMO, simply because either choice has very, very minor consequences for him, while it is life-changing for the mother.

Fatherhood alone changes a man's life profoundly, if not, I fear he is not a man to begin with. If you wish more tangible effects, let's see, 50% of all earnings, possible jail time, all insurance expenses, responsibility for all visitation travel expenses, education costs and thats the norm with many non-custodial fathers and the cases I've seen.

On the flip side, being robbed of fatherhood when expecting and desiring it can have an equally detrimental effect on a man.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Human Life = conception to natural death.

Under that rubric, abortion is wrong save in those very rare circumstances where it is a true choice between the life of the baby-to-be and the life of the mother. In that instance, the mother (or her designated trustee) should choose.

Cases of rape and incest are abhorent for any number of reasons, but the unborn has harmed/wronged no one.

[BDC]

Human Life = conception to natural death.

Under that rubric, abortion is wrong save in those very rare circumstances where it is a true choice between the life of the baby-to-be and the life of the mother. In that instance, the mother (or her designated trustee) should choose.

Cases of rape and incest are abhorent for any number of reasons, but the unborn has harmed/wronged no one.

I'm inclined to agree with you, but...

1) I find it hard to see a few weeks old bundled of undifferentiated cells as human, it will probably grow into one assuming it doesn't miscarry, but it isn't really yet, any more than a culture of cells taken from me is a human.
2) On a more practical note, abortion happens anyway. I'd rather have it done cleanly, safely, and be regulated.

[Ironside]

Human Life = conception to natural death.

Under that rubric, abortion is wrong save in those very rare circumstances where it is a true choice between the life of the baby-to-be and the life of the mother. In that instance, the mother (or her designated trustee) should choose.

Cases of rape and incest are abhorent for any number of reasons, but the unborn has harmed/wronged no one.

But if you classify Human Life = conception to natural death, and gives them equal value throughout this process, then millions dies every year because of inadecute medical treatment in their first month of life.
Very few of the fertilized eggs makes it to a new-born child and adults, children, babies do get access to medical treatment, while the embryos does not.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Cases of rape and incest are abhorent for any number of reasons, but the unborn has harmed/wronged no one.

The rapist's genes carry on to another generation. The mother would look at her child every day and see that half of it is the rapist that violently abused her, and that she hates over everything else in the world.

Incest: the child gets genetical disorders 9 times out of 10, due to inbreeding and lack of genetic variation. Most cases of incest that result in children seem to be fathers raping their daughters. Would the daughter take care of her father's child and for the rest of her life be reminded that she was abused as a child? Or should the child be taken to an orphanage, where it has little chance to find decent new parents because it is sickly by its inbreeding genetical disorders?

These aren't children concepted under normal circumstances. Unless you do a really good job preventing those circumstances from ever occuring, the anti-abortion view is quite weak compared to the acceptance to abortion view. If someone even actively promotes keeping a society that repeatedly and often gives rise to these phenomena, their position against abortion is quite hypocritical IMO. Perhaps the Catholic Church should instead campaign to teach people to keep the condom on until they are mature enough to have a child that they can love, and campaign to help the kind of people that eventually become rapists before they enter that path. To teach people that it's dishonorable to use abortion, but that it is a necessary evil in some cases. Rather than today enforce a rather militant view on abortion, resulting in abortion happening a lot more often than it would, if it wouldn't have such taboo on it.

[PanzerJaeger]

i have a question for some of the pro-lifers out there. it's a position i've seen some people take and i don't quite understand it. the position is that abortion is wrong and it's murder unless the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother or it's a case of rape and incest then it's ok.

my question is, why is it ok then? if it is an innocent baby, why is it ok to murder an innocent baby if the mother's life is in danger by the pregnancy or if the baby is a product of rape or incest? the baby has nothing to do with the cirucmstances of it's birth. you wouldn't penalize the mother in such circumstances, so why would you penalize the baby?

Deep down I feel aborting a child due to rape is still wrong. It really is a horrible circumstance for a woman to find herself in, but its not the child's fault.

As for if the mothers life is in danger, sadly a utilitarian choice must be made.