Under what cirumstance is abortion moral? I've always thought about this

[yellowjacket7]

I still can't come up with something plausible. Seems to me abortions are undertaken not from a moral point of view but maybe more from a financial point of view. With the exception of incest or rape, what moral standpoints are there for abortion?

[benburch]

1. Under any circumstance.

A fetus is not a person. It is 100% up to the woman carrying it if its potential humanity becomes actual humanity. I would not restrict the right to abortion.

[LynnTheDem]

10. Well said!

Don't agree with abortion?

THEN DON'T HAVE ONE.

I won't force anyone to have an abortion...and NO ONE is going to force me NOT to have one. It's that simple. :)

[benburch]

27. Thanks!

I come by that opinion honestly, having had two children of my own, one of them now a young woman. And these Rethuglicans had better keep their fucking laws off my daughter!

[FreedomAngel82]

129. Exactly

Duh. I get so tired of fundamentalist in the country who think if they get rid of Roe V Wade women will stop having abortions. :eyes: In the Bible God says to follow his laws over man's laws but it also states to respect law and authority for God's sake and basically to not have a bad rep etc. Just because there is gay marriage or a law such as Roe V Wade doesn't mean I'm going to do it. These people need to get that and get over not being able to control everyone's life. :eyes: They think cause this law or that law doesn't exist people will stop doing that. God gave all of us freewill and in my opinion since I believe in God I believe he loved me enough to give me freewill. The fundamentalist are nothing but selfish.

[LynnTheDem]

162. Stupid MFers seem to think there were no abortions until it was legal

And that's why I call them the STUPIDEST MFers on the planet.

[benburch]

190. They know that...

They just want us to go back to where the abortions you can get are dangerous and often kill the woman.

You see; They HATE women.

[RPM]

46. Amen

or as my mother warned me (as a child), "up to and including the age of eighteen."

she was kidding..... i think...

[yellowjacket7]

58. So you say a fetus is not a person

So at what month in the pregnancy do you classify a fetus as a baby or not? Why then don't we terminate a fetus at 7, 8, or even 9 months?

[benburch]

62. When it draws breath.

Not one second sooner.

[LynnTheDem]

64. That's between the WOMAN and her DOCTOR.

PERIOD.

[benburch]

68. Exactly!

And as I said, neither the woman nor the doctor are likely to abort a near-full-term fetus casually.

[yellowjacket7]

69. So what is the moral argument here?

Give me a moral argument that does not include a financial aspect or a health reason for the mother or the baby.

[benburch]

77. Why should we have to?

It is not a baby. It is a fetus that is not a human being. The only human beings in this equation are the woman and her physician.

[yellowjacket7]

80. At 8 or 8 months, it is still a fetus?

Why not terminate pregnancies at 9 months then?

[benburch]

88. It ought to be lawful up to time of live birth.

Not that you will find many doctors to do it, or patients who want it at that stage...

[wellstone_democrat]

103. pregnancy termination at 9 mons is called "delivery"

This is a personal decision that for different people have medical, financial, psychological or other reasons. One person's "moral" code does not necessarily suit another---including religious codes which range from conception to first breath to define an infant vs. a fetus.

Third trimester termination is rare, difficult, dangerous and virtually always done for medical reasons despite bizarre claims to the contrary: my favorite is the vacation story. Terminating at 8 months would not leave anyone in "bathing suit" shape for a vacation the next week but it sounds "awful" doesn't it? Certainly to me it would be but that's why *I* would never make that decision for that sort of reason. What other people do is up to themselves, doctor, family and whoever else they chose to involve. They don't need to make "moral" arguments to me because *it is none of my business*

or yours.

[salin]

105. or eight minutes?

Some (Sen Santorum) would make the use of the pill illegal - based on the (religion of some) that life begins the second that the egg is fertilized. Ergo - the pill prevents fertilized eggs from implanting and is thus 'murder.'

[CoolOnion]

107. LOL! Pregnancy IS terminated at nine months!

It's called your BIRTHDAY, idiot.

[yellowjacket7]

116. Most pregnancies are naturally terminated

Abortion on the other hand, is a physical termination process. There is a difference.

[Crunchy Frog]

140. Well what about a ceasarian section then?

[CoolOnion]

151. And what about in-vitro fertilization?

I mean, since we're talking "morality" (i.e. "God's will") what about people who use artificial means to conceive? Are "unnatural" things like C-sections and fertility drugs "immoral?" I'd love to know the right-wing answer to that.

[yellowjacket7]

156. Yes, that's physically induced

but that is not physical termination in the sense of taking away the life of the fetus.

[The Magistrate]

164. As A Matter Of Curiousity, Sir

Why do you consider questions of health and finance to be seperate from questions of morality?

What do you conceive norality as comprising?

[Raster]

187. Oohhh, that's why you are a moderator

[Crunchy Frog]

185. You said physical termination rather than natural termination.

That would be the definition of a C-section. Clarify your terms more sharply next time.

[TankLV]

120. Pregnancies are automatically terminated when a baby is born.

Until then, IT'S NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS!

[Name removed]

166. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kestrel91316]

208. Some silly, stupid people here can't seem to figure out that

Roe v. Wade allows restriction of abortion after VIABILITY (third trimester) because after viability many folks might consider the fetus to be a person, so the rules change.

[LynnTheDem]

79. WHOSE "morality"? Yours? Mine?

MY morality is it's not my business to determine what YOU and your doctor can and cannot do with YOUR body. And I'll be damned if I'd let YOU decide what *I* can and cannot do with my body.

That's my "morality". :)

[boilerbabe]

182. thank you

[TankLV]

117. NO!

IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!

NONE!

There is no moral argument!

[Lindacooks]

168. It's none of your business. THAT'S the morality.

It's a privacy issue. You have no business poking your nose into someone else's private life.

[boilerbabe]

196. well then , you should not expose yourself on theDU hunny!

[Scout]

175. there isn't one. n/t

[kestrel91316]

207. We don't have to give you anything Who the f--- are YOU?

[boilerbabe]

139. I agree with you !!

I think that this chick is some sort of Freeper interloper, sorry to say///haven't been online for some time, but it looks like there are a lot of idiots trying to take over this discussion board...

[TankLV]

113. We can assume you're a man, then?

Why do you hide you're gender?

[benburch]

119. Well, in fairness it wasn't asked, til now.

And a nitpick... Words have a gender... People have a sex. (You can slap me for being a word fascist now!)

[boilerbabe]

195. No.I am a woman . oh well

[boilerbabe]

122. you need to be posting on some other board , I think

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[boilerbabe]

180. do not give up n/t

[FreedomAngel82]

134. I don't know if you are religious but

in the Bible God states a person becomes apart of everything when they recieve "the breath of life."

[LiviaOlivia]

154. What would Bill " Book Of Virtues" Bennett say?

well we know that.

OP: your morals your religion. In what way is poverty and war moral?

[tocqueville]

161. a fetus cannot sustain it's own life outside the woman's body

up to 5 month it's not even viable. That's why there are no restrictions in a majority of European countries. After 6 months it can be saved outside artificially and survive. That's why abortions in that case are very few unless there is a major genetic defect (non viability) of the fetus or risk for the woman's life/health. But all comes around the viability.

That's why fundies don't want tou to masturbate : you kill the precious semen that could be a baby. Oral sex should be forbidden too in consequence...

[Scout]

174. we do, under certain circumstances.

Why then don't we terminate a fetus at 7, 8, or even 9 months?

we do, under certain circumstances.

[boilerbabe]

186. Obviously you have never been pregnant

And with no choice...put yourself in someone else's shoes. and then come back to us and tell us you have an idea..ok?? othertwise just move on...we don't need to hear your bullshit, and that's a fact...sing another song, hunny....

[kestrel91316]

204. If you can't figure it out to your own satisfaction, DON'T HAVE ONE

[SaveElmer]

That's the point...

The judgement of whether an abortion is moral or not is up to the mother...no one else...and especially not the government.

[boilerbabe]

193. i so agree

[SaveElmer]

153. That's the point...

The judgement as to whether an abortion is moral or not is up to the mother...no one else...and especially not the government.

[Synnical]

160. Thank you. That's all that needs to be said.

Abortion on demand. I'll deal with the personal "moral" issues, myself.

Not feeling much love for the OP here.


BTW - the OP is flame bait, as I've just proved.


-Cindy in Fort Lauderdale

[alphafemale]

2. .

:popcorn:

[Lex]

3. LOL!

Me too.

[longship]

4. Got mine popping...

:popcorn: :popcorn:

[nonconformist]

83. Munching away...

[Cleita]

Me too.

:popcorn:

[benburch]

6. Yeah, this one will need popcorn.

Extra butter, please! :popcorn:

[Rabrrrrrr]

7. Just one?

I'm glad I have a popcorn machine!

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[StellaBlue]

91. Damn you people!

You've made me ACTUALLY crave popcorn - and I'd been off it for a week!

grrrrrr

[still_one]

5. how about the life of the mother?

how about, a 15 year old who doesn't know any better?

how about it is between a woman and her doctor?

what is moral? look at All the unwanted children? Look at all the starving children, and how the church will not even allow birth control?

[GRLMGC]

13. Exactly

How is bringing a child into a world w/o proper resources or people willing to take care of him or her, "moral"?

[smoogatz]

8. If both parents are known to carry the recessive

"Republican" gene (also known as the "moran" gene), it's not only moral, it's imperative.

[peace frog]

15. Good one!

:rofl:

[shraby]

9. Under what circumstances is it moral to deny a

human being the right to a doctor and hospital for a medical procedure?

[benburch]

17. Under NO circumstance is that moral, ethical, or constitutional.

Period.

[TankLV]

124. Ahh - another MAN telling a WOMAN what she can or can't do with HER OWN

BODY!

Why are we not surprised?!!!

[benburch]

159. Read that again.

I was saying the opposite of what you seem to have read.

I tend to use too many negatives...

[boilerbabe]

194. I am interested

[tocqueville]

56. depends of the definition of medical procedure

in several European countries you can be denied certain procedures even if it is your own will and you have the money for it.

the best example is female circumcision

[jim3775]

11. Hmmm

Very interesting.

:popcorn:

[really annoyed]

12. .

:popcorn:

I actually had a great box of popcorn tonight, so it all works out!

:popcorn:

[marbuc]

14. Under what circumstances is it immoral?

up to a certain point a fetus is just a mass of cells. Aborting it at this point is certainly not immoral.

[benburch]

21. I argue that until live birth, a fetus is not a human being.

Just a potential human being.

And it is a part of a woman's body up to that point.

And nobody has a right to impose control on women's bodies.

The alternative becomes "The Handmaid's Tale" quite easily.

[CoffeeCat]

38. Gosh...I can't agree with that at all...and I'm pro choice, big time!

That disturbs me!

A fetus is "full term" at 40 weeks. So, you think it's ok to perform an abortion--for any reason--at 39 1/2 weeks?

I agree that the government doesn't have the right to make decisions about a woman's body.

However, I can't imagine agreeing with the notion that a woman--at any stage of her pregnancy--can walk up to an abortion clinic and get an abortion. If the mother's life is in danger or if the baby is severely malformed--then I understand.

However, if someone just decided--a week before her due date--that she wants an abortion---that should not be allowed.

Does this really seem unreasonable to anyone?

[benburch]

48. I believe it is OK right up until the woman is in labor...

and the head is crowning.

Until it has drawn breath it is not a human being.

[CoffeeCat]

101. ...but it IS a human being...

I can understand believing that it is always the woman's right to decide--because of the choice issues, rights issues, privacy issues.

However, how can you say that a baby--just because it is not outside the woman's body--is NOT a human being? It most definitely is.

What is it then, if it's not a human being?

That's offensive.

I've never, EVER heard anyone suggest that a 38, 39 week old fetus is not a human being. That statement defies logic, science and basic biology.

[TankLV]

130. Nope - the WOMAN - the person who came FIRST - is the "human being"

The fetus is NOT.

It is only a "potential" - right up to the minute of birth!

Until then, it is just a part of the WOMAN's BODY!

[CoffeeCat]

147. No, actually--a fetus is a human being...

The mother is a human being. The fetus is a human being.

Period. That's scientific fact.

You can argue that the woman's rights trump the baby's rights. That's an argument and a point we can all debate.

However, for you to deny reality--makes it hard to have a conversation with you.

A 38 week old fetus is a human being. There is no doubt. It's certainly not a can of corn, or a quilt or a squirrel. It's a human being.

Please--be reasonable.

[readmoreoften]

59. How about....

If the infant is encephaltic or deformed and will cause severe vaginal tearing and loss of muscle control to the point where she will never be able to control her bladder.

Is it only death?

[benburch]

66. That is almost the only circumstance under which...

a doctor would do such a late abortion anyway.

The fact that the LAW does not restrict it does not mean you can find a physician to do it.

And by six months women have that hormonal "Mommy" thing happening, and are VERY unlikely to make a decision like that on a lark!

But if we draw a line in the sand before "live birth" we are in dangerous territory.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

75. What if live birth is induced?

If a fetus can survive outside the body, and labor is induced...what then? Is the woman still under the obligation to care for it?

[benburch]

84. If you have a child born alive, whether induced or not...

Doesn't matter. Its a human being and the normal parental duties apply.

If your argument is that the fetus MIGHT live if induced at a certain stage, we are on the "Brave New World" slippery slope I wrote of elsewhere in this thread.

Nope. Potential humanity is not humanity. "Snowflake Babies" are not babies.

Until breath is drawn that is not a human being.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

94. No, my question is, can they FORCE a woman to induce rather than

abort? IF it can survive, and IF that is the criteria, then I can see certain people calling for forced labor. My point is that even the "live birth" criteria is subject to a slippery slope effect. There are all kinds of ways the forced birthers look for, and we have to be vigilent of them all.

[cynatnite]

104. Late term abortions are very rare and most doctors will not do them...

unless it's the life of the mother or the infant has already died or will die at birth.

Those are the facts. I have never heard of a physician who willingly performs an abortion on a women who is healthy as is the infant so late in the pregnancy. That's not to say it hasn't happened.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

109. That's not what I'm saying...

Im saying that...should the OPs point about earlier and earlier fetuses beaing able to survive come to fruition, then I can see people saying that a woman is obligated to give birth and have it live outside the womb, rather than abort.

For example, a fetus at 20 weeks. This is not a third trimester baby. I can see certain people forcing the woman to have the baby.

[cynatnite]

118. They want to force the woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term...

but they are not going to want to rely on science to have it live outside the womb in these kinds of situations if it were possible. 'It ain't natural'...that's what they'd say and use the bible and gawd to reinforce their beliefs.

[benburch]

126. Yes, but these are hypocrites, remember...

They can take the scientific fact that an a synthetic womb can keep a two week fetus alive and bring it to birth to set the time limit, but still outlaw their use.

[cynatnite]

136. I don't think they would...they abhor science...

and would insist and force the woman to carry to term by any means possible.

Yes, hypocritical, but these are fundies who are rabid about gawd and forcing their beliefs on everyone.

[colinmom71]

181. Not once they hear the medical bills involved in such a situation....

Actually, a 20 weeker is NEVER viable (capable of living outside the uterus). Developmentally normal fetuses aren't viable until around 23-24 weeks, with 24 wks. being the preferred minimum age. It has to do with fetal lung development - the alveoli of the lungs aren't capable of oxygen exchange into the bloodstream until around this time. You would never see any responsible physician encouraging an induction "birth" before this point in gestation.

Sure you could try to compel a woman into giving birth at 20 weeks, but the result will *not* be a living, breathing preemie. Actually though, the only time you'd see an induction before viability (pre-24 weeks) is where the intent is to terminate the pregnancy either due to maternal health concerns (HELLP syndrome, severe pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, etc.) or because of fetal defects where other methods of abortion are too medically risky for the woman to undergo.

[benburch]

110. Clearly NO!

Just like abortion, the decision to induce labor has to be only between the woman and her physician!!!

[colinmom71]

170. Well, medical consent laws demand that the pregnant woman....

Give full consent to any procedures performed on her body, even where the procedure is intended to promote better health for the fetus. An induction cannot be procured unless the woman consents to having the meds injected into her body in order to bring on labor contractions. If an induction is taking place, it's because the pregnant woman agreed to do so and the attending physician felt it was the best medical treatment to meet that particular woman's health goals.

Now, as to once the fetus is born, the answer to your question is no. No woman is legally required to care for a child they do not want. She has the open and legal option to surrender her parental rights over the child in order to allow others (hospital staff, foster parents, adoptive parents, etc.) to care for the child after it's birth.

See, you're mistaking abortion as being the alternative to parenting. It's not. Abortion is the alternative choice to continuing a pregnancy and giving birth. Adopting the child out is the alternative to parenting the child.

[cynatnite]

90. In those circumstances they usually know fairly early on...

Abortion is an option given to the mother who can make the decision and it's early enough before there is substantial bonding.

Even if it's late in the pregnancy, it's rare and the will be done to save the mother's life since the infant's is not likely to survive such severe deformities.

[wellstone_democrat]

115. again, who are these 8 and 9 month elective terminations?

and, the doctors that allegedly perform them? Lots of anecdotes, no discussion of the dangers or the reason any doctor would abort rather than deliver a third trimester healthy pregnancy. I'm sure there is a nut somewhere who would go through most of a pregnancy and then say: "Damn, I forgot to have that abortion! Give me one now, I have some vacation time I can use!" Please.

Having witnessed at close hand a tragedy of a third trimester refusal to "abort" a fetus who had died (military hospital) and the failure of the woman to spontaneously abort I find these imaginary cases repugnant. But, I guess that these undocumented vanity abortions in the final stages of pregnancy are more dramatic than the horror of seeing someone die at 25 of blood poisoning and leaving behind 2 small children and a husband.

[cynatnite]

131. before I was educated about late term abortion...

I used to envision women late in the pregnancy walking into abortion clinics and I think that's the image the right wants to force onto the country without educating them.

I make damn sure to educate anyone who doesn't fully understand what it's all about. They usually come away very surprised once they know the truth.

[Scout]

189. if someone just decided--a week before her due date--that she wants an abo

Name ONE time since R v. W that a woman even ASKED a doctor to do an abortion "just because" one week before her due date.

Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick!

We trust that no woman will carry a pregnancy through 39.5 weeks and then abort it if there is nothing wrong with the fetus or with her.

And you know what? Even if some woman did ask that, and a doctor did do it, it's just none of your business, nor mine.

[WildClarySage]

203. Exactly right, it's a straw man injected into the discussion to promote

the idea that women are silly, vain creatures not to be trusted with their own reproductive decisions.

[kestrel91316]

211. Gee, I didn't know women could just get an abortion ANY TIME

during pregnancy..........I thought Roe v Wade allowed restriction of abortion during the third trimester.

Have I been imagining it all these years???

[cynatnite]

50. That changes for me in the latter part of the pregnancy...

In the third trimester it's a baby to me and can live outside the mother's womb.

That's how it is for me, but I know other people see it way differently.

[benburch]

57. It is because that is a slippery slope, that I would not restrict!

At what time can a fetus be detached and live outside of the womb? Very soon that may be two weeks! (Yes, I mean Brave New World sort of baby factory technology. It is coming to possibility even now.)

Now, very few real women (as opposed to hypothetical women) will abort that late.

And very few doctors will consent to do it.

But the LAW has no place in that decision.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

70. The earliest a baby can survive is 23 weeks.

And that usually includes severe breathing problems. We are in no way close to 2 week old fetuses living on their own.

The facts speak for themselves, there's no reason to bring exaggeration into the picture.

[cynatnite]

73. I've heard of a few surviving at 20 weeks...but it's so rare n/t

[SemiCharmedQuark]

86. I've heard 23-24 weeks..

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/sns-othernews-0920smallestbaby,1,7093234.story?coll=la-util-nationworld-nation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080201724_pf.html

But they may just not have reported the others. Either way, it's a long way off 2 weeks.

[benburch]

95. In france they are working on fully artificial wombs for cattle breeding.

Once they make that work, and they think they are close, two weeks becomes quite real.

[colinmom71]

197. Yeah, sounds nice in premise...

But this will likely NEVER be feasable in practice.

The biggest health problem that strikes preemies is anoxic brain and/or organ damage. Anytime blood flow is compromised to a fetus (and yes, surgery to remove a fetus from the blood supply of the placenta and umbilical cord at any point in gestation would definitely do this!), there is a *significant* risk of a lack of critical oxygen being cut off to the fetus's own blood supply. The resulting damage (to the brain especially, but even to other vital orans) can result in fatal complications or life-long severe disabilities. If you're an "ER" viewer, you saw a dramatization of this medical phenomenon tonight.

Believe me, as the parent of a former 24 weeker preemie who is now severely disabled as a result, these risks are not something to take lightly or to hold some vague sense of false hope over. We even recently saw the tragic death of Susan Torres (the preeemie delivered from her brain dead mother), who died as a result of necrosis of the interstines due to anoxic damage - a common complication from premature birth.

[cynatnite]

96. It does boil down to lung development...

two weeks makes a world of difference. I heard of one on TV some years ago...I think it was Dateline. Another a neo-natal nurse told me about. There were health problems, but I don't remember how severe they were.

[benburch]

100. But as soon as they can hook up an atificial placenta to the umbilicus...

The lungs don't even need to move.

[cynatnite]

106. Lungs do move in the uterus...

they are breathing liquid. It takes a lot more than an artificial placenta. It also takes a uterus and the necessary nutrients not to just keep the fetus alive, but to nourish it for growth.

[benburch]

114. They have all that under development right now.

It will not be much longer before the "Brave New World" baby factory becomes possible.

[cynatnite]

121. Do you have a source for this? I'm curious about it. n/t

[benburch]

133. I read science news blurb about this some time back.

I just googled. This is likely the story I recalled;

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,648024,00.html

I recalled france, though, so perhaps they are working on this there, too.

[benburch]

144. Google shows other efforts.

In Japan they have an artificial womb that successfully brings goats to term.

And the goat is used as the surgical physiological model for humans in many surgical technique development efforts, so the human version should merely be an elaboration of this!

Use the search term "Artificial Womb"

PS -- Sleepy and my typing sucks now.

[cynatnite]

149. Fascinating article!

What would make it a more acceptable practice is the fact the artificial wombs would be implanted in the woman's body. There are huge ethical issues to tackle as this science progresses.

Thanks for that. I skimmed it and I'll spend more time on it tomorrow.

[benburch]

157. The Japanese technique was in a plastic tank...

And in any case, the baby factory is coming.

[benburch]

163. Here is the story on the japanese effort...

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16559920%255E24331,00.html

Birth of the 'womb tank'
By MARY PAPADAKIS
11sep05

PREGNANCY and childbirth could be superseded, with scientists claiming babies may be grown in artificial wombs within 20 years.

Researchers in the US and Japan are leading a push to bring fetuses to term in "uterine tanks" designed to replace a mother's womb.

Experiments in the US used human embryos up to six days old.

Japanese scientists have brought goat fetuses to full term after removing them mid-pregnancy from their mother's womb. The goats did not live.

<snip>

-----

So, some work left to do, but clearly not that much!

[boilerbabe]

176. Dont' worry so much about "weeks:

Check out this other chick to worry about as in Right to Life...

[cynatnite]

I agree...law has no place in the decision...

It has to be up to the woman and her physician.

[benburch]

97. Just so.

And in late term pregnancies, the question is exceedingly hypothetical unless there is urgent medical necessity!

[cynatnite]

108. Yes n/t

[kestrel91316]

210. I use slightly different semantics ...............

I consider a fetus to be human (it sure isn't a twinkie, or a rock, or even a fish), but it isn't a PERSON deserving of civil rights as outlined in the constitution until it has been BORN.

The constitution mentions "natural-born persons" as being entitled to citizenship - as opposed to natural-conceived persons. So the Founding Fathers obviously considered personhood to be something conferred at BIRTH.

[intheflow]

16. The morality of a sentient being to determine their own destiny

by the right of their own conscience.

Note I said "right of conscience." Fetuses do not have rights. Grown women do.

[niallmac]

18. "Under what circumstances is another persons decision

concerning their own life crises a subject for me to render moral judgement? I've always thought about this."

[Az]

19. Sorry, but until there is a functional brain present its optional surgery

At least in my book. Life started a long long time ago. We are just a continuation of that life. Its not life specifically we seek to protect. It is the life that supports a cognitive human entity. And that does not even have a chance of existing without a brain being present.

[still_one]

22. will that answers the question I had about bush

[Az]

24. Heh

set that up for ya didn't I?

[still_one]

29. yup, but your answer was actually quite poetic

[LynnTheDem]

87. rotflmao!!!

:D :D :D

[salin]

20. Isn't this question tied directly to the (personal) belief of when life

begins?

For some life is at "inception" - or the second the second that the egg and sperm intersect. Which suggests that some common birth control methods are abortions - such as the "pill" which prevents fertilized eggs from being implanted.

For some people any abortion - based on the belief of when life begins - is a moral issue. For those that do not believe that life begins at that very second - the belief that the pill is a legitimate form of birth control, rather than an abortion (and thus to some = murder) the question is more complex.

Due to the high frequency of spontaneous miscarraiges, many do not believe that "life" can be qualified until later - viweing this early period as mass of cells - but not necessarily life. This is where it gets thorny. The belief of that "when life begins" is often based on religious beliefs. So should the law of the land be based on religious doctrine? And if so, which one? Catholocism - in which case most birth control at all should be banned?

[Horse with no Name]

23. I guess it depends on whose morals we are talking about

Yours or mine.
The thing is...my value system is none of your business.
You give me ONE example of how the way that I live my life affects YOU personally and I will listen to your bullshit on morality.

I'll wait right here for your answer.:popcorn:

[NYC Liberal]

25. Under any circumstances and it's none of your damn business

why a women gets one.

[Raster]

26. well, any abortion that would have saved the planet from the bush family

would have been morally justified.

:rofl:

[Raster]

28. I love jiffypop

:popcorn:

[LSdemocrat]

30. That's up to the pregnant woman (and who she freely consults) to decide

It's just not anyone else's business

[CHIMO]

31. Are You

Referring to the abortion of sperm cells, eggs or accidents?

Like maybe reducing the speed limits under rainy conditions to stop potential accidents?
Or the incestuous relationship between politicians and corporations and the subsequent raping that occurs?

[smoogatz]

32. You can't think of ANY?

Here's an easy one: what if pre-natal testing reveals that the fetus has a severe genetic defect and will be born with no brain (this is not a made up thing). Its life expectancy after birth will be measured in hours or days; during that time it will either suffer or feel nothing at all. What if your wife was pregnant with that baby? Would you insist that she carry it for nine months, endure the pain of labor and childbirth, then watch the baby (inevitably) die a few hours later?

[Inland]

47. Well, besides the product of rape or incest

So it's pretty clear that the poster CAN think of some. What's interesting is that if I wanted to pick the non-arguable circumstance, the one that would give anyone pause, I would have picked yours, where continuing is futile at best and causes suffering.

But for most anti abortion folk, it's about the sex, and that those who play must pay. So if you got knocked up in rape or incest, it isn't like you enjoyed it so you get a pass at an abortion even if it's a form of murder for other folk who get pregnant enjoying sex. Go figure.

[smoogatz]

52. Bingo.

the Right to Life is a moral absolute--except in certain cases. May the liberal moral relativists rot in hell!

[readmoreoften]

76. This hits it on the nail.

Their 'exceptions' are always valid because they are good. Ours are bad because we are bad. That's why the anti-choicers spirit their daughters away to the abortion clinic, because THEIR daughters are moral and good--not like those pro-choice hussies who 'use abortion as birth control'.

[Cleita]

33. What is your definition of moral?

Maybe you should define that first before you ask a question that might have different meanings depending on that word.

[zulchzulu]

34. Having the government decide reproductive freedom is immoral

Having an abortion is not a picnic. It is a tough decision that should be between the mother, her doctor and her deity of choice.

Issues about the viability of life up to the first trimester or when the mother's life is at risk due to the pregancy can be of infinite moral discussions. But to have the government not allow a medical decision and reproductive freedom is utterly immoral.

[Inland]

35. Nothing plausible......except rape and incest, See how easy that was?

You found two circumstances without even straining.

[Bluerthanblue]

158. while I share the belief that abortion is a very personal

and difficult decision, if you qualify 'rape and incest' as reasons why a person SHOULD be denied life, what of a child born to a woman who was mentally unable to parent? Something that often isn't known till 'after the fact'. What do you say to a person who is an adult, whose conception was as a result of a rape?

What IS 'moral' anyway? I believe it's immoral to drive a brand new SUV through a town where people can't even afford to feed themselves- I believe its immoral to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to demolish a perfectly 'good' building, to make way for a 'Walmart'- why couldn't the building be used, and the Walmart built some other place.

Personally, I believe that if a child is able to live outside the womb- then anything done to end that life, is ending another 'human' life.- I don't believe the 'mother'should be required to bear responsibility for the child, but to put an end to a life that is not 'reliant' on the woman who carries it within her body, recognizing the ability of that person to 'live' independent of her, and consciously putting an end to that person, is wrong.

I would carry that same thinking forward to 'end of life' issues- if a person is alive, and in need of care to remain alive, and DESIRES to stay alive, they should not be forced to 'rely' on their 'blood relations' to be their only 'refuge'. We as a society should encourage more community support of and for each other,and for living things, and de-value objects, and the selfish pursuit of 'more' when one has FAR more than 'enough'.

I would not be in favor of legislation that outlawed abortion up to the point of 'viability' nor require the woman who 'birthed' a child to be held responsible (if she would sooner abort a child which could live outside her body, she should be able to be 'free' of the child, while recognizing the child's right to exist.

I also think it's ludicrous to make suicide a crime.

And it is troubling to say "except in cases of rape and incest"- because what of those whose lives began that way? Are they demon seed? Tainted evil beings? I ask this, as one who has more than a passing interest, and stake in the issue.- Many people are conceived in situations that are FAR from 'ideal'- and are born into families that are equally 'far from healthy'- but grow up to be valuable members of this family of humans who inhabit the planet.

[Raster]

And the HIT and RUN award goes to:

Our new waspy friend!!!

Welcome to DU

[jim3775]

41. "Our waspy friend" also wins the fishing tounament n/t

[Raster]

49. 75 posts and two prestigious awards. My oh my...

[yellowjacket7]

51. I'm still here

There's nothing wrong with this question. So far I haven't seen the moral argument of abortion answered, except for a comment on preserving a mother's health, or a genetically defective fetus.

[NYC Liberal]

71. The "morality" of abortion is subjective anyway

Some people thinking alcohol is immoral. Should we ban it?
Some people think having sex outside of marriage is immoral. Should we ban it?
Some people think gays are immoral and we should kill all of them. Should we do that?

[smoogatz]

85. What's the "moral argument" against abortion?

Can't answer it unless we know what you think the argument is.

[alphafemale]

98. How about obligatory blood marrow donations then?

To save a life?

And there are people out there who need one of your kidneys or part of your liver to live.

Should you be forced to give it up?

Or should you be able to choose what you do with your body?

edit: grammer

[tocqueville]

99. define morality

the examples you give are not "moral arguments", just cases

a genetically defective fetus could be saved in the name of a certain "morality", for example to be the object of scientific study to cure fetuses in the future.

a woman health could not be preserved because it would be "immoral" in a certain culture specially if resources are very scarce.

show me the absolute "Bill of Morals"

then it won't be any problems

[TankLV]

150. Yeah - we noticed, unfortunately.

Don't you have a date with a tepuke chickenhawk or something similar to go to?

I hear anntheman coulter is still looking!

[Scout]

200. it's been answered plenty

you just don't like what we told you

[elfin]

36. When the fetus is so compromised

that "life" is more horrific than death.

When the mother's physical or emotional health is ultinately compromised as to her very life or future successful pregnancies.

When it is absolutely untenable to raise the born child due to financial, family or other circumstances - and adoption is not an option due to various factors - ex. a mother established in a community whose husband or other inseminator cannot or will not support such progeny nad who cannot support the resulting birth. What is she to say when obviously pregnant ? "Oh. I am giving this one up?????" Imagine the peer resonse - and just imagine her imagining it. Peer pressure is not just for teenagers.

Lots of reasons to keep this issue solely between the pregnant femaleat any age and her doctor and her faith. No reason for the government to be involved at all.

[elfin]

37. Dupe - delte

[LisaLL]

39. Defending the survival of existing children

Women make difficult, moral reproductive decisions because they care deeply about providing for and protecting their children and raising children well. When faced with pregnancies that threaten their ability to take care of their children, they morally choose abortion to defend the long term health and survival of the family.

A major reason women choose abortion is that they feel that continuing a pregnancy will be harmful to the children she already has. IMO, maximizing the chances of survival for one's children is a moral decision.

[stepnw1f]

40. For You Or Her?

Therefore, what is moral?

[The Magistrate]

42. The Question Is Meaningless, Sir

It presumes several things, that cannot safely be presumed in such a discussion.

First, it assumes a uniform standard of morality, yet any examination of the concept demonmstrates that people use widely varying moral standards, such that what seems of burning import to one is a mere triviality to another. What might seem to you either a moral objection, or a moral endorsement, might well strike another as the opposite, or simply beside the point of what seems vital to her or him.

Second, it assumes there is some importance necessarily attached to judging actions as moral or immoral. That seems to me, at least, a most dubious proposition. It seems pretty clear to me that morality is far down the list of factors people generally apply to deciding whether to do a thing or not, and it is not at all clear to me that people's behavior would be much improved were it otherwise. Many standards of morality in wide circulation, if closely hewn to, would require of people many actions that seem to me quite repugnant.

Finally, there seems to me to lurking under the whole enterprise some presumption that ensuring personally moral behavior is a proper aim of government policy, or even of statue law. That is a most questionable and dicey proposition: in most instances where that has been attempted, the result has been atrocious outrage to human liberty.

[omega minimo]

55. THIS IS FLAMEBAIT

sir

[benburch]

72. Amen.

Your answer is better than mine.

[havocmom]

43. That is not for me to decide for you. Nor is it for you to decide for me.

That is the only moral way to address the issue

[cynatnite]

44. Only the woman can decide the morality for herself...

It's a personal choice. That's it.

[omega minimo]

45. THE MORALITY IS: IT'S NOT YOUR DECISION UNTIL IT IS

THIS IS FLAMEBAIT

[distantearlywarning]

53. The following is only a personal belief:

I personally don't feel that abortion is ever "moral" (I am using your term although it is not entirely clear from your message what that means to you - I am taking it as "right" or "just" in a objective sense). No matter how it is framed, it is still the taking of a human life. At a certain point in a pregnancy (still up for debate), it ISN'T just about the woman and her choices and her life - it becomes about two lives.

That being said, I also do not believe that life should always be preserved at all costs, and that there are things more evil/bad/unpleasant in the world than physical death. Or to use your terminology, there are things more "immoral" than the taking of a physical life.

This is not an uncommon viewpoint - it's why national leaders make decisions to send their people to war. In the U.S., for instance, our President felt that terrorism was a greater evil than death. Or in other words, death (of U.S. soldiers) was a price he was willing to pay to fight Muslim extremism. I was personally supportive of the invasion of Afghanistan because I agreed with him (although Iraq is another story at this point).

In the case of abortion, I believe there are times when taking the life of a human who has not lived yet is also the lesser of two evils. Or in other words, the death of the fetus is a fair price to pay to avoid a greater evil ("immorality"). Some examples of things I believe are a greater evil than taking the life of a fetus are 1) forcing a severely handicapped child to live a full and difficult lifetime (especially if pain is involved), 2) sending a child into a life that would be extremely difficult financially (your "financial point of view", I think) or into a situation where he or she would be unwanted, neglected, or abused, and 3) forcing a woman to bear a child under extreme psychological duress, which would almost certainly be the case if incest or rape were involved, but could also include other difficult individual circumstances (an example might be if she were a member of a very judgmental religious community who would shun her for being sexually active). There might be other circumstances under which I would find abortion acceptable, but I don't feel like considering them all right at this moment.

Abortion is a complicated moral issue, despite the fact that both sides want to believe that it is black and white. I hope that the responses you receive to your post will help both clarify and broaden your thinking about this issue.

And welcome to DU. I hope your stay here is productive for you (as long as it may be).

[BillZBubb]

54. Isn't personal freedom a moral standpoint?

I thought we all supported freedom?

Therefore, whenever abortion is FREELY chosen, it is moral, irrespective of the motives.

A collection of human cells without cognitive brain function is merely potential. Those cells present no moral dilemma as they have no "personhood". They aren't people any more than an egg is a chicken.

[distantearlywarning]

78. Freedom = Moral in any case?

This suggests that ANYTHING that is freely chosen by the individual is moral, regardless of its effect on any other being.

So if decide to freely choose to kidnap young girls and torture them in my basement, that's ok?

I don't think that's what you meant to say here, but you still might want to re-think this viewpoint. A clump of cells is certainly not a person, but at some point prior to 40 weeks a fetus becomes capable of drawing breath on its own, and becomes something greater than mere potential.

[BillZBubb]

155. Of course not. Don't be absurd.

We were talking about abortion. You chose to extrapolate that to crimes against actual sentient, self-sufficient people. That's a straw man.

As for drawing a breath, again you are mistaken. Just because an organism is "capable" of drawing a breath doesn't bestow on it any special status--especially if that organism is still inside a real person. It has the potential to draw a breath, but isn't actually breathing. Your argument is emotional, not rational.

What is crucial is brain function and autonomy. That is what makes a human being a unique entity and governs our morality. Until the higher cognitive centers are working, you have a potential person at varying degrees along the development path.

Also, until the fetus has fully exited the uterus, it has no special moral rights (or any rights for that matter) that supersede those of the mother. It is essentially a parasite until that time. The mother has rights including the right to terminate the pregnancy. The state should not have the power to FORCE her to carry the pregnancy to term against her will. That would be immoral.

[distantearlywarning]

169. Sorry, but I disagree.

There is clearly a fundamental difference in the way you and I view the nature of "fetus". We are unlikely to resolve our differences on this issue because of that.

[tamtam]

60. Here is a thought for you

Here is a grand idea. What if morality was based on your own PERSONAL BELIEFS, thought process and so on? Ohhhh yea I have another idea. What if all the people who question the morality of abortion just don't have one? If every person that question the morality of abortion didn't have one then we can end this decades long argument once and for all. Imagine, a country where people just didn't participate in activities they were unsure of or didn't agree with. We could finally erase hypocrite and judgmental from all the dictionaries. :evilgrin:

[CoolOnion]

61. It's a medical procedure

There's no more "morality" attached to it than a heart bypass.

[DELUSIONAL]

63. It is none of your damned business -- this is a matter of PRIVACY

period -- end of discussion.

If YOU don't want to have an abortion -- then don't.

But never impose your version of Moral on me or any other woman.

Got that?

My body is my own -- my body is NOT a political play ground.

Got that?

[tocqueville]

127. must say I never understood the argument of privacy in that case

I think it was used to avoid to pass a law

with the argument of "privacy" you can allow anything. If I go to a doctor in France and say that I want to be completely physically castrated (not within the frame of transgendering) he is bound to refuse by law. Same with female circumcision. Still it's still "my body" and I can do what I want with it.

But it's not legal to go to someone and to say "eat me", at least for the cannibal.

If you pass a law that abortion is legal (at least within certain circumstances which define the status or the fetus) than it means that SOCIETY accepts it. It's not longer a private thing. That's why society can PAY too for the people that cannot afford the procedure.

[mondo joe]

146. To the contrary: that law permits it does not diminsh the privacy.

If it did, only illegal activities would be private.

[tocqueville]

178. "if a woman can find a doctor willing to perform the procedure"

is not a law in European civil law sense. Besides the law should have been passed by Congress, thus authorizing ANY competent doctor to do it. Roe/wade is not a law even in common law, it's a judicial interpretation.

A law represents society's will. A court decision represents the judge more or less temporary opinion about a case.

[mondo joe]

65. The moral standpoint is autonomy over one's own body. That is more

than enough.

[Solly Mack]

67. LOL So who exactly is consenting to your idea of what is moral?

I don't recall consenting to anyone's idea of what is or isn't moral...other than my own.

You question is premised on the notion that what is moral is not only absolute, but that your thinking is also shared by all - and it is not.(to both)

Just because you can't see someone's reason as moral doesn't mean their decision to have an abortion wasn't moral.

[readmoreoften]

132. Okay, abortion is wrong. Let's go to the next question.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that all abortion is wrong. Or wrong unless she's a rape victim: an innocent victim of penetration and not a wild seeker of penetration.

1) So how do you prove the rape? If the victim is afraid to prosecute her attacker will she be forced to carry the fetus to term? Will bruises be acceptable proof of rape? How extensive does the bruising need to be? What if it starts as consensual sex, and then turns to rape? How would we just that? The pregnancy could have occurred during the consensual part, before the frat boy invited his roommate to participate. What about statutory rape?

2) Now that question one is answered, how do we prosecute these libertines who abort? Execution? Or will execution only be for hardened abortion-havers, repeat offenders? Life imprisonment for first time murderers? A few years in a 're-education facility'?

3)And what about the doctors who perform abortions on thirteen year old girls. I suspect the public will much less sympathetic towards them. I think they'll get the death penalty.

4)Now, let's move onto the secretaries and the nurses aides. Will a five-year prison sentence be enough?

After all, the secretary only needed the job to support her children...

[Solly Mack]

167. What do you mean by this comment?

"Or wrong unless she's a rape victim: an innocent victim of penetration and not a wild seeker of penetration. "

"wild seeker of penetration?"

What does that mean exactly?

"innocent victim" (what does that mean?)- There are circumstances where a rape victim isn't innocent?


By "wrong" do mean you illegal? If so, use the word illegal. "Wrong" implies a moral judgment. And I don't give a damn what anyone's moral judgment of abortion is...


If you're addressing my post - and I can't imagine that you are considering the content of your post...

Let me make myself quite clear

1- I don't give a rat's ass what those who are anti-choice/anti-woman think about abortion.

I support it - fully. Case closed as far as I'm concerned.

I don't consider it "wrong" and I am not going to entertain anyone else's idea of "wrong" - I don't care if other people think it is "wrong" - because (refer back to #1)

2 - I would never accept charges against anyone for having an abortion they wanted or doctors/nurses performing an abortion. Regardless of whether abortion was legal or not. Regardless of any "what if" game.

[readmoreoften]

188. The comment is meant for the OP, sorry.

By 'wild seeker of penetration' as opposed to 'innocent victim of penetration' I mean that the entire OP itself is utterly absurd. I was ridiculing the obscene notion that some women deserve abortions and other don't.

But most of all, I wanted to force the OP into addressing abortion beyond this garbage line of argumentation that invokes some kind of impossible, transcendental morality.

In other words, let's get down to brass tacks: not only is your anti-choice debate full of logical flaws, it doesn't hold water in the real world. I won't debate morality with someone who would subject a woman to a forced pregnancy.

That was my point.

[Solly Mack]

192. Okies! Got it! Thank you!

:hi:

[devilgrrl]

74. How is someone else's abortion your problem?

Just asking.

Personally, I couldn't care less about other people's abortions, so I don't think about it much.

[pro_blue_guy]

81. Oh boy

This has always been a tough issue for me. I've seen ultrasound and actually watched the little being move around inside the mother. I would call that a baby, not a fetus. I can't help but think that abortion is nothing less than murder (just a personal opinion, or maybe that's the 12 years of Catholic education speaking); but war is murder as well (just don't tell George Bush that).

Anyway.

Who the hell am I or a government or anyone to tell someone else what they can or cannot do with their own body (or what's inside). It should be up to the woman carrying the baby. Maybe she was raped or whatever. Abortion is a personal choice and I don't feel anyone else should have any say in the matter.

You can call me an idiot or dumb or whatever; but I guess my overall opinion on abortion is neutral. It's just tough to really formulate an opinion on the subject. Does anyone else kind of feel this way???



P.S. I find it very annoying that abortion is such a big national issue. Shouldn't we be worrying about important things such as healthcare, good-paying jobs, the reduction of poverty, protecting our environment and natural resources and peace? These things are not just a personal matter like abortion; they are something we all need to be concerned about for the sake of humanity.

[FlaGranny]

198. Well, your last paragraph

makes a lot of sense. If we worried about all those things, abortion would almost disappear. Then we wouldn't have to worry about what other people were doing we regard to abortion.

[StellaBlue]

82. When it's a dog fetus!

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

:rofl:

[Catherine Vincent]

89. You should ask George W. Bush.

His old girlfriend had one.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

92. in what way is it immoral?

[CornField]

93. Under what circumstance is it not moral?

How about tubal ligation, circumcision, and/or vasectomy? Date of first period? Disposal of shed uterine lining and ovum from said period? Breast reduction? Augmentation? Sex-change operations?

Tell me, is it all medical procedures on reproductive organs you find somehow immoral, or just this one? Is it only women you seek to control or would you like to toss a few homosexuals into the pot as well?

[Coyote_Bandit]

102. Abortion has a long history

and the use of chemical abortifacients can be traced back to the ancient Egyptians - as can the use of physical violence to induce miscarriges. There is even a recorded instance in the Bible (Genesis 38) where Judah wanted to burn the pregnant Tamar to death after impregnating her.

In English common law - as documented in the Blackstone commentaries - a fetus was not considered a person until it was born alive which required it to breathe on its own. This common law was widely adopted into American common law.

Democrats and Republicans alike misunderstand Roe v Wade and rally for or against it being upheld on the basis of its end result. The fact is that Roe extended rights to the unborn that did not previously exist. A third trimester fetus is now considered viable which gives it protections that were previously not extended to fetuses. When understood in term of its analysis Roe v Wade was indeed judicial activism on behalf of and in favor of the unborn.

Maybe the better question isn't whether or not abortion is or is not moral in any given circumstance but rather if it is possible and appropriate to legislate morality. This raises questions as to the appropriate balance between an authoritarian and libertarian society. For whatever relevance it might have, Scripture teaches that morality is an issue of the heart which clearly suggests that morality cannot be legislated. That, in turn, suggests that it is not for us to determine whether or not abortion is or is not ever moral.

Law and public policy by its very nature must be inherently practical. There is simply no place for idealogues to judge and condemn others for perceived moral lapses. Doing so is counterproductive and incredibly devisive. Scripture would admonish us to take the log out of our own eye before criticizing the speck in anothers eye.

[TankLV]

111. Who cares - it's NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS what a woman does

WITH HER OWN BODY!

NONE!

Don't want an abortion? THEN DON'T HAVE ONE!

[blonndee]

112. Okay, it's a moral decision to have an abortion when

the mother is unable to care for the child financially, due to whatever circumstances she faces (absent father, lack of $$ resources, other reasons).

the mother is unable to care for the child emotionally.

the mother OR father is UNWILLING to do the above, for any reason whatsover.

the government of the people in question has not provided the appropriate resources for people to be able to support children in a healthy and productive way, whether this be through jobs OR "the welfare system," which is really a way to keep the poor "unworthy" out of sight and out of the job market.

You cannot separate "morality" and "financial points of view." The current economic situation in this country IS immoral as far as I'm concerned.

Is it MORAL to bring unwanted children into this world? Sure, there are those who do wish to adopt these children (and I am one of them...I was adopted by a beautiful family in 1975). But it's not that simple. One must consider economic factors, racial demographics (how many rich white "Christian" families will adopt a baby of another race?) as well as the plain and obvious (though overlooked), and other moral implications of bringing children into this world.

It's such a complex issue and I can discuss it at length if one wishes. I just fucking hate it when people try to simplify it and use it for political gain. And that's mostly what the issue is.

[FreedomAngel82]

123. What about physical abuse?

I guess living with that isn't moral? Would you rather live with a spouse who is abusive? What about when men rape babies? Would you rather have that?

[MissB]

128. Could someone please get me the bunny/pancake picture?

This shit is so predictable.

[nonconformist]

135. What are your morals? You cite incest and rape.

So, I would suggest that unless you are raped or a victim of incest, you shouldn't get an abortion if it goes against your moral beliefs.

Every woman has a right to chose what her personal morals are. Some people's morals would prevent them from getting an abortion, even in the case of rape and incest. Some people's morals would prevent them from getting one if they could financially afford the child (btw, the "financial issue" is steeped in morality as well... living in hopeless poverty is immoral). Some people's morals will allow them to preach against abortion, even though they've had a few themselves.

Morality is personal. Everyone has different morals and standards, and they should live by them the best they can. If they find abortion to be immoral in their personal view, they shouldn't get one. PERIOD.

If we let the religious right control what our morals should be in law, then it will be illegal for girls to wear pants soon.

[bearfan454]

137. Whenever a woman decides she wants to get one for any reason.

It is HER body. She can do whatever she wants to.

[redwitch]

138. Just because women are capable of conception

doesn't mean that when they do conceive they should be forced to have children if they don't want to. Women are not "holy vessels" or something. Neither are they livestock who can be forced to breed. Each woman has her own moral code and should abide by it. It really doesn't matter to me if you see the morality of it or not.
Women used to die rather horribly in the days before roe v wade from botched back alley abortions. they also had families so large they could barely take care of them. that's why roe v wade will be fought for so fiercely if it is ever threatened. I was in DC last weekend with tens of thousands of people at least. Mess with roe v wade and there won't be enough space in DC to hold us all. and we will be very, very angry.

[erinlough]

148. Perfect response IMO....WE WON'T GO BACK!

[MaraJade]

205. If Roe is reversed, I predict riots. . .

Women will NEVER go back to being subservient to nature and their bodies. If the rightwingnuts want to press this issue, they do so to their everlasting harm.

[CoolOnion]

141. Just out of curiosity, do you think WAR is moral?

Since you're obviously "pro-life," tell us how you feel about kids being used as cannon-fodder in Bush's illegal war.

[4nic8em]

142. I think a popular conservative view...

regarding abortion would be to never, ever abort a fetus. At least until they can wear camo and carry a gun.

[Hello_Kitty]

143. If you view abortion from a "moral" point of view

And you view it as the destruction of a human life, then why would you make an exception for rape or incest? Isn't the "unborn child" that results from that type of situation also equally human?

Or...maybe the morality of this issue for you stems from your adjudgment of the behavior of the woman who is pregnant. In that case, you may then decide that the fetuses of women who are raped and/or incested can legitimately be destroyed but those of women who had sex willingly must be carried to term. Because those women must be punished, right?

Which is it?

[boilerbabe]

145. Try having one n/t

[electron_blue]

152. No, no, no

It's not fair to say that it's a financial point of view for most women. Emotions, ambitions, desires play very large roles, if not larger. Not to mention the physical ordeal of pregnancy, labor & childbirth. Or the physical ordeal of raising a baby and young child.

[WildClarySage]

165. What moral standpoint exists for interfering with the right to bodily

integrity?

[DanCa]

171. Okay heres for me

I strictly believe a man has no say so except for saying no to sex.
However if a woman ask for my opinion these are my justifications.
IF the pregnacys results in death or paralysis or in some cirmcumstance that i can't judge where here heart might be in the right place. I.E. extreme birth defects or poverty. It's her choice not mine. Simply put i am not kreskin and i cant make that decision for anyone else because I cant read thier heart or mind. And that's why it has to remain legal.

[Cleita]

172. I can't believe this thread is still up!

It's so offensive to women you men can't believe how offensive it is.

[DanCa]

179. I hope my answer wasn't offensive. (nt)

[MissB]

202. Not at all.

But you already knew that. :D

[Cleita]

206. No you weren't offensive .

The premise of this thread is offensive. It isn't a morality issue, but a health issue first, and a choice issue second for the woman who will carry the child. No one seems to understand that a woman really had a right to decide to give birth or not to. It's her body.

[DanCa]

209. Agreed i am just so tired of the moral one upmanship.

Thank you for understanding. I think am going to put the rest of this thread on ignore because i am bitting my tongue not to step on anyones toes. I also stand by my first statement if a man truly is against abortion he should be the one saying no to sex. Have a great night clieta and dont let this place get to you Danny.

[all.of.me]

173. i don't see how it's IMmoral!

and it is only the business of the woman who is pregnant, no one else's.

[thedailyshow]

177. is it moral to force a woman to bear an unwanted pregnancy?

[Dr Fate]

183. Until we reduce or eliminate the non-choice killing of non-fetuses...

...this is at the bottom of my list of moral outrages.

War, child hunger, exploitation, crime, poor healthcare, unhealthy environments- these things kill more live people than abortion kills fetuses.

I'll worry about fixing those things before I do much moral restling over a woman's right to an abortion or birth control.

[MarsThe Cat]

184. if you consider abortion to be immoral-

why the exception for incest or rape?

i assume you consider it to be immoral because in YOUR opinion it's the taking of an innocent human life...if the fetus is an innocent human life, then why does it being the product of rape or incest change that? it's not the innocent fetus' fault as to how it's life was begun.

[SnoopDog]

191. Since America is 50-50 on this issue...

No answer is right and all answers are right.

If you disagree with abortion - don't have one.

If you feel it is the the correct thing to do - then do it.

End of issue....

[Warren DeMontague]

199. I don't have a uterus

so I'm not placed to make that call for someone ELSE and her body.

[kestrel91316]

201. If you can't figure it out, then you'd better be sure to never have one

[The Magistrate]

212. Locking

This has generated more heat than light....