Hi Jess havent been here in a while.
posted by pasofol on December 1st, 2003 at 6:12PM

I'll agrue with you in your views.
But I'll add that adoption is also possible and that abortion may not be the last resort to a unwanted child.  

I know of cases where the parents/aunts have taken care of the child until the parent was mature enough to take care.  Also of cases were the child remains within the family but with relatives as the parents.   Accounts mostly based on TV.

I've watched too much opera, hehe.

Link

Careful ...
posted by jess on December 1st, 2003 at 3:30PM

Abortion is a really touchy subject. I don't know how many times it's been a debate topic in high school but I do know that I've had to argue for both sides. From what I can remember, the arguments were something like this:

There are both pros and cons to abortion. However, they each apply to you only if you're within a certain situation. Please don't butcher my opinion on this. I'm only giving my own personal thoughts on the matter being that this is an issue that I belive is extremely sensitive.

/Case Scenario 1:/ Let's say you and another individual were involved in sexual intercourse. Things got out of hand and the girl becomes pregnant. So many teenage girls have gone through with abortion because they don't want to go through raising a child. Not only that, they're not even prepared for it. One night of pleasure cost them that much. In this case, I would think that having an abortion is wrong. If the couple was responsible, they would have thought about using protection or some other method of contraception. If they truly loved each other, they would have discussed the matter and made the decision on whether or not they were ready to bring a child into the world. So many factors arise when you have a baby because you now have to think about generating an income for the three of you, finding clothes and shelter for the baby, etc. If the girl wanted an abortion just because she wasn't ready, that would be her own fault. She should have thought about all the consequences *before* having intercourse.

/Case Scenario 2:/ A woman is raped by a man and she now bears his child. In this case, she didn't have a choice in the matter. She was taken by him and was forced to have intercourse. Should she choose to have an abortion, it would be ok. If the child was born and raised, it would have such a messed up life. The trauma that child would have to go through just to learn about his own family history, is enough to psychologically damange himself. As the child grows older, he may become troubled with his past life and fall into depression or get into trouble. Children generally look up to their parents as a role model. What sort of role models would you have if your parents were a rapist and a victim?

Human rights activits would argue that abortion is completely wrong no matter the situation. I would believe that it's more of the situation you're in. There's some other good points that were brought up in various debates but I can't think of them right now. I'll post later if I do.

Link

Avoids the issue?
posted by Driusan on December 1st, 2003 at 9:24AM

I don't know how you can say that, people who are going to avoid the issue of abortion generally don't open their jokes with "Let's lighten things up a bit and talk about abortion."

Link

baby murder
posted by dennisn on December 1st, 2003 at 2:17AM

sooo .. i suppose the real issue behind abortion is how do we define life? .. because i'm sure we can all agree that murder is wrong - so if we consider an embryo alive .. abortion is murder, and thus wrong.

i guess it bothers me slightly that the answer to abortion is not instinctive. i originally was going to argue that whatever is inside the mother's womb, is the mother's - and not a separate entity - but, obviously, the organism inside the womb at nine months is very much a living baby. whether the fertilized egg is alive is slightly less obvious.

but, then again .. murder is not always instinctively seen as wrong either. sooo .. i guess there's no shortcut to life's problems - we're doomed to a life of thinking.

sooo .. i say life should be defined with the fertilized egg .. because that's the biological beginning of life .. life grows on its own, after the egg is fertilized. although, the egg doesn't have the capacity to feel or think. hmmm. ok .. maybe it isn't all that wrong to "kill" the egg - not much more wrong than it is to kill a skin cell (like dandruff). ok .. how about we push the boundary of life to start when the brain starts developing? that sounds better - but still, the brain is just a bunch of nerve cells. and pain is just a reflex of the brain to sensory stimuli. hmmm. hmmm .. i wonder how much the brain could possibly know even at nine months. i'm pretty sure the baby's eyes are closed in the womb (no?) .. so, if it has no visual memories, perhaps a few auditory ones .. perhaps a few touch memories .. .. can it feel? can it think? .. of course it can think .. it's just a machine, awaiting input. i wonder what i was thinking right before i was yanked out? hmmmm. would i have minded if i was killed (peacefully, i hope) in the warmth of my mom's uterus. i don't think i would have minded.

ok .. i now say whatever is inside the mother, is still not much more than an appendage of the mother - but certainly not a real human being. although, at nine months .. gosh darnit .. it just looks soo much like those cute babies. heeeey .. but aren't those cute babies just as un-human as the nine-month-old fetus. yes they are. sooo .. would it be so wrong to kill (peacefully of course, that just-born child) .. i guess not. although, now it's crying, and listening, and seeing, and learning much faster. but still .. it doesn't know what love is .. it doesn't know any math .. it doesn't know about murder and hatred and government and oppression. ok .. so fuck the baby - if it doesn't know what murder is - if it won't feel anything - sure, "kill" it if you have to. hmmmm .. but what about kindergarden children .. do they know about love and murder .. about life and death. well, i don't know if they're fully aware of their awareness .. but i suppose by then they know what love feels like .. they know language .. and other basic forms of communication. ok .. i guess we can let them live.

hmm .. i'm having a much harder time at this than i had intended. i'm going to sleep on it. for now, i have to say the individual's - the mother's freedom takes precedence. in fact, i don't really have a problem with the mother killing the just-born child .. actually .. i do .. because then it's no longer hers .. for example, it is partly her father's, and her father certainly should have some say in the matter. ok .. i have logically and rationally (and respectfully, i hope) concluded that we should consider life (with all "inherent" freedoms), to begin upon the fetus' exit of the mother's vagina. .. but vaguely so. some may freely consider it to have started earlier .. but i would say no later than that - because even though it's still pathetically incompetent and dependent on others, we're not all that different :)

yeah .. i'm still not completely satisfied with my answer. i feel that one of the next logical steps is to justify my own right to live. i too am just a biological machine, responding chemically (not willfully) to sensory stimuli - still pathetically incompetent and dependent on others :). can i then be killed (peacefully, of course). and, i guess i don't have any objection to that. sure, there's alot more i would have like to have done here ... buuuut .. if it's for the greater good .. .. .. jesus did it .. alot of people sacrifice themselves .. ..

ok .. i give up. i say we should be able to individually decide the "right" thing to do .. i trust humanity .. there is no sense in a single, all-purpose, all-knowing law prohibiting, without question, abortion. such laws are yet another invention of society, used to create an illusion of order and stability.

soo .. once again, individual freedom prevails.

Link