Let people decide for themselves. It's their body, they should have control. Especially if it's deformed or screwed up. Even better, how would you like to be forced to give birth to the child of your rapist?

Yes, there need to be legal, safe options for abortion. If abortion is made illegal, the practice will continue, but it will be done illegally and in unsafe conditions.

I continually go back and forth on this issue weighing the pros and cons. Sometimes I feel as though it should be illegal because if you are responsible enough to be having sexual intercourse you should assume responsibility for a child. However, I agree with the above poster on unsafe conditions for those that will ultimately seek out an abortion whether it is legal or not. There are plenty of irresponsible people having sex and having children. I think abortion should be legal and safe sex practices should be enhanced in schools. Abortion should be the last resort.

This is another example, along with gay marriage, where I feel the government should have no say. It's a person's body, their life, it should be their decision. Abortion isn't pretty or good, but life isn't always either, and maybe some of these woman realize they can't and will never be able to provide their child with a good life. Still, I believe abortion is the biggest moral issue in our society right now and one that will be intensely debated for a long time.

If you don't like crime, then you should like abortion. See the supporting evidence below which summarizes the Freakonomics theory of abortion.

Good point. The one good thing about abortion is that it prevents a bunch of hoodlums from being born. Freakonomics proves that the rise in the number of abortions lead to the downturn of the amount of violent crime. Most abortions are prevalent in poor households with single mothers, which are breeding grounds for criminal activity.

What separates humans from all other species of this world is language and our ability to reason (to grab from quickly from Wikipedia: "Compared to other living organisms on Earth, humans have a highly developed brain capable of abstract reasoning, language, and introspection."). A fetus can do none of these things. While it certainly in most cases will turn into a being able to reason and communicate, it still is easy to dispute that a fetus is a "human" as we officially define one today. Just something to think about when arguing your point.

I too have my isses with abortion. I am against the idea of man playing a role in human life (this includes the death penalty), HOWEVER...until there is SCIENTIFIC proof of when life begins, I will support its legality. Religion should NEVER have a role in politics, and there should be no Divine assumptions. I certainly don't wanna see women getting back alley abortions because somebody who believes in "god" says its murder. I will also say though that I think abortion is used to quickly and I think there should be a greater stress on alternatives as well as a greater stress on education for pregnancy prevention (and im not talking abstinence). Abortion IS unhealthy for a woman's body, so i would never recommend it. Though, right now, with the info we have, we cannot even consider making it illegal.

If an organism is physically, naturally attached to a host to whom it is utterly dependent and to whom it owes its conception then yes, it's the host's decision.

And I wonder how many people would like to adopt a baby with horrific, life curtailing physical deformities?

I believe it should be legal up to the end of the first trimester, as this is when it is plausible that the fetus will experience pain if it were to be aborted. Before this the "being", if you will, is not conscious nor can it suffer it's destruction in any way, so why is it such a moral issue? If you think it is "human" from the moment of conception then I must assume that you are at least misinformed. A fly is a more complex living thing than a blastocyst (day 3 of pregnancy). It seems to me then that we should make the killing of insects illegal too.

I highly recommend Sam Harris' "Letter to a Christian Nation" For those here that are fully opposed to any kind of abortion.

Endowed by their creator? There are 1.1 billion people in the world who seem to disagree with the idea that we have a creator. Your entire argument crumbles right from that beginning and until you can provide evidence that proves beyond a doubt that a) such a creator exists and that b) he has given us these rights, the rest of your post is pointless. Do not bring religion into a political, and perhaps even scientific debate.

Also, "Imagine forcing people with religious and other beliefs against abortion to pay for them through their taxes. That is what the government now does if not stopped."

Do you have ANY idea how often atheists and other unaffiliated people in America are forced to pay taxes that end up going to strictly religious causes? Why not attack that? Don't use a double standard here.

Also consider, that humans are the only species on earth that have 46 chromosomes in our DNA structure. This DNA structure is truly what sets us apart from other species. 23 chromosomes are found in the sperm, and 23 in the egg. At the exact moment of conception those 23 come together to make 46, detailing not only that they are human, but who they will be. At the exact moment of conception, they are a human life, and no longer a couple of cells.

Are you suggesting that we should have the right to kill any person who is not capable of abstract reasoning, language or introspection?

mmb98, they were only quoting the Declaration of Independence. And I assume this discussion is for legality in America? So really the argument doesn't crumble at the beginning at all. In fact, it starts at the beginning, of this country.

And an interesting idea, life before liberty. B/c the pro-abortion crowd considers themselves "pro-choice", but they deny life in order to have choice. Do you think they'd agree if we deny their life for one of my choices?

Hey blammo, why should science have a role in politics? Is that in the Constitution?

yes cyberweez...science should have a role in politics...because science is proven....religion is a myth or in the very least an unproven theory. Thus...cannot dictate how we create laws. Furthermore, Are you going to seriously argue that scientific evidence should be ignored in our society? That's a scary thought. Have you heard of that story about the parents who decided to "pray" for their daughter who had diabetes instead of getting her medical attention? she's dead now and they will thankfully be going to jail. (see link below) And, if you are one of those people who believe that because God is written in the Constitution in a couple of places that its intent was to secure a Christian Nation, then you both havent read the Constitution NOR know anything about our founding fathers.

I didn't say anything about ignoring science when creating laws. However, I asked why should we let it have a role. Ah, I see, b/c science is proven. Why is it proven? Ah, b/c science says so. In essence, your position is not much different then the religious fanatic, a complete reliance on your senses as opposed to complete reliance on an idea. You trust that your senses are all there is in this world. Many don't. And science doesn't prove that the natural is the only thing, it only can speak about the natural.

Besides, every law isn't based on a "proven theory". I'm not allowed to steal from you. What does that have to do w/science?

Thankfully, I'm not one of those who think this nation was founded as a Christian Nation. However, I certainly know a bit about those founding fathers, and know they certainly believed in a Creator, and that belief influenced the founding of this country.

This gets murky, because each person differs in DNA. Then at what point does something stop being animal and start being human? We currently investigate how animals reason and communicate in order to determine their degree of 'humanness' for want of a better word. By your definition, we should give a chimp 98.6% of human rights. Why shouldn't we judge a person's worth by their skills and aptitude, indeed, that is how modern society judges a person's value, their salary and place in society is largely determined by how well they predict and manage obstacles. And to an extent, we do shun those who are incapable. That is how our Laissez Fair paradigm works.

One problem with that argument. If we judge rather someone should have the right to live or die, by their ability to reason or communicate. I by all rights could kill my 1 year old child. A person with Human DNA, is Human, killing them is murder.

I dont believe katie was refering to the fetus. If conditions exist that it would be irresponsible and morally incorrect to give birth to a child, it is better that the treatment availiable is from a safe, legal practitioner rather than some backalley with a coathanger.

Again, you cant determine the value of life by it's DNA. Should a cabbage receive 50% of human rights, because we share 50% of our DNA? Its literally impossible to draw a line on the genetic level between human and non human.

It is more likely that if something is illegal, because it is unregulated, standards may slip. Yes, it is possible that a blackmarket clinic may be actually safer than some legal clinics, but because of the very nature of the black market, in being deregualted, there is no guarantee. Comparitively, because legal practioners would be regulated, there is an expected minimum, a guarantee of sorts, at least, if you will.

I think there is an underlying definition inadequacy here. What pro-abortionists deem lives seems incompatible with what anti-abortionists believe in. I myself do not believe that life begins at conception, but rather at birth. That is why I cannot cede to the 'thousands of deaths'. I do not define them as deaths, but rather as a treatment for what essentially is a parasite, until birth. And just because you call this treatment by emotionally evocative names dosent make it any less right. See blamo in regards to your comment about science.

Abortion should be legal for it is ultimately the Mother's choice.

Don't criticize just because you're not going to be that poor unfortunate 16 year old girl who can't go to college and pursue her dreams because of a mistake.

Don't criticize because you're not the future father who is stuck paying welfare for 18 years.

Well, the 16 yr old girl and 18 yr old boy should have thought about that BEFORE they decided to shack it up. Actions have consequences. And if these kids themselves decide that it is such a 'mistake' then put the baby up for adoption.

Should a mother be able to abort her un-born fetus because she will never be able to provide her child with a good life?? If that's the main concern, then put the kid up for adoption or drop it off in a basket on a millionaire's doorstep. Both sound like better options than the alternative...

Are we talking about fleas and dogs or human beings?

I disagree with you at the age of 16 and 18 they do fully understand consequences. Parents and teachers and life teach them that every action has consequences and by that age there have been enough lessons of actions and consequences.

If you think having an abortion fully erases the mind of "error" as you call it then well then you never had one. It sure does not erase your mind.

The fetus is essentially a parasite, growing at the exclusive detriment of it's host. If that host has attachments to the parasite, and decides to nurture it, it is at the discression of the host.

Some people will never be able to comprehend fully, the consequences of their actions, ageless. Yes we have been taught that consequences have actions, but not everyone has learnt. If it were up to me, fertility would be a privilage rather than natural, but that's elitism and eugenics. Alas, nature cannot be foiled.

Yes it should be legal, within the first time frame of the pregnancy, the embryonic stage. Once the embryo first develops into a "baby", when it is no longer embryonic, abortion is not right. Under certain circumstances though, this condition might be avoided, like if the woman is underage, or was raped.

That's a really fuzzy line! Look at this picture of an embryo. It's just a spec but I can already see the eyes and a heart!

You know how laws work...it must be spelled out. 45 days? Is that fair?

Making abortion illegal does not prevent abortions. Those who can afford to circumvent the system will (by going to another state/country/bribing a doctor/etc)--in reality, outlawing abortion hurts poor women more than any other demographic because they are the ones that will turn to back-alley abortions and suffer infection/complications/death because of it.

Also, the government has a greater obligation to the health of the mother than the fetus. We can argue all we want about when life begins, but I'm pretty sure you're not a citizen until after you're born. At least, until they start issuing conception certificates instead of birth certificates.

Why I personally think abortion is a horrible sin. I do believe that we are here to make choices right or wrong those choices are going to be made. I do support that it is a choice. I just wish people would make the right one.

Until no man is ever capable of impregnating a woman without her consent, it MUST remain legal!

How many millionaires do you know with adopted children? I agree that in a perfect world those who are incapable of parenting (financially or otherwise) would hand off their children to those with better abilities (or resources). But in THIS world, rich people are too selfish to care for a poor (or even middle-class) woman's child.

firstly Is it not legal in the US ??

in Britain it has been legal for along time. and i know i sided with the YES however most valid points have been made and i would just like to say i believe that the time period needs to be properly looked at. 24 weeks and a baby is well a baby... not a feetus. and the abortion process at that stage is horrific. chopping up the baby to get it to fit our of the whom.... i do not want to go on.

but i think there should be a shorter limit on it. also if someone take so long to decide then they may be unsure or be being forced into it (may have been hiding it)..... should defiantly be more regulations. ect to ensure a safer system

Ok, first let's get some terminology straight. Until the end of the eighth week after fertilization we have what's called an embryo. An embryo is basically just a clump of cells with the potential to grow into a person. I think it's wrong to give it the same status as a fully developed human. I think abortion of an embryo should be legal, although, once it develops into a fetus it become more objectionable.

"You could get the procedure before even giving the idea much thought. It shouldn't be an option. It should be illegal."

You would have plenty of time to think about it. It's not like a woman can just touch her stomach and kill the baby. She would have to go the clinic, consult a physician, make an appointment, and then show up to the procedure. She could change her mind at any time.

And if this isn't enough time, it still isn't necessary to make abortion illegal -- we could simply enforce a waiting period of a week or so. This would avoid the sort of "impulse abortions" you seem to be worried about.

"It is a taking of a human life however you try to spin it."

So when a the female body naturally rejects a fertalized egg is that a taking of a human life? Only a minority of fertilized eggs make it to conception.

Let me ask you, what other rights do you assign to fertilized eggs? If the death of a fertilized egg bothers you, are you a vegatarian? After all, a cow is a million times more developed than a fertilized egg.

It never fails to amaze me how many people are against abortion on the theory that fertilized eggs deserve to live, but then oppose welfare, education, etc. etc. Guess what, kid? We cared about you when you were a blastocyst, but now that you are actual human being you can go f* yourself.

Call me insane, but I think the notion of punishing women for having sex is not a good idea.

I agree with "fairfax68"

So what should the punishment be? Prison for the woman? Fines for those who carry out the procedure?

So what's the punishment?

It should be legal because it is an action on someone's body and that person has a right to do what they want with their body. Obviously the person should make an educated decision if to get an abortion or not(adoption is a viable option)but in the end it is their choice.

If the person considering abortion lives in poverty(or other adverse conditions) and does not feel or know that she can properly care for the baby once it is born and give it the foundation of a good and healthy life then an abortion should be legal so as that the suffering that the child would endure could be prevented.

Making abortion illegal denies one's freedom over one's body and no institution should be able to make such a claim or action.

A fetus does not have an informed conscious(at least there is no scientific proof) and thus it could not make a choice of death over adoption or life and thus it means nothing to ask "What choice do you think the unborn babies would make" as this is an appeal to emotion.

Also to complain that governments force people against their religion to pay with their taxes for abortion seems hypocritical and naive. If you don't want government to use your tax dollars for abortions because it is against your religion why should the government support tax breaks for religion and your church? because not everyone follows a particular religion yet they end up paying for it. Also don't forget that some churches of various religions work very hard to impose their doctrine/beliefs on to others of which they have no right.

Also all of your sources are biased towards pro-life where their mission is only to support pro-life so how credible is it?

I am conflicted at one point, but one question I do have for people is this. If something is illegal, there is a punishment for it. How should we punish women who have abortions? Forget the doctors, women can get abortions without doctors (its just much more dangerous). How should the woman be punished?

Yes but we don't know if that unborn life could become somebody like Albert Einstein etc but it also could become a Hitler, osama bin laden and countless others. It's chance, we don't know who the unborn will become.

Government should not place restrictions on what a female can do with to her body, because of a chance. Many people die before they have a chance to become somebody like Albert Einstein yet the evidence of their path is there to see, but the government and others don't worry about trying to preserve their life, just the life of a chance which could go any number of ways.

I'm not saying that we should abort babies because one of them might become like Hitler or Stalin or someone else bad, i'm just saying that if you are gonna use the argument that not aborting a baby might produce a genius then you have to take into account that not aborting that baby could also produce a very evil person. It goes both ways. of course i'm not saying my reasoning would require that every baby be killed, i believe the woman has the final choice so i couldn't decide if the baby is aborted or not i could just suggest.

Yes, abortion should be legal. First off, you'll never stop abortions, legal or not. If abortions are not legal, women and young girls will be having abortions in places such as motel rooms, back street alleys, etc., which are very unsanitary and dangerous. Also does anyone really think that the rich won't have abortions if they are made illegal? Of course they will, they'll pay top dollar to have an abortion. Lastly, it is really nobody's business what the female decides except her and her family. Pus you don't know the circumstances. Women have the right to choose, period.

The frightening thing about the abortion debate in this country is that not enough attention is brought to the fact that white men often have the strongest opinion on the matter.

While I am in NO way religious, I understand that some people are religious, and that abortion goes against their beliefs. Why is it, then, that these people do not respect my views (or lack thereof) and are ffighting (sometimes violently) to make abortion illegal.

Leave it up to the WOMEN who should have teh right to chose, on a completely individual basis.

i believe that it is wrong but that i also think that it should be legal because some people don't have any control over getting pregnant because of rape. and they just are not ready to have a child because or age, finances or both. it also needs to be legal because women and or men will take it into their own hands and do it themselves therefore inflicting damage upon themselves as well possibly permanent damage. and maybe even death to the mother. abortions have to be legal or all hell will break loose and the death rate will increase substantially

If I was a little unicellular embryo, I wouldn't be physically able to make that vote. I understand what you're saying, but I wouldn't have noticed it if my mom had decided to abort me.

So in response to your question, my answer is this: it wouldn't matter.

Please stop making appeals to emotion.

A fetus is not yet a child. It is the product of the woman's body despite it

being viable future offspring. And although males have a stake in this

creation of life they are not the ones who have to take the risks of bearing

children. Pregnancy is a very risky situation for women and I think the

pro-life camp takes this very lightly. Women are responsible for bringing

life into this world, however that responsibility falls into each and everyone

of their hands. Every woman should have the right to decide what's best

for her health. After all it's her body and not yours.

frist of you can only have an abortion if the fetus is at least 28 days old in the stomic of course but its not takeing any human life it would braly have been growing outof the egg so yes it ahould be legal but only for 17 and below people

It is allowed to kill to save your own life.. it should therefore be okay to kill a fetus if this saves the life of it's mother..

But I dont think it should be allowed to kill unwanted fetuses, those can be given to adoption..

its hard to tell if it's the child of a rapist though, I don't think I would want to give birth to the child of my tormentor if I were a woman..

Not only do I think that it is wrong for the government or any type of law to prevent a woman from having the choice, but I also don't think that it's really the same as murder per se to abort a fetus. They're really not the same thing at all.

It's not impossible. Just unfathomably complex at our current level of technology.

They still haven't disproved your argument though. Review your statements and make sure they're on topic, guys.

This is as polite as I can possibly say it: You do not belong on this site.

No, it's not.

(How's it feel to read a terrible argument?)

I wish more people were as mature as you.

Forcible impregnation.

What? I thought it was funny. Fine, vote me down.

It is a known FACT that human life begins at fertilization.

Life. Not consciousness. Taking life painlessly is justified in some situations.

Just because you may be adopted does not mean you’ll have a miserable unsuccessful life.

No one said this.

Did you know that Faith Hill, Jamie Foxx, and Babe Ruth were adopted?

Did you know one of the aborted children was going to be a mass murderer? Did you know one of them was a better baseball player than Babe Ruth? This is why your argument is nonsense. If all three of your examples were aborted, no one would feel their absence. Even the fetuses wouldn't.

Abortion is done for mere convenience. Many women don’t know the true facts of abortion until it is to late and often feel depression, guilt, isolation, insomnia or nightmares, and much more after it is done. Even Jane Roe (Norma McCorvey) is pro-life now.

Just as a side note, a lot of this could be said about giving birth. But it's right. This information should be publicized more, and made mandatory before going through with the procedure.

Are men not taking human life when they please themselves?

I live in the United Kingdom and a 13 year old boy became a father, if he the pregnancy was aborted (his girlfriends) then he would have been spared the shame, worry, and financial difficulty.

Abortion should be legal regardless, I stand for that as does our PM

An example of a post by someone who does not understand science.

THE FOETUS (UK SPELLING) IS NOT ALIVE, it cannot be asked on its rights and has no nervous system, there is a greater need in the social aspects and it is inane to suggest that there is murder in something which saves the money, time, and essentially life of the mother.

The mother keeps the rights, not the child.

"Everything happens for a reason"? So incest, pedophilia, rape, and abuse are results of reason?!? There is nothing reasonable about raising a constant reminder of a cruel crime. Those opposed to any type of induced abortion have no idea what its like for a child to carry the burden of being the offspring of abuse. It is a fact that unplanned/unwanted children are more likely to be subjected to abuse and neglect--continuing the cycle. Stopping that cycle of abuse is easy. It just takes one outpatient appointment.

"If it is ok to abort, why do those who do so end up so destroyed for the rest of their lives?"

They don't. Not if they do it for the right reasons. There is always the "what if" factor. But millions of women have had abortions and are living perfectly healthy, happy, successful lives. About half of women in the US who have had an abortion already have children, so they know the joys and stresses of children. They make the decision for the greater good--the family and society.

The only real advocacy for pro-life is the thought of killing a child. It's living tissue I'll give you that, but would you have a C-section at 2 months and call it a birth? No. Because it's not truly a being yet, is it?

And if you're going to make the argument that stopping a child from existing is murder, in that case, sex without procreation is murder, or for that matter, not deciding to have a child at any point is murder.

The only event horizon would be life at conception. That's purely a religious claim. A conscious human being cannot be contained within 2 cells.

Look at it this way: should a human life suffer because of the mistakes of their parents? I mean, you're saying a human shouldn't suffer death because the parents conceived the child against their wills. My issue is, a) a fetus isn't a human and I have a hard time with people comparing fetus's to a newborn with a brain. b) The consequences of those parens having a child when they can't even afford to take care of it, not just financially, but probably mentally and emotionally, only leads for that child, with feelings, and a current life, to suffer. I think they're two totally different things: fetus vs child. I understand the empathatic thoughts of abortion, but I believe it hurts a hell of a lot more seeing kids abused and abandoned than it does to see a fetus aborted.

Early-term abortions should undoubtedly be legal.

I have one question for all of those who claim that abortion should be illegal because it is taking a life: If abortion becomes illegal, and a woman has an illegal abortion, what should her punishment be? Technically what she has done is murder; thus, under current laws, capital punishment would be a common solution. So, does a woman who has an abortion deserve the death penalty?

Why make this a legal debate, its a womans choice, not a congresional descussion. Why make it illegal then make women be forced into back alley abortions or worse bathtub abortions.

yes, but you should have to take some sort of test saying why you want to.

i have known people who got abortions bc they "didnt want to get fat"

that is not a good reason.

needless to say, i dont talk to that person now.

however it is terrible to say abortion should be legal . if it is made illegal than women will do unsafe things to themselves not to have a kid . such as get a friend to push her down the stairs

The number of people who want to adopt a child, does not equate to the number of people who can.

There are thousands of children dying to be adopted. Abortion lowers that number.

This is obviously a difficult decision to make, and one I have thought out carefully prior to coming to an opinion.

I think, to paraphrase Obama, that expectant mothers are the best people to make the choices about whether or not they are financially and emotionally stable enough to care for a child.

The world is overpopulated as it is. Humans continue to grow at a rate that is unsustainable, and at some point nature will regulate us through some mass disaster/disease. Until then, however, abortion at least offers a little self regulation of population growth.

Agreed. And these homemade abortions are not always successful and thus do not harm just the mothers but also the children.

If it isn't a human, what is it?

If it isn't alive, how can you kill it?

But if it is a human, than it has rights.

If it is alive, than killing it is murder.

Last I checked, murder is illegal (unless you happen to be an unborn baby, in which case you just don't count).

Well think about it... women already have abortions whey they are impregnated against their will. Isn't that the point--that they didn't intend to become pregnant?

Intelligence and desire to have sex are two entirely different parts of the brain. One can be very stupid and have no sex drive. As can one be very smart, very horny and take all reasonable precautions (pill, condom, etc) and STILL end up pregnant. Sex is more than procreation. Other primates (and many other species) have sex for the pleasure alone. Humans have those same desires--smart or not.

Abortion doesn't kill a baby because it's not a baby. It's an inviable parasite. It cannot eat or breathe on its own without the host (woman) so it is not its own entity. Therefore abortion removes an unwanted growth. If the fetus were a person than every miscarriage would be a murder and Mother Nature causes miscarriages in 20-45 percent of pregnancies. Are you going to accuse Mother Nature of killing babies? Or the host (woman)? I think not. It's not a baby. It's a bunch of cells.

Abortion is not killing a human child. When you have your abortion, the fetus has probably not even opened its eyes yet. It isn't a formed child! It is a FETUS. Is it a mistake of the girl if her drink was roofied at a party and she was raped because of it? Only if she dropped the pill into the drink.

Exactly how would you enforce such a law? Would you set up gov't intervention to pregnancy test ALL eligible females monthly? What would be the cost? Will it be a federal program or a state program? What if a woman has a miscarriage? How will they prove that. What you're all asking for is a police state in a woman's uterus. You're basically calling it Government Property. When you do these things, you violate a woman's civil rights. Once you take away a woman's civil rights, then the gov't will just move on and take everyone's away. Then you can just relax in your ChristoFascist America.

The constitution does not provide rights or personhood to a fetus. You cannot murder a non-person. Also note, you cannot provide personhood to a fetus and the mother, since only one body can be a person. (unless you're conjoined twins)

Since CreateDebate won't let me close my account, I will delete my posts.

No, a fetus is a human from the moment it is conceived.

There are plenty of people out there who have fertility problems and would love for the opportunity to adopt a child. Why not have the child and give it up for adoption?

Im not a Dr. but I do believe a fetus is a human. Aborting it is playing gods role. With that said, look back at your past. Many of us have been in situations where a baby would be unbearable, faced with the pressures of a young life, an abortion almost would seem right. Isn't it scary that it would be readily available? You could get the procedure before even giving the idea much though. It shouldn't be an option. It should be illegal.

Abortion should not be legal. It is the taking of a human life however you try to spin it. Everything happens for a reason; the baby should not suffer because of the mistakes of the parents. Most abortions that take place in America are cases of convenience, which is clearly wrong! I do understand that cases of rape or medical necessity are more difficult and cannot be black and white. I have compassion for these mothers and feel for their situations. Adoption is a great alternative!

Abortion should not be legal. It causes massive deaths, and every human life has unailinable rights endowed by their CREATOR among these are LIFE, (FIRST) and liberty (SECOND) ... Abortion is always a sad and bad choice. I recently got off a flight from Beiging, China, where I met a VERY happy couple who waited 3 years to adopt the 8mos. old beautiful baby girl that they were finally bringing home with them. What a special occasion! Too bad it is so difficult to adopt here, because there are so few babies available, or they would have. The point is; life matters, and adoption is a positive, and very possible answer where BOTH the mother and baby can have bright futures. There are crisis pregnency centers in most towns with helpful people who care deeply about the mother, and baby. Wouldn't YOU prefer adoption over death for YOURSELF ? What CHOICE do you think the unbornbabies would make?? Who will give the baby, it's choice and chance ?.......Can we unite now?
What kind of a society sentences these innocent unborn babies to DEATH, ...and gives LIFE sentences to guilty massmurderers ??? Thankfully, Virginia just voted to stop funding abortions with your taxes through Planned Parenthood ( see Wash. Post 2/28/08). Did you know that Planned Parenthood which sounds so good, is the number one provider of death by abortions ? It is also in approx. 180 other countries offering abortions with America's ( your tax ) money. Imagine forcing people with religious and other beliefs against abortion to pay for them through their taxes. That is what the government now does if not stopped. Lets not support Planned Parenthood, who is pro-abortion/death. Let's support the heroes at crisis pregnancy centers who can then better assist mothers in crisis before and after the babies birth...and lets vote pro-LIFE together from now on... God bless America,fathers, mothers and All size babies, unborn as well as born!
FYI, see:
Birthright, Lifeline,
Bethany Christian Services, Catholic Charities,
Prolife orgs. ProlifeUnity, Concerned Women
for America

Maybe the one who referred to the Freakonomics theory of abortion never finished the chapter, because at the end he goes on to compare how many deaths were spared by allowing abortion, vs how many prebirth baby deaths were caused by abortion. Even if you "value" an unborn baby's life as only being worth a tiny fraction of a live human's life, abortion still ends far more lives than it saves!

"if you are responsible enough to be having sexual intercourse you should assume responsibility for a child."
First off, I don't think anyone ever thought that because you had sex, you were also responsible.
But, either way, the option for abortion should be legal, I think that making abortion 100% illegal would be a terrible decision. There will always be fringe cases in which abortion makes more sense than having a child, and to strike that option off the list forever would just create unsafe, unmanaged, abortion clinics because they would have to go underground and operate in secrecy without proper health standards. All in all, this country would be much worse off without it.

Katie, with all due respect, have you ever considered that legal abortions result in thousands of deaths...every week? Far more then when it is illegal. Humans after all come in many sizes....Don't you agree it's time to stop the mass-death-business of abortion? Drs make much faster money destroying life than delivering it. One takes nine mos. and many hours of labor... the other takes only a few minutes. Which do you think might attract the more talented , dedicated and professional Drs ? Can you even call them that when their purpose is to kill very little humans for big money, so people will not be inconvenienced ? "Hit" men might be a better name, based on what they truly do "legally". There are many loving people waiting to adopt, as you can plainly see in most news paper ads and by contacting any adoption agency. Should the innocent little ones CONTINUE to pay, for "life"styles, IE "death"styles?The abuse called Slavery ( which also made life more convenient for the ones in power)CHANGED thankfully, and which situation is really worse ?? So, there is hope that the ultimate child abuse and then killing of unborn babies in abortion will be stopped. Science makes it crystal clear now that this little life is a human being,and not an eagle etc. If however you kill an eagle egg there will likely be a fine !!

Trixxsta, you are so right! I also went to the Freakonomics theory of abortion that was suggested by Loudacris...which I agree, he must not have read much of, if any, since it completely undermines his point ! All lives are precious, and the real freaks are the ones who think they are better, or think that they can cut corners on research where they think it won't be noticed, as the authors of Freakonomics did. Throughout history countless children were unplanned that turned out great...and remember there is adoption. Spoiled disrespectful children, who WERE wanted may be a bigger problem now. If this " Freak" theory was correct then prisons should be emptying out not filling to overflowing like they are now ! Killing innocent unborn babies is simply not the answer. Less selfishness, and more tender loving care and respect is. .

This does not take away the fact that it would be unbearable for a woman to give birth to a child that was conceived when she got raped. The psychological damage would be immense!
Not only that, but there are more than enough children waiting to be adopted. Worldwide, this number is increasing daily and within the USA the number is declining very, very slowly. Between 2003 and 2006 the amount of children in the USA waiting to be adopted has only declined from 130,000 to 129,000 (see link for source).
This means that there are a lot of children waiting to be adopted. Why make this number even bigger?

I would like to see your proof for this statement:
"Science makes it crystal clear now that this little life is a human being,and not an eagle etc. If however you kill an eagle egg there will likely be a fine !!"
Science has made NO ground-breaking discoveries about when a human life begins. If you are gonna make a statement like that, you are gonna have to support it with evidence from a reputible source.
Secondly, I think you should be aware that slavery still exists in the world...even in America (see the link below). Mostly in the immigrant communities.

So it is OK to carry guns on campus' but not to have an abortion? Wow what a concept. Need I say more?

Sorry hit wrong one.

So it is OK to carry guns on campus' but not to have an abortion? Wow what a concept. Need I say more?

At a genetic level, they are humans. I guess that's the closest we've come to scientific evidence in either direction. DNA from a fetus, looks no different that that of an adult. It does not match the mother, it does not match the father, but it does match the same fetus, once they are fully developed.

Why do you think that people need a safe way to kill other people?

It certainly isn't safe for the fetus.

Not to mention, that the moment before birth, they are not human, and then, poof! they are? Unless we must decide when any fetus reaches the point of "abstract reasoning, language or introspection"? Its completely random to say that happens right at birth.

The argument that if its illegal then abortions will happen illegally and therefore not as safe is silly. Then everything should be allowed, b/c doing it illegally is more dangerous. Its funny how many people actually think its a valid argument tho.

It would really suck to have to go through that. (giving birth to your rapists child) while I agree that there could not be many things worse than that, one of the things that would be worse, is death. Why should we force that death onto another party, who has no say in the situation, and is not at fault in any way? It is not right to ease the emotional suffering of one person, by killing another.

I think the crux isn't really whether it's DNA, but rather potential. Because again, we dint know where to draw the line between what's considered human and what isn't in terms of DNA. But alas, i support the right to abortion because i believe it really should be the mother's choice. Consider if I suddenly imposed a set of conditions on your lifestyle out of the blue. Would you want to be rid of me? As natural as to value the sacridity of human life, I believe the right to self determination is equally important. But realistically, it occurs to me again and again that human life isn't valued, while self determination is aggressively fought for, and that is why I think it makes more sense to support self determination rather than human life.

I think it should be illegal because when you extend your reasoning, condomns are then also responsible for preventing fertilisation and thus the possibility of life. But more to the point, just because something is scary dosent make it any less valid.

I don't think that is an age where you necessarily fully understand consequences, vies change when people get older. It's that time when everyone wants to have fun.

As for adoption, the baby is going to have to be born but it's even more painful never knowing who their true parents are and always questioning it.

Abortion seems a way to fully erase one's mind of the error they had made.

the fundamental difference however is that unlike a parasite, the foetus is genetically related to the mother and will statistically carry some of the mother's attributes beyond her death. Perhaps we should blur the lines between humans as individual entities.

What is cut-off between the embryonic stage and the baby stage? I think this is what most of the fuss is all about. If you're going to through out an argument like that, let's hear your opinion!

You are completely right of course, and as soon as I posted it I realized someone would say something to that effect. I think that cut-off would be at the point the embryo begins to develop specific features: eyes, mouth, specific arms and legs, etc.

You are completely right of course, and as soon as I posted it I realized someone would say something to that effect. I think that cut-off would be at the point the embryo begins to develop specific features: eyes, mouth, specific arms and legs, etc. Just realized I accidentally posted the same thing twice... my bad.

And you really believe the fetus suffers? What real proof do you have? Did your mother abort you and you suffered? You are making assumptions.

Granted there is a life in there and it is a cell and then more cells but to state it "suffers" is ludicrus.

Well if it is a case of convenience then for all those teens, unwed mothers, crack heads, and abused women then I do believe they should have the child and give it to you to care for. Most of the time the women who are having abortions know they are not able to raise a child correctly, so you theory says we should not let them "kill" it but, force them to raise a child they know they can't raise properly then blame them for the child going down the wrong path maybe even killing your child, or family member?

You have to remember there is a variety of ways to look at a situation. There is almost no single easy answer for why things are done.

Don't want a baby? don't spread your legs. However, understanding there are cases of rape, even in that horrible absolute tragic experience for that woman, it is not the child's fault.

"It is the taking of a human life however you try to spin it."

Aborting an embryo is not taking a human life because an embryo is not yet a human, it's just a clump of cells with the potential to become a human.

It is a human embryo, which are living cells, just like you, except smaller, because you are made up of tiny cells.

If every unborn child voted, how would it go?

They are living homo sapien. What if you were a little unicellular embryo, and you had the vote, would you kill yourself?

It is a living homo sapien cell. It deserves a chance to live. What if you were killed as a cell? Think about it.

Why does a single cell "deserve" a chance to live? A single cell is insignificant. It will not suffer if it is destroyed. Life will go on without it. If I were killed as a cell I simply would not exist. No big deal. It would not have bothered me because "I" did not yet exist. A single cell has no consciousness and thus destroying it is no big deal.

NO! it should be illegal, because is like a killing a HUMAN being. The baby does not have any fault.

Contrary to popular belief Roe v. Wade never legalized abortion. It stated that until the fetus became viable to live on it's own if it was taken out of the woman that her right to privacy outweighed the state's interest in the protection of life. It also stated that until the child is born it is in effect outside the jurisdiction of the United States and therefore NOT entitled to protections offered to citizens of the United States. The only protection that could be offered to the fetus was in a manner that servered the state's intrest while protection the privacy of the woman. (in other words the fetus had no rights and the ablity of the state to interfer with pregenacy was limited in the absolute extreme)

By legalizing abortion you are, in effect, giving the government jurisdiction inside your body. I for one think that government has no right inside a person's body.

Keep the current rule that abortion is neither legal nor illegal becuase it's outside the juristiction of the goverment. Keep a person's body soverign to themselfs only.

I agree completely ! And abortion doesn't make you "unpregnant". It just makes you the mother of a dead baby !

Do you have a informed conscious mind? Where you once a fetus? I am going to assume that both of those answers is yes, thus it matters little whether a fetus is conscious, merely that if allowed to grow and develop it will have a conscious mind, but if an abortion is carried out that life will never be given a chance to develop. Just imagine what this world would be like if Jonas Salk, or Sir Isaac Newton, or Albert Einstein, or Abraham Lincoln, or George Washington, or Thomas Jefferson had been aborted as children. It's hard to imagine what the world would be like.

If you take that view, then we should abort every baby because one in a billion might have the charisma, insanity and happen to be in a desperate country whose economic power has been crippled through exploitation by the "free world." By your reasoning none of us should have been born because of the "chance" we might turn out bad.

Abortion is the killing of a child. No one should be willfully killed, be it at 1 week or 100 years. When I had my first ultrasound with my son, I was 5 weeks pregnant, which means I had become pregnant 3 weeks prior. My son had a heartbeat. How can anyone anyone anyone stop a beating heart on purpose? Your decision should happen BEFORE you find yourself in this position. If it is ok to abort, why do those who do so end up so destroyed for the rest of their lives? It's because they know they killed a human and that will rest on their hearts for life. If only their child had such an opportunity. For those of you who wrote that there is no God, and were angered by such a defense, I will pray for you. Because without faith, you really have nothing.

I am a prolife democrat, Abortion should not be legal for the simple reason that the baby that they are killing, is a person, how would you feel if you were aborted, and dont say fetuses dont have feelings, if you were aborted, you wouldent be here right now!

Abortion should be illegal. It is taking the life of another human being. It is a known FACT that human life begins at fertilization. Let’s take a trip back to biology class; the male sperm unites with a female gamete to form a single cell called a zygote. So basically when the sperm and egg unite they then create a unique DNA of a human being.

Only a small percentage of abortions are done due to rape and medical circumstances. A recent studied showed that women who were raped and had an abortion had a harder time healing than those who chose to have their babies. Since when is it expectable to punish a child for their father’s crimes?

Just because you may be adopted does not mean you’ll have a miserable unsuccessful life. Did you know that Faith Hill, Jamie Foxx, and Babe Ruth were adopted?

Abortion is done for mere convenience. Many women don’t know the true facts of abortion until it is to late and often feel depression, guilt, isolation, insomnia or nightmares, and much more after it is done. Even Jane Roe (Norma McCorvey) is pro-life now.

I am not pro-life because of my religious beliefs; I’m pro-life because it makes logical sense that abortion is killing the life of innocent child.

Personally, I don't think abortion should be allowed anywhere. Abortion is a cruel way to get rid of a child. The mother always has choices readily available to them, and many hospitals have programs that give unwanted babies to good homes. I think that for those who consider an abortion, they shouldn't have opened their legs in the first place, whether the guy was wearing a glove or not. Unless there was a life-or-death situation where the mother could die with a c-section or die having a baby. then it's appropriate.

This is not a legal argument. It's a values debate. "Should abortion be legal?"

"Why is it proven? Ah, b/c science says so."

Science relies on logical parsimony. Science does not say it, logic does. Faith is by definition contrary to proof, and thus reliability. Though both prove themselves in a way, Faith does so syllogistically.

"And science doesn't prove that the natural is the only thing, it only can speak about the natural."

There is only one true version of the natural world, however. Any version of the supernatural is speculative and one of many. The right religion could just as well be Scientology as Christianity.

"Besides, every law isn't based on a "proven theory". I'm not allowed to steal from you. What does that have to do w/science?"

The consolidation of public concensus on acceptable behavior is a science. Exegesis is not.

By the way, fetuses can't feel pain until 12 weeks old. EEG FTW

I heard someone argue that this technically makes the child the same organism as the mother; birth is more like mitosis than birth. I forget the specific justification. But it's nice to think that we're all part of the same organism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_pain

That is a good point is the world not overpopulated already?

Have you ever heard of law enforcement? It's possible.

hey why enforce the law they will just do it anyways, mine as well keep it and make it safe

Thats called giving up.

Abosolutely no, abortion is also killing and i don't think it should be made legal.

Even though it is used for some reason, a life is at stake.

When abortion occurs for no reason, it is considered as murder.

But if the foetus or baby implicate the mother's life, it''s up to the mother and father decision.

No they aren't. A gamete will not develop into a living human being on its own. It needs to meet another gamete and only then can two gametes create life. A sperm cell on its own will die unless preserved in some way, like frozen.

It seems to me that both sides of this topic tend to be unreasonable. Many pro-lifers go so far as to assert that the morning after pill is murder, which is ludicrous. On the other hand, some pro-choice groups don't want any restrictions on abortion, which is equally ludicrous.

I am trying to have an open mind, so my question for the pro-choice group is, should there be any restrictions on abortion at all? Should we (the people) allow a woman to decide she doesn't want her child as it is coming down the birth canal at 9 months?

Abortion is murder no matter when a person believes life becomes official. This controversy will remain for centuries, however the fact that a potential life has ended before given a chance remains evidence enough for most people to understand why a person should never have a choice of whether a baby lives or dies. There are many reasons abortion should be illegal including the descriptive and disturbing stories about how aborted babies sometime scream as they come out and the looks of pain on their faces. These facts alone should convince anyone to eliminate the idea of pregnancy termination out of their mind.

The health threat to the mother after going through with the procedure as well as the lifelong health risks that remain should be good enough reasons abortion should be illegal. With the rising healthcare costs and instance of disease greater than the medical ability to solve the problems, continued health remains important to all people. Self induced problems such as voluntary termination of pregnancy leads to complications for future pregnancies, reproductive disease, and depression. Understanding that abortion is murder aids a woman in making healthy decisions for baby and mother. Though a mother may not want her baby, health for both remains and adoption remains a viable option. God chooses many couples to be available for adopting these children by way of impotence by one or both people. Bottom line, was sex made for reproduction? Yes. Can you say abortion is natural? No

Abortion should NOT be legal. There are countless women in this world that can't have children or are struggling to concieve...women should deliver the babies - and allow the child to live a life. Just because 2 adults are not ready to care for a child doesn't mean that abortion is the only option.

As a mother, I know how much joy my son has brought me...and believe me - if there is a woman out there that doesn't want their child - there are equally as many women out there that are dying to have one. Allow your child to be loved if not by you, then by another family.

Killing a human is murder. Murder is illegal. Therefore, because abortion is killing a human, abortion should be illegal.

Okay, so how about we only allow women who are raped or impregnated against their will to have abortions?

Since they are the group you seem to care so much about.

Lack of intention doesn't imply it was against their will. It just means they aren't the brightest fish in the tank.

Will is want, and if you are stupid enough to have sex when you don't intend for a baby to be born you are acting against your own will.

Sex is a means of procreation. If you don't want to create, then why risk it?

if you keep abortion legal than you should make murder legal. if you can chose you don't want you baby alive than you should chose that you don't want someone else to be alive and kill them. it is all the same and what kind of world would this be if murder was legal.

It is a known fact that the human brain is not fully developed until after the age of 18. Therefore, anyone under the age of 18 should not be held entirely responsible for actions such as unintended pregnancy.

I agree that intelligence and desire are two different things but...

Sex is pleasurable, but it is still procreation.

If you are smart, you will know that birth control fails. If you are intelligent and want to have sex, but don't want a child, you will re-think the sex.

What child deserves to die simply because his 'genius' mom doesn't think he should inconvenience her? It was her mistake that created him, not his. Why should he lose his life, which is his own, because he depends on her for survival but she doesn't feel like taking care of him?

Since CreateDebate won't let me close my account, I will delete my posts.

If a lack of an informed conscious means you can't make decisions for yourself, then Terry Schiavo's husband was right in starving her to death. She never made a formal living will so there is no statement on file as to what her wishes were.

If your method of reasoning fails, any person who falls into a coma unexpectedly would be at the mercy of whoever has to take care of them. If you don't say you want to live, anyone can kill you?

By the way, the 'church' tax breaks also extend to organized atheists; in case you wanted to file an amended return.

Since CreateDebate won't let me close my account, I will delete my posts.

Unborn babies are living things and when you kill them, it is the same thing as killing an adult or a child. God is the creator of life and when you kill unborn babies you are destroying his creations. In the beginning God created Adam by breathing the breath of life into his nostrils. “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.” Psalm 139:13.

Abortion is when you kill an unborn baby, and the people who do this are selfish because they don't want to spend money on the baby, confused because they don't want to be pregnant, and evil because they kill children, they also don't trust god and what he provides. If somebody did this they would be breaking the fifth commandment: You shall not murder. He or she is also breaking the first commandment : You shall have no other gods. You should help everyone stay healthy and alive.

I have four sisters and I am glad none of us have been aborted.

Abortion could distroy everything including mankind!!! Than we would all be dead!! DEAD!!! DEAD!! DEAD!!! DEAD!!!

AAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!