What do you guys think about abortion??? Is it right, or is it wrong? And why do you think so?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

I think its very selfish.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

hMm...abortion..i think dat its murder in some ways...
i dont think people should have abortions...maybe just give the baby up for adoption rather than killing the baby before its future..and if one cannot take care of a child and face their consequences...why have sex in da first place or why can't they just make sure da condom doesnt break or wutever...the females should even try birth control ^^

Last edited by kRypTic_nABi on 06-02-2002 at 06:41 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

i heard somewhere that heejun of SM entertainment fame's parents almost had an abortion with him...
hm....

__________________
word is bond

Last edited by tm11 on 06-01-2002 at 05:47 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by tm11
i think AbOrTiOn is bad...
i heard somewhere that heejun of SM entertainment fame's parents almost had an abortion with him...
hm....it cannot be good...

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

yes, i think of if you want to abort, the better thing to do would be to have the baby and give it up for adoption. that way, you didn't take away someone's life and you won't have to put up with the baby again (unless the baby wants to find their real parents, but that's a whole other story)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

I for one, am pro-choice to a certain extent. However, this topic is based on an argument of strong moral and ethical beliefs which (if you read my little bit on morals in the Nukes topic) cannot ever be resolved as everyone in the world posesses a different standard and thus would always garner opposition.
But i'll put what i think anyways.
First off, I would agree with abortion, but only to a certain extent. Hmm...though this idea might seem a bit ineffectual, I propose that there should be a series of guidelines and criteria utilised to keep people from using abortion as a second-nature (You'll see my reasoning for this later). Thus, there must be an ample reason for a person to desire an abortion, because life is not something that can just be thrown away, one must take the recipient's life into consideration before doing action that would most certainly destroy them. However, that brings me to the next point which would be in response to a question such as, "Well, if one must always take in consideration the recipient's life, then why would you have abortion in the first place? If you have an abortion, you are disregarding the concern for their life right?"
There is a point relative to abortion wherein death might be more acceptable than keeping them alive. Being born with a vicious or terminal disease for example. Or being born into an abusive home. I don't need a statistic to show that children who live in an abusive home suffer a higher suicide rate than those who do not. Suicide is in many cases their only way out, and if you are religious, you would know that suicide would just give you a seat next to the devil. So why not take away the risk of them killing themselves? Someone's response to this could be "well, how about the ones that actually would not kill themselves, you're depriving them of a chance to live." Thats where the criteria system that I proposed come into play. That being, that only the worst cases would be accepted as ready to be aborted, the worst cases being for example, a mother on welfare that already has 4 other children to feed AND is abusive.
Eh, i might put in a little on adoption later if i feel like it


oh and ladimoon, you forgot to change your title to debate mod heh

__________________
ni pour ni contre; ça m'est égal

"The weight of this sad time we must obey,/ Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say./ The oldest hath borne most; we that are young/ Shall never see so much, nor live so long."
King Lear (V.3.300-304)

Last edited by Crazydeb8ter on 05-31-2002 at 05:04 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crazydeb8ter

oh and ladimoon, you forgot to change your title to debate mod heh

---

whoa haha, when did this happen? Anyway welcome racer...was your name, julie? I have forgotten ^^;.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crazyde8ter


oh and ladimoon, you forgot to change your title to debate mod heh

---

haha... yeah, I know that... I just haven't had the time to change it!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by PsychoSnowman


whoa haha, when did this happen? Anyway welcome racer...was your name, julie? I have forgotten ^^;.

---

Thanks... and my name is Julie!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

I agree with abortion only as a method of emergency contraception. If it was a couple foolin around, screw them.

But if it was a rape victim or if the baby would bring a lot of complications (disease and death) to the mother or anybody else, abortion is ok as an option.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

i dont get why people have an abortion
they can just have the baby and give it in the foster home

__________________
immagijibae: seons a hoeeeeeee, he wears them g-strings, and i also knowwwww, they hurt his dinga-lings~ la l alalala~ nanannan~ oh~ seons a hoeeeeee, he wears them g-strings..............
immagijibae: liiiiiiiiiiiiiike my new 1-minute-made-up song???????

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

i think abortion is always a selfish decision, it always is. But i have to side with rape victims and those of similar situations. In actuality, you are making a choice of whether to kill someone else's life, and it's a hard decision. I think adoption is the best thing to do if you really can't afford a child at the moment, and for a better life and whatnot. But even if they are born with a chronic illness or whatever, it's still should be their choice nonetheless, not the mothers.

I'm really indifferent on it, and i have to say that i am slightly hypocritical when i say that i support it when the birth is caused by rape, or when the womyn is really young, but having a child is a lot of work...it'll be selfish no matter what if you decide to go through with it, but giving up that much of your life to produce a healthy child is a lot to ask when you didn't even ask for it, or want it.

So, Pro-Choice in special circumstances...in which i know there is impossible legislation that will ever be able to accomodate for this.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Last edited by PsychoSnowman on 06-02-2002 at 04:31 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

OK, it seems like I'm the only one here who's totally pro-abortion.

Many of you think that if the only reason the abortion is wanted is because the child was a 'mistake', and a couple were having sex unprotected, then abortion is immoral. And alright, perhaps they should have thought more carefully about consequences. But in the long term, when you think about the future of the child either going into adoption or coming into a family where it is unwanted, is it really better for it to live like that or not to live at all? I think that the couple, or the woman alone as the case may be, needs to have the right to choose, whether or not they want the child and if they can provide the child with the proper support to give it a full and happy development.

I also believe that everybody's idea about how they can all give their babies to orphanages is just plain stupid. Sorry, people, but if you've been to an orphanage, it's no way to grow up. We all think that those children are going to be picked out and taken into loving homes. That's becoming more and more rarely the case. In many places, the number of adoptions is decreasing or looked down upon, and babies taken there often never leave. Instead they are raised by their nurses there, with 'sibling' rivalry on a huge scale for attention. They are deprived of love and care, and it seems that they must feel unwanted. Who wants to grow up knowing that they were left by themselves because their parents didn't want them? Many children that are adopted end up being brought back because of neglect or abuse from their foster parents, and orphans are at a much higher risk of committing suicide.

"But even if they are born with a chronic illness or whatever, it's still should be their choice nonetheless, not the mothers."
-PsychoSnowman

How does that work? Whose choice should it be if not the mothers? OK, probably a lot of you are girls, but have you noticed how many people that are generally against abortion are people that have never faced a choice such as this one? You may disapprove of it now, but if you were in such a situation, would your resolve hold?

Lastly, say the couple was not married and the woman were pregnant, and the man was not willing to take responsibility. Yes, both should have thought before they acted, but even so, it can ruin a woman's whole future by not being able to have an abortion. Having to support another life when you're not ready, and if friends and family turn away from you because of this mistake, then it can change your whole life. How many people, especially in the US, have dropped out of school because they were pregnant? And how many of those were bright students who now have little chance of getting a worthwhile job because they were not allowed to choose? Also, is the man involved going to have any of the above to worry about? Of course not. So who else's choice should it be if not the woman's?

Alright, I guess I've sorta written enough now. Obviously, I kinda feel really strong about abortion.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

dreamcatcher, you make a lot of generalizations and assumptions that really don't hold true to a lot of cases. Sure to some, but not all. That thing about the unwanted child just doesn't work. I don't even need to spend time responding to it, also your whole post is things like "we all believe" and stuff. When people don't. Reread your post and realize how much validity is actually in that. These fallacies you speak of are true in some instances, and the way you wrote it sounds as if any good thing that comes from adoption or whatnot is an oddity. It may be most cases, but it's still their choice to decide if they want to live or not. Live in an orphanage, or to never have lived at all? See, complications.

That quote you took from me was taken out of context, what i was doing was supporting my thesis that all abortion choices are selfish, since mothers are essentially making a choice to kill someone else's life for their own sake or for what may seem to be the baby's sake. Get it? I was outlining a fact that exists within society. Not that it shouldn't be the mother's choice, but the choice should be the baby's choice which is impossible so therefore by the mother making the choice it is ALWAYS selfish no matter what they moral ground behind it is. And i only feel it's even slightly justified by the event of it being not by choices that lead up to it. Slightly hypocritical, but yes...tis my opinion,...unwanted pregnancies due to forced nature i think easily supercedes selfishness. Although when it gets late in the pregnancy it may seem like it's worse cause you can see the baby's head and stuff after they abort it cause it's more developed, but it's the same thing except in a more advanced state even though it feels and looks a lot different.

If i were in the same situation would my resolve hold? Yes, thats why it was a resolve. Except i would abide by the opinions expressed in my post, so only for special circumstances would they be aborted.

If a girl gets pregnant too young you make the assumption that they are bound to keep it for themselves instead of giving it up for adoption. It was their fault to begin with if it was consensual, and an abortion still would be selfish. Face it, it is. Not saying that selfishness is that bad of a thing, but it's not that great.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Last edited by PsychoSnowman on 06-02-2002 at 07:57 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

abortion.. hmm..i think it's a bad hting to have an abortion.. u'r taking someone's life away..yea there's responsibilties that follow wen u have a baby.. buh u have to learn to take those responsibilities.. instead of going the easy way out.. juss think of it as a contribution to the world lolz.. i dunno i think it's bad

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

OK, perhaps I do jump to some conclusions that are a little one-sided. But on the other hand, since I don't think there is any way to make one rule about abortion and have it cover all the possibilities, we do have to make some generalizations.

I don't see how you can brush off the matter of the child being unwanted as 'an issue that does not need to be addressed'. I think that has to be one of the most important factors. PsychoSnowman, you say something about the complication of my question about whether it is better for the child to be put into an orphanage or not to be born at all. True, of course there are cases where orphanages are very good, and it works for the child. I am just saying that there are cases both ways, and that both need to be considered. Also, the things that I said about the orphanages are true, and need to be taken into consideration, too, before we can come to a conclusion. One other thing that was said was that it should be the child's right to choose whether or not they want to live. Again, that may be true, but is that saying it is better for them to go through initial pain before they finally decide that they do not want to live and end up taking their own life?

My misunderstanding of the quote explains some, but not enough. Like you said, there is no way for the baby to decide before it is born, so is it not the mother's choice? If you think not, then again, it can circle back to the last paragraph. Instead, it would be taken into the child's hands, and perhaps this would mean suicide. Is it better to be so 'selfless' that there is the chance of ruining the already living's life and having a baby which could be born into a situation where it's life would already be ruined? Of course I am making assumptions, but in much too many cases they are truths.

I'm not saying that abortion is in any way the best or correct solution. Yes, the choice may seem selfish, and it may seem the woman is thinking only of herself. But when you look at the realities, what really might be the most thoughtful choice for the child and it's mother is abortion.

__________________
"Do not look backward in anger or forward in fear, but around in awareness."
- James Thurber

"I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand."
- Chinese Proverb

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Excuse my asking Psychosnowman, but would you really give birth to a child that you know you can't be responsable for and aren't ready for? Would you want to live in a world of suffering? Suffer everyday of your life? The state of orphanages aren't usually well-maintained. These children have to go through pain, anguish, depression, abuse. Could you stand living one day like that??? And the mother would be selfish to have an abortion? I would say that if she knew that she couldn't be responsible or ready to take a child at the young age of like 14 or 15 and still gave birth to the child, she is being selfish! Actually more cruel to know that this child of her OWN will have to suffer everyday knowing that their mother couldn't have them! Or didn't want them. How would you feel I ask, if your mother said actually, I don't love you at all, now I don't want you! Go away! Get out!? Or even if the mother wanted to keep her child and loved it, but knew that both of them especially the child will have to suffer daily, wouldn't she abort it? If she loved the child, she would get an abortion since she knows it would suffer too much being in this world! Besides, the foetus isn't a human yet, it can't do anything. Thats why they call it a fortus and not a baby. It isn't born yet. Do you want to grow up knowing, that oh my mother was a pregnant teenager and I have no idea who was my father was. The man almost always leaves. If you can get yourself out of trouble then why not? Exactly so therefore the mother must take care of this child by herself! her parents I don't think will pleased that she is pregnant, and if it was the male and female's fault, why should only one (the female) have to suffer? Or is it just like that I ask? Females should suffer! They are being self-centered when then have an abortion, while the male can get away with it? Is that not even more cruel and selfish???
I have to agree with dreamcather.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Abortion Sucks!

I don't get either of you, Dreamcatcher and Aurora! It doesn't make sense. Abortion is killing a life! don't you care?????????
Besides its so selfish for the mother to kill her child when it was her mistake! I mean why? If she agreed to unprotected sex, she should just keep her child and raise him/her properly! She should also demand the guy to take some responsibility or at least tell his parents who most likely will take action It was their fault and pay for it!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frenzy
I don't get either of you, Dreamcatcher and Aurora! It doesn't make sense. Abortion is killing a life! don't you care?????????
Besides its so selfish for the mother to kill her child when it was her mistake! I mean why? If she agreed to unprotected sex, she should just keep her child and raise him/her properly! She should also demand the guy to take some responsibility or at least tell his parents who most likely will take action It was their fault and pay for it!

---

__________________
"Do not look backward in anger or forward in fear, but around in awareness."
- James Thurber

"I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand."
- Chinese Proverb

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

First of all, i don't even know why you tried to substantiate your points through personalizing it with me. I posted MY opinions, therefore, my answers will hold true to MY opinions. I'll answer them anyway though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aurora
Excuse my asking Psychosnowman, but would you really give birth to a child that you know you can't be responsable for and aren't ready for?

---

Hmmm, YES i've said that pretty much implicitly. If you can't be responsible for it, give it up to an another family, orphanage, or whatever.

quote:

---

Would you want to live in a world of suffering? Suffer everyday of your life? The state of orphanages aren't usually well-maintained. These children have to go through pain, anguish, depression, abuse. Could you stand living one day like that???

---

What i was saying is that the value of life is up to the beholder. It won't do you any good whether i concur with what you want me to say or if i oppose. It just so happens i oppose it though. I WOULD want to live in an orphanage becuase i consider the gift of life to supercede this world of "suffering" (you don't need to argue why i put it in quotes, it'll be bootless and take up space). Usually, usually, usually....i don't care about all this usually cases, there are other cases of course...this is the basis of your argumentation. If i could live like that, theres the possibility to NOT live like that. If it WAS me, then i would try and get out of that life, but i wouldn't be thinking "ooooh why didn't my mommy get an abortion!?! ahhh, i hate her for not saving me the suffering of my CURRENT life." I could stand living one day like that, my hope would get me through it, but then again it doesn' tmatter about me, it's the child's life. Whatever worth it has is up to them. I just happen to think this way.

quote:

---

And the mother would be selfish to have an abortion? I would say that if she knew that she couldn't be responsible or ready to take a child at the young age of like 14 or 15 and still gave birth to the child, she is being selfish! Actually more cruel to know that this child of her OWN will have to suffer everyday knowing that their mother couldn't have them! Or didn't want them. How would you feel I ask, if your mother said actually, I don't love you at all, now I don't want you! Go away! Get out!? Or even if the mother wanted to keep her child and loved it, but knew that both of them especially the child will have to suffer daily, wouldn't she abort it? If she loved the child, she would get an abortion since she knows it would suffer too much being in this world! Besides, the foetus isn't a human yet, it can't do anything. Thats why they call it a fortus and not a baby. It isn't born yet. Do you want to grow up knowing, that oh my mother was a pregnant teenager and I have no idea who was my father was. The man almost always leaves. If you can get yourself out of trouble then why not? Exactly so therefore the mother must take care of this child by herself! her parents I don't think will pleased that she is pregnant, and if it was the male and female's fault, why should only one (the female) have to suffer? Or is it just like that I ask? Females should suffer! They are being self-centered when then have an abortion, while the male can get away with it? Is that not even more cruel and selfish???
I have to agree with dreamcather.

---

haha, you are too offended (if thats what it is) by me calling it selfish and hold too much worth in that statement. Deciding anything for anyone else that will affect their life is selfish as i see it. Allow me to personalize , if i sign you up for the army and you have to go or something, that would be selfish...get it? It doesn't matter how different the situations are, cause my view holds. Getting into whether i knew the child would sufffer or not, if they did...well i'd give them up to someone else if they'd suffer with me!! And, it's not her "OWN" kid. It's the kid's life as i see it, so they really shouldn't be making the decision, but hten again...how would the kid? the mother would have to, but that necessity doesn't make it not selfish. It's not that strong of a word, and i don't see how it's not.

That argument about aborting a child when she knew they would suffer is bootless and one-sided. I DON'T agree with you hahah, it's not like it's the obvious decision....your words: "wouldn't she abort it?", well thats subjective to whomever it is, get it? Getting an abortion isn't a signifier of love. It's different from person to person. And it woulnd't be selfish to go through with the child being born. She could give it up to another. "saving" their child from all that suffering isn't the definite love, and by "saving" it doesn't make it not selfish. She couldn't bear the thought (the mother being selfish) of her child suffering, and didn't want them to suffer (the mother again being selfish), so she aborted them in order save "them" (save the mother, and the child in a miniscule way).

Now we're getting into what is a baby, when i'm not even saying that. I'm saying she's killing another...another LIFE, not a baby if i accidently said baby by accident, i meant life heh which is what i've been talking about all this time). I think it's a baby even inside the fetus, thinking otherwise has too many complications and hypocracies i think.

I don't care about all those should questions, whether the male can get away with it doesn't make the female's decision ANY different. Stop being victims, and realize the responsibility...jsut cause someone left you doesn't make it not self-centered, cause it is, rather selfish is the word i use. Even if it's not entirely, it still is. We're talking about the value of life, and whether it's right for another to take that into their own hands.

Bottom line: Making a decision to end someone else's life is selfish, simple as that. Don't be offended by it. Whether someone left you or not doesn't make it not selfish. People are getting into arguments on how male's can sometimes not have responsiblity of it as well as making it somewhat less self-centered. Fine, but not totally.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Last edited by PsychoSnowman on 06-05-2002 at 02:50 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged