How can anyone support abortion

My opinion on abortion and women right it goes like this, a women choice is a personal thing between her and her body whatever she chooses to do with her body should not be concern of politicians, religious groups or pro or antiabortion groups, but a personal choice. Not body have the right to debate a woman�s decisions but the woman herself.

Ox is right. This is a total rehash of old crap.

Already there have been almost record accounts of the same old tired lines from both sides.

-It's murder
-Politicians have no right to decide what a woman can do with their own bodies
-No man should have an opinion on this topic
-They should just adopt
-I don't think abortion is right... except in cases of rape.

(Need I go on? You know the all by now)

Can you hear yourselves? But go ahead; disconnect from reality and humanity some more. Wars have been fought to kill and much the same to preserve life.

Which side are you on in that respect?

Are we out for ourselves alone?
Are we out for humanity on a whole?
Are we out to secure life on all fronts?

Those are the questions to ask yourselves, because the funneled down effect of those questions shapes this topic, so why even talk about the nooks and crannies when you should run your eyes across the surface and see the face for what it is.

Since Abortion is in the Political Arena, like it or not, I recently was made aware of a very good approach to solving this problem at least from a legal standpoint.

BTW, I used to be Pro-Choice. If for no better reason than being Male, I realized I was naturally not as involved in the Birth Process as a Female would be. Therefor I couldn't justify My Opinion taking authority over theirs, which means I have to support a Womans Right to Choose in that situation as I would never truly understand that position.

From a 'Constitutional' point of view, every individual is Protected Under the Constitution of certain Rights. One of which is the Right to Life.

So now the question is 'When is Life Established'? Conception or Birth or Somewhere in the Middle or maybe at 3 months or 13 years??? (Just keeping things loose here guys!)

Well, because of the fact that we, Legally, Scientifically from a Medical Standpoint, and so on, State that the Time of Death is when 'Brain Death Occurs'. No Brain Activity at all. So, it would seem reasonable to say that 'Life is Established' when 'Brain Activity First Occurs in the Womb'. Which I think is at 6 weeks maybe, have to check for sure as I don't really know.

So, from a political point of view. At the first sign of 'Brain Activity' the Child would then be considered to be Alive and Protected by the Constitution as an Individual with his/her own Right to Life. What do you think???

Remember this is strictly from a legal and/or political point of view only.

EDIT: Had to change ProLife to Pro Choice in that first part. :bnghd:

[Edited on 8-7-2004 by mOjOm]

You know, that's fine Mojom. I mean it's a lot less arbitrary than the trimesters the Supreme Court invented, but at some point it comes down to a generalization that must accept some error.

If we did say "at the appearance of brain activity" and then assigned a universally agreed upon guideline like 6 weeks...it's still just a guideline.

If you believe then stopping brain activity is murder you are guaranteed to murder 50% of all abortions even at 5.9 weeks. Know what I'm saying?

But I realize practically all (not all) people are okay with the morning after pill within 72 hours and some people drop off then at varying places up until 9 months.

But you know, the Pope aint happy about RU486. In fact, condoms are wrong. Masterbation, sodomy...it's all a sin. Those are LIFE, as per the Pope. So why even bother trying to please some of the people.

To be logically consistent we either need to be 100% sperm worshippers and outlaw EVERYTHING that interferes with life or just make it a woman's choice (period)... no arbitrary rules, no stipulations...no BS.

That's my opinion anyway.

Well, am a male, so my veiw is I have no right to say anything on this matter for I am not a woman.

But I support a womans right to have an abortion. Not just rape, not just medical issues, but abortion as it is.

Now, pro-life people say women will just get pregnant, walk into an abortion clinic, get it out, and repeat this again and again. So does this mean all pro-life people are men? I think it would have to be all men to think that women are brainless #ing machines. Do you really think a woman would do that just because they aren't men? Do you really live in the old days where women were considered a little above slaves for they were to "weak minded" to be anything else? I'm sorry, but I highly doubt a woman would do that unless they had mental/drug problems that kept them from making reasonable choices.

I would like to hear more from the women, for abortion rights affect them, not men.

Also, if it is wrong to take the "life" of a mass of cells, what is pro-life's arguement to shooting doctors and blowing up hospitals? If it is wrong to take something that, by definition, is not alive, then why is it ok to blow up a hospital killing the doctors, nurses, and patients inside? Even more funny is that they say they are protecting the baby then blow them up right along side the doctor, nurse, and mother. So is it only killing the mass of cells the size of my thumb-fist if done medically but not murder if it gets blown up with the rest of the hospital?

If you are a man, then don't be saying women have no rights. Remind me of the preacher now judge that says a woman can't get pregnant from rape. You pro-life people live in the past. Do you also believe that a woman can't get pregnant unless she enjoys the sex? And that they should be killed if they "think" about an animal? Or that they should still be subserviant to men still? This is 2004AD, not 4AD.

Edited: Messed up with here and hear. Also, if they think removing the mass of cells that could become human is murder, then what is masturbation? They all have the potential to be human, but they are just wasted on the bed sheets or keyboard or whatever you use for fun. Damn, it is illegal to kill, the pro-life say if it could become a human and it doesn't you are killing it, then I have killed more people than Hitler and Bush together.

[edit on 8-7-2004 by James the Lesser]

I wont argue this issue, but after reading various opinions I feel i must simply state mine's. Some will definitely disagree other might agree, regardless, this is simply my opinion.

As a mother of two beautiful sons, one unplanned and one planned, both of whom i love with all my heart and wanted in my life....I am still pro-choice. I feel it is a woman's right to do as she wishes with her body. Having gone thru 2 pregnancies, i feel that "life" doesn't enter the unborn child until that first movement is felt in a woman womb, letting them know that hey there's something alive in me. Until that moment, i think it is fine to have an abortion, regardless of the situation, rape, unwanted, whatever. this first movement of the fetus is usually felt between 16-20 weeks after conception. As a woman who experienced, that first flutter in belly really has an affect on you. It it the first time that you are aware that life has suddenly entered you. That to me is the point that the fetus becomes a life...prior it is still a bunch of cells trying to form into a healthy physical specimen. During the time before the "first fetal movement's" many women have natural miscarriages. Are they murdering their child by having a miscarriage or partaking in an activity that triggers the miscarriages? Many women don't even know they are pregnant until 4-6 weeks after conception. How can you blame someone if they don't even know.

but i should also mention that It is only after that magical moment that "medically" necessary abortions should be allowed to save the mother's life. I do not believe in abortions of healthy fetuses after the 16th week.

You know what the travisty in this whole debate is? It that somewhere along the line, men and women got the idea that this was a woman's only issue.

It's funny, when women want a man recognize his role in the creation of a child, they want him to be involved.

But when a man choses to voice an opinion on it, it's suddenly not his place to say anything.

This is the most grotesque thing I have ever heard. MEN, grow the hell up. You have a RIGHT and an obligation to be involved because whether or not you have been in the situation, you need to be prepared, know where you stand, and be a man and help make a choice you can stand behind.

Women, get the hell off your horse. Please god forgive us for being born with a penis.

So I have this to say in responce. If you are a woman, and you have never been pregnant, don't let me catch you having an opinion because you HAVE NO RIGHT!

Please people, use your brains for god's sake. James, I'd edit your first line. You come across as a coward.

A coward? How? That I am a man and I, unlike the pro-life people, don't want to make women slaves? I don't find it right that I should make a woman do what I feel is right and that is coward? Strange definition of a coward.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
A coward? How? That I am a man and I, unlike the pro-life people, don't want to make women slaves? I don't find it right that I should make a woman do what I feel is right and that is coward? Strange definition of a coward.

You are way off base with this. First, how does making a moral judgement dictate slavery. Secondly, you can not become a slave by choice.

But aside from the staggering misrepresentations you rail against, this is not what I was talking about.

You are a coward because you will not accept that your opinion matters because you have a penis and do not actually have to do it.

Originally posted by RANT
You know, that's fine Mojom. I mean it's a lot less arbitrary than the trimesters the Supreme Court invented, but at some point it comes down to a generalization that must accept some error.

If we did say "at the appearance of brain activity" and then assigned a universally agreed upon guideline like 6 weeks...it's still just a guideline.

If you believe then stopping brain activity is murder you are guaranteed to murder 50% of all abortions even at 5.9 weeks. Know what I'm saying?

Yah, I totally see what you're saying. So don't set the line so close. In fact, if you're gonna have it at all, IMO it should be within the first week or two at most. Simply because I believe we should always be in the Support of Life. I don't agree with Capital Punishment either.

Although, at the same time, something needs to be done about the method people are allowing themselves to become Baby Factories who throw their kids in the trash, or starve them to death, or just don't use birth control in the first place. I mean, can you actually go to some bloated Skeleton Child in a 3rd World Hell who is deceased, sick, starving, just a mess all around and who has 10 other siblings just like himself and tell them with a straight face, 'Well, at least you were allowed to have a bit of the Gift of Life'?? I've also heard Crack Babies Detoxing at Birth are a pleasant thing too. Or how about the recent 'fad' of mothers wigging out and beating their year or less old babies to death with rocks or whatever. Tell them what a great Gift Life is and see if they'd agree with you.

But I realize practically all (not all) people are okay with the morning after pill within 72 hours and some people drop off then at varying places up until 9 months.

But you know, the Pope ain't happy about RU486. In fact, condoms are wrong. Masturbation, sodomy...it's all a sin. Those are LIFE, as per the Pope. So why even bother trying to please some of the people.

Yes, I know what you mean. People are f*ckin' nuts and have all kinds of theories. For the most part, as long as they leave me alone I don't care what they do either. Some people like to shove steel rods through the Genitalia. Hey, great, knock yourselves out for all I care. It's the old rule of 'You can Pick your Friends and You can Pick your Nose, but You can't Pick Your Friends Nose Unless they also want you to do so.'

Again, I'll have you remember that this was simply from a Legal, Political standpoint though. I fully support the Right for a Woman to do what she wants with her own body and all, but I also support the Life of a Child if they're capable of having a healthy birth and a chance to live too. Our Constitution feels the same way too, and if we base our Laws on the Constitution then that is what we should try and base Law Making Policy off of.

Here are some other reasons why I feel that Life does begin in the Womb for example.

Scans uncover secrets of the womb
A new type of ultrasound scan has produced vivid pictures of a 12 week-old fetus "walking" in the womb.
news.bbc.co.uk...

The images have shown:
From 12 weeks, unborn babies can stretch, kick and leap around the womb - well before the mother can feel movement
From 18 weeks, they can open their eyes although most doctors thought eyelids were fused until 26 weeks
From 26 weeks, they appear to exhibit a whole range of typical baby behavior and moods, including scratching, smiling, crying, hiccuping, and sucking.
Until recently it was thought that smiling did not start until six weeks after birth.

At 22 weeks gestation babies are capable of fine hand and finger movements. In a short space of time this baby scratches, rubs and pats his cheek before doing the same to his nose.


Foetuses as young as 11 weeks have been seen with their thumbs in their mouths. This baby started out sucking his smallest toes and gradually moves on to suck a bigger and better toe.

To be logically consistent we either need to be 100% sperm worshipers and outlaw EVERYTHING that interferes with life or just make it a woman's choice (period)... no arbitrary rules, no stipulations...no BS.

That's my opinion anyway.

So if Brain activity starts at 6 weeks. 11 weeks we are sucking toes and at 12 stretch and move and so forth. Well, now abortions are done up till the 12th week. Well, IMO, that's living, thinking, cognitive creature who's brain has been processing info about life for 6 weeks already and has the Right to it's Own Life as We've established by the Laws of this Country. As long as it's capable of being a healthy child and all, so what exactly makes it OK for the Woman at that point to choose to Kill off her own unborn child for reasons like just not wanting it???

Sure it's life still depends on the mothers, but I don't know if such a title of Mother is appropriate for someone that irresponsible in the first place. She made the choice to conceive it and then let it grow to that point without taking responsibility, so now on top of that she is somehow found as mentally capable of choosing the Mentally, Physically Aware Child that grows within her???

But, just like you, that is just my opinion and even that is still not at a solid conclusion in the matter. Personally, I along with my g/f (who may as well be my wife for those who need such formalities) have chosen not to have kids. So, we take measures not to even allow the first stages to begin.

I try not to bother too much with the morality of Killing with most people cause People see life different anyway. Just like the Pope. Sure he won't let you masturbate but I doubt he has too much trouble killing all other forms of animal life. Even other primates who share 99%(??) the same DNA as us. Obviously to him Sperm are even more important. Well, I think that's insane but hey, you people do what you want IMO. Just leave me and mine alone and we'll all get along just fine.

That's why I believe in the morning after pill, I don't agree with a woman waiting for the fetus to start moving before disposing of it.

Men out there whenever you spill your seed outside a uterus you are killing thousands of potential babies.

A week or two? Most women don't even know they are pregnant by the 5-6 week let alone the 1-2 week. Kind of hard to abort if you don't know you have a kid.

Anyways, leave women alone, they don't tell us how to use our bodies, we don't tell them how to use theirs.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Anyways, leave women alone, they don't tell us how to use our bodies, we don't tell them how to use theirs.

~sigh~ I guess you can't make the blind see.

Look, it's abunduntly clear that the idea is not getting through to you, so let's break it down simple stupid.

1) I am not talking about men. I am not talking about women. I am talking about our society making a choice on how to define our own morality through the legalities we impose and/or allow. Not hard to get, but we need both sexes for that one.

2) Somewhere between the pro-choice stance and the staggering deadbeat dad figures, men have been effectively removed from the scene, which is rediculous. You can not be both responcible in one situation, yet have no say in the other. Men need to step up, but that would mean that we have a voice and should use it.

3) The government has the obligation to promote and secure life (the reason for protecting animals like geese, including their eggs). Yet we are so expendible? The humanity is slowly leaving this country for the detached voyerism of today.

4) This debate is not about the women, it is about the women, the men, and the children regardless of what side you are on.

5) The choice comes with having sex.

6) You have the right to define your own morals, and in such you have the right to an opinion.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
A week or two? Most women don't even know they are pregnant by the 5-6 week let alone the 1-2 week. Kind of hard to abort if you don't know you have a kid.

Anyways, leave women alone, they don't tell us how to use our bodies, we don't tell them how to use theirs.

Any woman who is having unprotected sex or has had a condom mishap, should be aware enough of her body and cycle, as well as the possibility she could be pregnant, that if she then misses her period, she should immediately have a pregnancy test done (especially if she plans on aborting the baby).
If her cycle is erratic and she doesn't know whether she's late or not, but she knows she may have gotten pregnant in the last month, she should take a test, to know what's what.
There are even tests out now that can indicate pregnancy after only a few days, so women don't have to wait 2 or 4 weeks before they can find out if they are pregnant

The most logical and objective way to determine the legality of an abortion, is by verifying brain activity. It makes sense that at the first signs of brain activity (6 weeks) we are granted the status of an individual, with all the accompanying rights, and after the last sign of brain activity has ceased, we are pronounced dead, and our lifeless form no longer possesses its former individual rights or freedoms

i'm going to chime in on this and give my two cents. what i'm going to say comes from my heart and my own mind, not some groups ideology or sesne of morality.


i am against abortion and before you blast me as being a right wing a-hole i'm going to explain why and i want EVERYONE who disagrees with my stance to understand why i feel this way. i understand that nothing is hard and fast. there is no black and white and in this world women are raped by strangers or a family member. there are medical complications that sometimes makes a woman choose between saving herself or her unborn baby. i can understand these reasons for the prcedure to be around and i feel in such cases it IS justified. what i do not find justifiable or excusable are those who have abortions because its not convenient to their lifestyle, they didnt think about the consequences of their actions or simply dont care (such as drunken one night stands). in such cases the abortion replaces conventional forms of birth control and absolves everyone (male and female) of their actions and nothing is learned. and while it is rare there are some females who do this regularly as they cant dont or wont put any forethought into their actions.

sadly this is NOT a one sided issue. men are as much to blame for this. men as well as woman are equally responsible for using protection. this age old idea that only men should think about birth control or practice it is absurd, it takes TWO to tango and it takes two to have a baby and both should take precautions to prevent a pregnancy. the fact that the woman has to deal with this either way should be incentive enough for her to take responsibility for what happens and the fact if she DOES choose to have that the man will become financially obligated would deter him from doing it "bare back". now i understand about "accidents" and i am not refering to them so do not bring them up. i am simply talking about men AND women with loose morals and decide to deal with the consequences of their actions later instead of thinking it through with a clean and sober mind. because we can does not mean we should. restraint and self control should be encouraged and praised. simply not having sex is the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and while some people view it as a "right" of sorts to go forth and "get off" with whoever they want they dont feel there should be a price to pay for such behavior. and this goes far beyond abortion. the fact you can get PERMANENT diseases should be incentive enough to not play man or woman whore at the local bar but obviously not. its not jsut men that go around with this "bang anything that moves" attitude, women does this just as much. how in gods name do you think diseases and unwanted pregnancies happen so often if its only one sided? wouldnt we think that if its just men with this loose attitude towards sex that the statisitics would be a lot lower than they are?

and i know this isnt going to be a popular stance either but if it takes two to create it then it should take two to deal with it and accept responsibility for their actions. i know it would be impossible to find out the exact reason why a woman wanted to have an abortion and then refuse her just because she wanted to have some one night stands. then again after watching maury povich's show and watching so many women on there trying to find out who the father of their child(ren) are that i'm pretty sure this is far from a one sided issue and sometimes i think aboriton should be even more available than it is now because of these women and the men they sleep with. but abortion is just a bandaid for a broken arm. no longer do people have a common sense of morality and feel that sex should be reserved for those you love and care about. with some people it viewed as a sport, a contest to see how man partners they can have.

there is no one size fits all answer to this problem. abortion itself isnt the problem, people not wanting to restrain their urges is part of the actual problem. people not wanting to accept responsibility for their actions is part of the problem. abortion is simply a reaction to that problem and its a poor reaction as it does nothing to stem the bigger problem.

i'm against abortion for those who put ZERO forethought into their actions. i am agaisnt abortion for those who feel its nothing more than another form of birth control and treat it as such. i am against abortion for those who feel they shouldnt have to live with the life altering consequences of their actions by raising a child.


i was once married. my wife was pregnant and a few months into the pregnancy she miscarried but she didnt realize it until she went to the doctor. the fetus was dead and she had a procedure done that could be considered an abortion. she knew what the procedure was, removing the dead fetus and was not happy about it. in her mind she still considered it an abortion but after explain to her that it wasnt in the traditional sense as the fetus was already dead and she didnt have a choice (oh she had a choice alright, get this done or carry a dead fetus).

now i feel that if abortion werent legal she might not have been able to get this done, at least the way it was performed. and its for this very reason i support such a procedure. i am not against abortion for this reason. i am against people not wanting to accept responsibility for their actions.

it a living thing whether we want to think it is or not. like us, the trees and ever other animal and plant it is made of living tissue. sure we can break even ourselves down to basically mostly water and a few basic elements and we could even justify killing ourselves or other animals. but the truth is all life is sacred to me and i wouldnt needlessly take a life without a true purpose such as my own survival. a greater good must be served in taking another life. we must make the most of the life we take whether it be a cow for food or the life of our enemy. we must learn to value we have this ability to take life. but we can also protect it foster it and create it. these things come with great responsiblities as they are great powers indeed and are not to be taken lightly. because we can does not mean we should. i only believe in taking a life when it is needed and serves a greater purpose than ourselves, when taking that life offers something else to another living thing. to take life for our own wants is greedy and selfish. to take life to feed our family is good, to take a life to protect ourselves, our family or where we live is good. taking a life because it doesnt fit our way of life or would "get in the way" is wrong. even taking a life to feed ourselves is viewed with some sorrow for it was living thing but its life helps to further other life. taking a life to protect ourselves serves to protect life, how many would die as a result if we didnt stop murderers? more than there are murderers.

It is murder and must be stopped at all cost. I just watched an A&E Cold Case files episode on how a young(less than 10 year old) girl was killed by her mother. She then buried her remains, and the police discovered her skeletal remains 30 years later. Im an adult and I could not help getting emotional watching that, I almost felt tears about to come. I feel so bad for her. The same way I feel for the abortion murder victims. Liberal women dont want to take responsibility for their actions after they get knocked up. Maybe their mothers should have performed an abortion on them. Its called using a condom for the undeucated. You can buy some at your local Rite-Aid. How could the murderers do this to a child:

Originally posted by Pyros
IMHO, I would like to point out a few things:

1st, I believe that NO MAN should even be part of this debate, as it has nothing to do with a man's body. This is a women's health & morality issue, and women should be the one's deciding it's outcome. To me, it would be no different if a group of women made up some law that said " all men must have one testicle removed". Imagine that!...

[edit on 8-7-2004 by Pyros]

Excuse me "NO MAN?" What about the father of the child? As far as your testicle analogy, it is stupid. Murdering a fetus is unnatural, as is the removal of your so called testicle. God and Nature did not intend for the unnatural killing of the fetus by forced means. Next time when you talk, do it using proper reasoning. SAT question which I think is valid..hehe

1) abortion:fetus::

a)OJ Simpson:Innocent
b)murder:human
c)toast:jelly
d)television:images
e)liberals:gay

The correct answer is b)

[edit on 9-7-2004 by TACHYON]

As far as the women who aborted a child, God will see you in Hell.

My views on abortion have nothing to do with conservatism or lberalism. IIts not a democrat thing or a republcan thing. I was raised to believe that there were only 3 situations in whch the taking of anothers life s justified.
1) in order to save your own life or the lfe of another
2) In war
3) the legal execution of a criminal.

My views on abortion are a natural product of my upbringing.

In a situation where the pregnancy threatens the lfe of the mother I believe that she has the right to save her own life, However that is the only situation in which I can accept abortion. I understand the severe mental trauma a woman faces after rape and I am in full support of castration of the offender, however to then sentace any child which may result from the assault to death is in my opinion wrong.

The reason I brought up assisted suicide is that it is another situation where an individual claims that as it is thier body they can do whatever they want with it, and in fact in this situation I agree because the one making the decision is the one who bears the full weight of the conseqeunces. But in the case of abortion it is not the mother who is sentanced to death by her decision it is a life which though supported by her is not a part of her. The fetus is NOT a part of the womans body, women are not born with fetuses, they do not (as in the case of breasts and pubic hair) Naturally generate a fetus upon onset of puberty, and a woman can go her whole lfe without ever becomming pregnant without suffering any ill effects. The heart and brain are fully functionng by 6 weeks both of which are factors taken into account when doctors state time of death. If the lack of these functions is indicative of death then surley by any rational or logical thought procees the presense of these functions must be indicative of life.
As for the masturbation is also abortion argument as sperm cannot under any circumstances create a child by itself then no sperm is not life, just as an unfertilised egg in a womans ovum is not life.
What disturbs me is the dichotomy of many of your vews.
For example earthtone beleves vehemently that Capital Punishment is wrong as the taking of the life of a convicted murderer (in his opinion) is murder itself, yet he feel that the murder of an unborn child with a heartbeat and active brain is " a womans right to do wht she wants with her body"
Earthtone how do you justify this?
While I agree that a woman (or man for that matter ) has the right to do what they want with thier body, I dont agree that a devolping child is a part of her body. Its the childs body. Could a child in the first 10-12 weeks survive outside of the womb? no but is that the point? Does dependence on someone or something for life confer the right unto that person or thing to deny life? When I was a child my parents supported my life and I depended on them for my life, does that mean that had my mother decided to smother me at the age of 6 months it would have been O.K.
I am no mysoginyst, I was raised by a single mother who made great sacrifices to care for me with little help from my father, so I agree that all men must be forced to live up to thier responsibilities. My question is does the fact that the man you chose to have sex with is reprehensible give you the right to murder a child who if left alone and not interfered with would within a few short months be capable of living outside the womb?
Does it give you the right to kill a living being with a heart that beats and a brin that thinks?
And if, as we know to be true, the fetus has a beating heart and an active brain can you really argue that it is a part of your body? Are there any humans alive (besides conjoined twins) who have two beating hearts and two active brains in the same body?
I am all for womns rights, I think the glass ceilng should be shattered, I believe that women deserve the same pay for the same job, and though I wuld not vote for Hillary Clinton I would vote for a female president if I felt she were qualfied to do the job. But to say that a living, breathing, thinking child is "part of the womans body" is ludicrous.
This is not an issue about men or women its an issue about life and whether or not we ALL have the right to life.

Originally posted by TACHYON
As far as the women who aborted a child, God will see you in Hell.

such a lovely christian caring attitude!