I agree that abortion is a very difficult decision, and it tries the potential parent to the utmost extreme. However, such a view as to restrict abortions for everyone, regardless of circumstances, is very narrow-minded.

"There are people waiting in line at orphanages trying to adopt children because they cannot have babies themselves. "

If there are people waiting in line at orphanages trying to adopt children because they cannot have babies themselves, then something is wrong with the bureaucratic system, not with abortions. Either the potential parents are being judged to harshly or people have decided to take their future into their own hands, and have decided that children wouldn't be good for them at that time. In fact, people aren't "lining up" to adopt. A census by the United States Census and Child Welfare Services found that in 2000, there were 501,000 kids in foster care, 127,000 of which people could adopt. However, only 51,000 were actually adopted (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070422195503AAqEb7z).

Because someone else would like a child, another person doesn't need to have the child. It's like why a father, who wants to put up his child for adoption for some reason, cannot if his wife says she wants to keep it. He still must be the father, even if he doesn't want to. He doesn't have the right to give up that responsibility, just like that person who wants to adopt doesn't have the right to give someone that responsibility.

"Why can't the minor have the baby and give it up then go on with their "happy go lucky'' lives or how ever they was living before?"

Again, this view is very narrow-minded. You are making the assumption that the baby was made through carelessness. Or that the potential parents live "happy go lucky" lives. However, consider an adult (or student or teenager) who is trying to say, get a job, an education, or advance in their career. That person (let's say Anne) is suddenly impregnated, even though she takes the pill and made sure her partner wore a condom. Now, her entire life is forced to change. If she keeps the baby, she will probably have to give up her biggest hopes in career advancements. Her education will suffer. If she carries the baby to term, but puts it up for adoption. There is still danger for her in the birthing process. She must still suffer immeasurable setbacks in her education and career. If she instead decides to have an abortion, Anne is suddenly given a chance to make sure her life stays on track, despite the momentous decision she is making. Yes, there is a loss of life, and that is sad, but we must look at the larger picture. Had she kept that baby, the quality of her life would probably have decreased from what the quality would have been. That fetus is only a bundle of cells, with little to no brain development. It has the status of less than any type of vertebrate.

I don't want to argue for all types of abortion. I believe abortion is only permissible when there is no brain or neural development. I also believe that the person who wants to have an abortion should talk to their parents and their partner. However, it should not be a prerequisite for getting an abortion. Perhaps the parents want their daughter to have the child, but she doesn't. The emotional and economic hardship are hers for the rest of her life. The parents don't have to deal with it. It's the daughter's choice, the potential mother's choice. That's why she should have the choice for abortion.

P.S. I will not (in this post at least) attempt to go into the potential dangers for the mother. If you wish for me to inform you on potential problems with her carrying to term, I will be more than happy to do so.

However, abortion is legal. That raises the question 'how should abortion be regulated?'

I believe no one should be allowed to get an abortion. Especially a minor. There are people waiting in line at orphanages trying to adopt children because they cannot have babies themselves. Why can't the minor have the baby and give it up then go on with their "happy go lucky'' lives or how ever they was living before?

If you are so adamant against abortion, I have a suggestion: Don't get one yourself! Leave it at that. The great thing about living in a free country is that purely moral views are not enforced as law upon everyone else. You don't like abortion? No one is forcing you to get one. Don't have one. It's that simple. You are not entitled to force your morals upon a population of 300 million, many of whom disagree with you. Why do you think you have the right to legislate your morals in the first place? What made you think so highly of yourself? What made you lose the ability to recognise that if our country allowed moral laws left and right, there would be a civil war due to the thousands of conflicting ideals?

I watched my aunt and her husband struggle to have kids over years and I watched the long drawn out process my supervisor went through in order to adopt. So I understand what you're saying yeah you're right adoption is definitely a great alternative to such a matter but, at the same time you can't honestly say nobody should be allowed to have an abortion because if someone was raped they should have every right to terminate their pregnancy. I do 100% agree though that anyone under the age of 18 needs parental consent.

Abortion shouldn't be outlawed because that's a woman's right to have a choice. It is their body and it's not effecting us (being were not involved) There should however be a limitation on how far along you can be in order to have a abortion but to take someones right away isn't fair. Let them deal with their decision.

It is a good thing that you are here - I'd be completely alone on most topics.

They are immature - but, a disputer would say, does that not mean that they should get an abortion rather than raise another life?