What are your opinions on abortion?

Question

I don't think the woman should be able to choose if she is going to abort her baby. She knew what she could have been getting into when she conceived. The baby can't choose whether or not to kill the parent if she is ruining his/ her plans. I think that's why God wants us to wait until marriage, so that we know we are ready to have kids.

I want serious answers, not people looking to bash my religion, please.

Answer 1

I think once a lady opens her legs, she should take responsibility of her actions..

Answer 2

no i do not think that abortion is right there is way too many ways for people to avoid pregnancy to end up that way when they really do not want to be  

Answer 3

You are totally correct. I can see what you mean. It's true, people know d**n well what they are getting there self into and its not like they didn't, unless it was a rape or something harmful like that.

Answer 4

I agree with you all the way, if a lady opens her legs, she best be ready to raise a child.

Answer 5

>What are your opinions on abortion?

I'm pro-choice in principle, however I also think that abortions should be performed as early as reasonably possible, and that limits should be enforced so as to encourage women to get their abortions done earlier and discourage waiting around.

>She knew what she could have been getting into when she conceived.

Not if she planned to have an abortion all along.

>The baby can't choose whether or not to kill the parent if she is ruining his/ her plans.

The baby doesn't HAVE any plans. If it did in fact possess the kind of intellectual ability to be said to 'have plans', then I would be just as much against abortion as you are. However, the scientific fact is that a human embryo possesses less intelligence than most livestock. So if you're against abortion because you think it's too nasty for the baby, then you should also immediately become a vegetarian, because anything else isn't logically consistent.

Answer 6

i am pro- choice.  i was 17 and got pregnant no where near ready, the condom broke we were careful. but it ended up that way anyway... i did have my baby he's a wonderful little boy. however i do support a womens right to choice and I'm sorry but dragging religion into doesn't help. it's got nothing to do with religion. i am not religious, but i kept my baby. i don't agree with abortion if its used as birth control. but sometimes people make mistakes... and as sad as it is. it's not your choice.

Answer 7

well I'm pro life and i totally agree with you!

Answer 8

I think abortion is irresponsible. If you are mature enough to make those kinda of decisionss then you need to be mature enough to handle the consequences. Simple as that. there are millions of couple and single people out there that would do anything to be able to have a baby. adoption is a much better route than abortion.

Answer 9

It's easy to have any opinion on this subject. Until you are personally in a situation where you have to decide whether aborting is the best option, I don't think anyone has the right to judge a woman's decision.

I am pro-choice.

Answer 10

I am pro life and I think abortion is very wrong.  I don't think the government will ever outlaw it, but ultimately women who have abortions and kill their babies have to live with their decision for life and take their actions up with God.

Answer 11

for people thinking there is a reason to have an abortion there is none. I'm not closed minded I'm some what experienced, I'm a 21 years old mother and love my child with all my heart. when i was pregnant with her, i was told that she may be very sick and that there would be no way for me to take care of her, they gave me a list of clinics and sent me on my way to kill my baby, my daughter was born perfect and healthy no problems. my grandmother could have passed away when having her last baby and while abortion was very unsafe she still could have done it, but there was no way, and if she had i wouldn't have my aunt. 50 years ago, abortion wasn't a choice like it is today, so why is it now ok? what doesn't make sense is people who talk about how its ok to abort when there is a chance they may pass away, so your saying that if your baby was in front of a bus and you could jump in front of it and die or just watch your baby be killed you would let it be killed? and when it comes to the issue of rape, i was raped from 11-13 and if i had gotten pregnant in that time i would not have had the ability to raise that baby as my own, but there is always adoption which i think many people forget about. some one is going to love that baby no matter what. wait until you see your child's heart flicker on that screen when its just "a mass of tissue", i'm not a religious person so none of this comes from the fear of gods wrath, but part of the problem i also see with people who are pro-choice is that they say that it is the women's body, a good friend of mine had a one night stand and the girl got pregnant, and she went out and killed his child. it isn't just the woman's decision, yes she is carrying the child, but she must take more responsibility when she lies down with some one. women want to be strong and in charge but don't want to take the responsibility of not getting pregnant. no birth control does not always work, i was young and had a world of options in front of me when i got pregnant, and my now husband and i used a condom and the pill and my daughter is still here. so no im not trying to be closed minded, but when people talk about killing a child, no matter what week. i remember my daughter little heart beat when i was pregnant and while my heart broke because i couldn't give her all the most wonderful things in life i knew i could give her love, and if i couldn't some one in this world could. i have gone through alot in my life, none of which i can or would change. no i çan't change your opinion and yes this is mine and in some way mine alone.

a little summery of what some people who are pro life believe

1: An unborn baby is obviously alive, otherwise you wouldn't need to kill it.

2: If it's not a human, what species is it?

3: If it's a living human, then there must be some fundamental difference between an unborn baby and someone who is already born to make the unborn baby less of a person.

4: The only differences between an unborn baby and us fall under four categories:

Size

Level of development

Environment

Dependency

5: Is it more right to kill short people than tall people? Should we kill everyone under twenty, since their brains aren't fully developed? Should we kill people based on where they live? Should we be able to kill children until they get a job and move out, until which time they are still wholly dependent on their parents? If you didn't answer yes to any of those, then abortion must be morally equal to murder.

6: Abortion for "the mother's health": Cases where the mother's life is actually at stake are almost unfathomably low compared to what the world would have you believe. Only in an ectopic pregnancy is there no currently known way to save the mother and the baby, and it probably won't be too long before we figure those out, too.

7: Rape and incest. Yes, rape and incest are horrible, but so is murder. Ask yourself this: What should a civilized culture do with people that remind us of unfortunate events? Should Jews be allowed to kill Germans with facial hair so they're not reminded of the Holocaust?

they say that most abortins are done because it's a inconvenecs and that it's unwanted. which is a ****** upreason not to have a baby. i believe that was 93% and a very litte percentage bc of rape and medical reasons. so to everyone that gets one your a very weak person.

Answer 12

I have thought about this quite a bit over the years. The wide spread of opinions is incredible, matched only by the passion of the activists on all sides. This is an issue that few people are even able to have a civilized discussion about. Complicating it further is that there are few that hold a black-and-white view of the issue. The majority of people in the US see abortion as a giant grey area with varying degrees of abortion considered acceptable. Very few people hold the position of unlimited abortion access or no abortion under any circumstances. Below is the process I went through to come up with my position on the matter.

First, I asked myself the question at what point does a human being obtain "personhood" and as such gain all the legal and moral protections that status entitles them to? There are some who say that the point of personhood is 28 days AFTER birth, at which point you still should be allowed to abort. In fact, there is a professor of ethics at Princeton University that actively advocates this position. This is the position that spurred “Born Alive” legislation that says if a woman has an abortion and the baby survives, that doctors cannot withhold care and let the baby die on the operating table. Others say up to the point of birth. These folks, such as Barak Obama, would hold that this type of infanticide as well as partial birth abortion is a reasonable procedure. Or perhaps just before while the mother is in labor. Or 6 months of gestation or 3 months or three weeks. I wrestled with this for a long time.

Then I looked at the issue a different way. Does human life have an imputed value or an intrinsic one? If we say that it is imputed, meaning the value is derived from something else, some outside criteria, then any one of the above positions would be equally valid. We as a society would decide what criteria to select. My problem with this is what criteria do you use? On what basis is a baby at 6 weeks more valuable than a baby at 5 weeks? Is a baby that has not yet developed a heart still a baby? This hit really hard on my wife and I when we lost one of our children. Lynne had a miscarriage a few years ago. When people with strong pro-choice sentiments gave us their condolences, they referred to the fetus as a child, even though she (we named her Grace, even though we do not know for sure if she was a she or a he. It made it easier to explain to the children what happened and easier for Lynne and I to grieve our loss) was at the same gestational point, 9 weeks, that they believed abortion was merely removing some unwanted tissue of the mother. So, the criteria used is whether or not a child is wanted. If that is so, then why? The characteristics of an object of any sort are not contingent on another persons belief for perception.

By similar logic, if the value of human life is imputed, it can also be taken away, depending on what some person or group of persons believe that life is worth. So if you happen to be mentally retarded or black or Jewish, it would be perfectly reasonable for you to be killed off for the good of the community if they believe it. I have a friend who is paralyzed from the neck down and constantly in pain. There are some in the world who would look at her and say that she has no quality of life or that the money and effort to support her would be better used on others. They would have her die due to her handicap. But knowing her the way I do I find the notion that she is without a quality of life to be ridiculous on its face. She is a writer, a painter, a social worker, and heads up an international charity. I’d call that a pretty good quality of life. So would her husband who married her years after her accident put her in the wheelchair. Thus, the imputed value logic is shown to me to be completely arbitrary. Following any of the “prior to this point it is not human but at this one on it is” positions is likewise arbitrary and does not answer the question of personhood.

But consider the proposition that human life has an intrinsic value. That it is valuable simply because it is human life and no other reason. No measure or quantification of the value of it, it is and that is enough. It is sort of like gold. Gold is valuable because it is gold, not because we as a society stood up one day and said, “we are going to make gold valuable”. Gold has an intrinsic value as opposed to an imputed value, such as paper currency. Paper currency is worthless in and of itself. It has value only because we say it has a certain value.

This position then would support a clear line between human life and not human life. With this position, you are a human at the point that you have a unique genetic code. In other words, at conception. Prior to that, there was no “you”. The male and female reproductive components in and of themselves are not a unique genetic code, but merely parts of the donors. It is only when they combine to create new life do “you” begin to  

Answer 13

I think it is up to the woman. It's her choice. That's what the law says, at least.

I respect your beliefs. You think it is wrong to have an abortion, and that is perfectly fine. I disagree with your beliefs, but I would never try to force you to have an abortion. However, there are clearly people answering this question that would force their beliefs on myself, and other women like me (who also believe that whether or not we have an abortion is up to us).

Simply put, I would never take away their option not to have an abortion, so why do they want to take away my option to have an abortion?

Also, it makes me sad to see how people talk about women who have chosen abortion. "Keep you legs closed?" Seriously?  That is how you want to respond? Can you possibly sound any less credible? "Deal with the consequences?" Sure. That's reasonable. But since abortion is a legal option, having an abortion is dealing with the consequences of having s*x and getting pregnant if you simply don't want children.

The joys of choice. Everyone gets to make their own decisions so why don't you all stop trying to control everything you don't agree with.