It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: truthseeker1110
I'm pretty much in your camp on this issue. Personally, I think abortion should only be allowed if the mother could die from giving birth or if the baby will be born deformed and have a wretched life. Still, I don't quite like the "it's a woman's body argument." If that stance is going to be taken, then at least classify a human fetus as a parasite. Somehow "killing parasites" doesn't sound as bad as "killing unborn babies."
ENGLISH OXFORD DICTIONARY DEFINATION OF *PARASITE*
An organism which lives in or on another organism (the host)
and benefits by deriving nutrients at the others expense.
originally posted by: Romanov
True. But the dependency during pregnancy is purely biological, and hardly makes any extra demand on the woman besides some discomforts, carrying an extra weight in the final months.
and avoiding some harmful habits (smoking, drinking).
Taking care of a newborn is more demanding, and of a 2-3 years old is even more so (at least this is my personal experience - my 3 years old son is unstoppable). So if a woman doesn't want the child.
just bear with these 9 months and give the baby in adoption after birth, and she will avoid the huge compromise and labor of growing up a child, which is the truly hardest part
Way better to do this than killing another person
originally posted by: Romanov
a reply to: eletheia
True. But the dependency during pregnancy is purely biological, and hardly makes any extra demand on the woman besides some discomforts, carrying an extra weight in the final months, and avoiding some harmful habits (smoking, drinking). Taking care of a newborn is more demanding, and of a 2-3 years old is even more so (at least this is my personal experience - my 3 years old son is unstoppable). So if a woman doesn't want the child, just bear with these 9 months and give the baby in adoption after birth, and she will avoid the huge compromise and labor of growing up a child, which is the truly hardest part. Way better to do this than killing another person.
originally posted by: truthseeker1110
a reply to: ladyvalkyrie
One problem, though - getting an abortion makes miscarriage more likely in the future.
originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: eletheia
I am not sure about that because I remember when my college GF had an abortion the doctor told her that one of the risks was increased chances of future miscarriages. If a medical professional will say this I doubt it is made up.
originally posted by: eletheia
originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: eletheia
I am not sure about that because I remember when my college GF had an abortion the doctor told her that one of the risks was increased chances of future miscarriages. If a medical professional will say this I doubt it is made up.
Like I said I think there's a bit of scaremongering there .... That is one
case. D id you follow it up, she may had a few babies by now!
You read Ladyvalkerie post where someone she knew had, had multiple
terminations and then gone on to have four? children, and I personally
know quite a few women who have had terminations and gone on to
have babies.
originally posted by: IAMTAT
That's why we have adoption.
originally posted by: rossacus
I believe having a child without financial stability, high nuture levels and having a child that was not "wanted" is worse than abortion. Of course medical issues come into the frame also.
I believe having a child knowing you cannot provide a decent/high quality of life is a worse crime.
Slave owners facing the same situation with a slave they couldn't handle...could dispose of them in any way they found convenient.