Abortion
pro choice
Side Score: 38
|
 |
pro life
Side Score: 49
|
|
|
|
|
3
points
2
points
2
points
I believe that if a parent can take care if a child then they shouldn't be able to get an abortion, but sometimes a child being born causes great strain on the parents and could possibly lead to death. Therefore, I believe that it should be the person's choice. Side: pro choice
2
points
What happens if the mother is raped? Could you ask her to live with the offspring of a obviously demented rapist. Being a mother is hard enough to add that to it as well. What if the child in the womb is damaged or deficient beyond help. A young mother that is duped and lied to by some swaggering Lothario that walks out and leaves her with the child. There are many situations under which you are completely wrong. People need to take responsibility for the amount of children being born into broken homes and poverty. Poverty breeds just look at the street children in calcutta or the child soldiers in Sierra Leone a lot of this stems from religious belief as religion, lack of education and poverty all go hand in hand. Side: pro choice
1
point
0
points
1
point
2
points
It would be really unfair if the mother was raped and she has to bear the emotional pain of having the child. If the mother was careless and say she was in high school, she would have to drop out of high school to take care of her child. In this cases I think abortion should be legal. Its true that the mother should have been more careful but should she ruin her whole life with one mistake? Through all this what about the child's feelings? If the mother was raped would she be able to take care of the child properly without having a emotional grudge against the child. I heard that the pain from rape never truly leaves you, you move on but you never truly get over it. The child would also have to grow up without a father. If the mother gave birth to the child in high school, she would have to drop out. The child will not be able to receive the full attention the child deserves from his mother if shes trying to take care of the child and study/work at the same time. It would be even worse if the father did not take responsibility like in some cases of teenage pregnancy. In other cases where women of any age are pregnant but are not prepared to take care of the child they give the child for adoption. The child would grow up in an orphanage without ever knowing his real parents. If the child is adopted, how would the child feel? The child might live with hate for his biological parents for as long as he lives and if he is not, does the child deserve to grow up in an orphanage without parents? So this is why I support abortion. Side: pro choice
The debate of abortion goes further than 'killing' a fetus. What you are saying is 100% correct. We are humans, we do stupid things and accidents do happen. There is no point in bringing life into this world if there are no structures in place to support this life. Side: pro choice
2
points
There are good people of good conscience on both sides of this argument. Isn't that a great indication that the government should butt out and let people make their own decision based on their own beliefs? We on the pro-choice side are content to let anti-abortion people who are faced with unwanted pregnancy decide what they will do based on their own beliefs. We think you should be free to live your lives according to your beliefs. We think we should too. Side: pro choice
1
point
The problem people have with abortion is the image they have of a baby dieing in the mother's womb. Unless you can remember what it was like in and coming out of your mother during birth then you can not argue that baby's know that they are dying. Babies in the womb are not thinking and do not have brain function other than to keep their organs functioning. People all need to realize that if a baby is not going to make it, the mother is not going to make it, or both aren't going to make it through birth. By disallowing the option of abortion to that mother, not only do you deny the mother who will die the right to Live but also you deny that baby a mother. Side: pro choice
I believe early abortions are ethically sound because all you have at that point is a clump of cells -- not a human being. Destroying a clump of cells is not murder. I believe late abortions are wrong because at that point you have an almost fully developed human capable of thought and feeling. Killing a developed fetus is murder. So we are forced to draw a line somewhere and say, "After this point, abortion is illegal." I believe Roe v. Wade did a reasonable job of drawing this line -- after six to seven months abortion is illegal. Side: pro choice
1
point
Potential life doesn't matter. Why should it? If you could somehow turn every speck of dust into a human being, then every speck of dust could be considered potential life. Would it then be morally wrong to destroy a speck of dust? No, of course not, because potential life doesn't carry moral weight, only actual life. The mother has a choice because: 1) Pregnancy is a pain in the ass 2) Childbirth is dangerous and 3) If she goes through with the pregnancy she will have a human being she will be obligated to care for. Side: pro choice
Abortion rights are being abused. It should not be looked at like an easy form of contaception. "People ought to abstain from sex or practise safe sex." Yeah ive heard that argument before , However; Abortion is a serious matter and unfortunately there are cases in which an abortion is neccesary; http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9603/ Side: pro choice
2
points
I agree with you on that . Perhaps these abortion debates need to be a little more defined. For example perhaps we should be asking ; IS IT OK TO USE ABORTION AS A FORM OF CONTRACEPTION? I would have to say that in that case ; abortion , no , its definately not ok. Side: pro life
1
point
If someone is a strict constructionist who interprets the Constitution word for word, the sanction for abortion is given under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Fourteenth Amendment of our U.S. Constitution defines a citizen “a citizen” at birth. If a woman is carrying a fetus in the womb, the U.S. Constitution does not designate the fetus as “a citizen.” It would take an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to declare a fetus a citizen. You have to be born in order to be recognized as a citizen. Therefore, a woman does have the right to choose. A fetus inside the womb is not designated as a citizen according to the U.S. Constitution so by default is not entitled to life, liberty, or prosperity. You have to be born in order to be endowed with those privileges. To conclude, neither the Federal government nor any of the States can deny a woman the right to choose.
If abortion is murder, abortion would have been terminated years ago due to the cruel and unusual punishment clause under the Eighth Amendment. Again, proof that a fetus is not recognized as a citizen of the United States of America. Side: pro choice
|
since abortion became legal in the US in 1973 50 million abortions have been performed. that would knock out 15 states with no1 in them. that ridiculous. there are millions of people in the world who would love to have children but cant. and we have millions of people having sex and not being able to handle the consequences of pregnancy. if u have sex u better be ready to have babies too. Side: pro life
1
point
Because, you know, there isn't a surplus of orphans or anything. =/ Should women who don't want kids have them anyway out of guilt for people who can't? "and we have millions of people having sex and not being able to handle the consequences of pregnancy. if u have sex u better be ready to have babies too." That's stupid. Just..... stupid. So a woman should go out of her way to NOT solve a problem just because she got herself into it? If you tripped and broke your arm should you NOT get a cast on it just because you were foolish enough to trip? maybe you shouldn't have been walking if you weren't ready to handle the possibility of breaking your arm. Maybe you should of had the good sense to wear a bubble-wrap suit. No? Why does that backwards logic only apply to abortion then? Side: pro choice
1
point
So a woman should go out of her way to NOT solve a problem just because she got herself into it? It is not a problem, it is a life. If you tripped and broke your arm should you NOT get a cast on it just because you were foolish enough to trip? A broken arm is an injury, easily mended. When a person's life ends, there can be to going back. Why does that backwards logic only apply to abortion then? It is in no way backward logic. You are equating a human life to a broken bone. If it weren't for that life there would be no bone to break! Side: pro life
1
point
I agree with Kmac. If you think you are old enough to have sex then you better be old enough and ready to deal with the possible consequences of having sex. There is always that possibility of becoming pregnant, so if you have sex and get pregnant deal with it!! Abortion is just wrong. Why kill someone that has done nothing wrong? The baby should not have to pay for your mistakes. If you can't handle having a child then let someone adopt it, don't kill it! Side: pro life
1
point
Many proponents of abortion say that it is up to the mother to decide what happens to her body. However, they seem to be forgetting one key matter: does the baby not have a choice as to it's body? Some say that cancer is alive and that by killing it we are ending a life. However, cancer will never gain sentience; cancer will never learn; cancer will never go to school. Cancer is like a parasite, feeding off of the body and expanding until the body is dead. I am completely for the use of the term 'fetus.' The excuse for the abortion is that the baby is not yet a baby, rather only a fetus. That is where they are wrong. A fetus is just as much a human as I am, it simply has not progressed to the point in life I which I have reached. Soon it shall be a baby, then it shall progress to toddlerhood, then to childhood, then to adolescence. It is not a baby, but it shall become one - just as an adolescent is not an adult, but it too shall become one. Side: pro life
kmac and princessjess are right abortion is murder. if you feel that you cant take care of the child, adoption is an option. there are families in this world that can not have children. why not give the baby to them so it can be happy and have a good life. there is nothing wrong with adoption Side: pro life
1
point
According to the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Nowhere in the Constitution is abortion mentioned, so each individual state should be allowed to determine at what point a fetus demands protection and when it can be aborted. Side: Pro States Rights
OK first off Abortion IS murder weather you believe it or not it IS. Example: Scott Peterson in trial was convicted of TWO murders not ONE but TWO why two though? He just killed his wife? His wife was pregnant. The baby inside of his wife was killed in the process of the mother being killed. If the supreme court agrees with abortions yet charge Peterson with two murders what are they thinking?! Once the a egg is fertilized and starts to grow into a human body it has a human "spirit" or "soul" inside of it (for those who are religious). So if you were to "dispose" of this body that IS alive and has a human "soul" within it isn't it the same as murder? Your taking away the life of some creature that has not yet experienced life yet. The baby moves, blinks, kicks, and squirms inside the mother, this is the sign that it is alive and is capable of understanding of what is doing (not of everything its doing) and human beings do just the same. So lets put a full grown man/women inside a glass incubator filled with water and have them semi-conscious. And then lets put a drug in there to kill this person. Then, put a giant vacuum tube into the container and suck all there body parts out. Is this murder? Some people will say "Oh well, that isn't the same. That person is fully developed and eduacated" There is no difference between killing the grown body and that of a one inside a mother. Weather it's there choice or not to get the abortion it IS still murder. People should understand the consequences of having sex and abortion should not be a option. It leads to people saying "Oh I can just get it aborted so I don't have to worry about it." <- LAZINESS. We already have enough lazy citizens in the US I don't think we need anymore. Side: pro life
"Once the a egg is fertilized and starts to grow into a human body it has a human "spirit" or "soul" inside of it (for those who are religious). So if you were to "dispose" of this body that IS alive and has a human "soul" within it isn't it the same as murder?" Is this a quantifiable statement. Are we capable of saying that 2 minutes after conception, that bundle of 8 or so cells is not just a human being, but has an intangible "soul". And those toe nails i just clipped that are made up of millions of cells, or if a hair gets plucked along with the root that still has a lot more than 8 cells, those have souls too? At what point is the now separate entity no longer "you"? If one wears protections, is that not killing potential for having something with a "soul"? Or is the woman's period also murder because it also is killing the potential for a new human being? "So lets put a full grown man/women inside a glass incubator filled with water and have them semi-conscious. And then lets put a drug in there to kill this person. Then, put a giant vacuum tube into the container and suck all there body parts out. Is this murder? Some people will say "Oh well, that isn't the same. That person is fully developed and eduacated" There is no difference between killing the grown body and that of a one inside a mother." I really don't understand how it's possible to say that a human being, having been alive, having consciousness, can be compared (even in a drugged stupor) to a collection of relatively inanimate bunches of cells. I agree that at a certain point, when the fetus has begun to kick and to show brain activity, that it is now murder to have an abortion. But up until that point, I believe the mother has a right to terminate the pregnancy. Additionally, you are forming your opinion based on an assumption that all accidental pregnancies happen through laziness. But what if the child has some terrible genetic disease that will render their life to be agonizing. I remember someone referenced a disease on CD where the baby lives for about an hour after birth in terrible pain. Wouldn't it then be mercy then to prevent this from happening before the bunch of cells has become conscious? Or if the woman was a victim of rape or incest, and she got pregnant. I doubt that she would love this child if she carried it to term, and so the child would probably be emotionally malnourished the rest of its life. Would you want to sentence someone to that kind of life? Another way of looking at is, okay the courts and legislature have agreed to your point of view. Abortions are now illegal. However, that does not mean that people wanting abortions aren't going to happen, and it also doesn't mean that people will stop getting abortions. Women who don't want to or can't carry a child to term will be forced to go to back alley doctors to perform the abortion (or perhaps worse, try to do it themselves) and those unqualified doctors' abortions could lead to their own death in addition to the fetus'. Also, those back alley doctors will no longer have restrictions placed upon them. They will be able to terminate a pregnancy well after consciousness has begun and the fetus is now a baby. Even when abortion is legal, this kind of stuff happens too much, and imagine how much worse it would be if abortion by qualified doctors was illegal. Side: pro choice
1
point
1
point
"Once the a egg is fertilized and starts to grow into a human body it has a human "spirit" or "soul" inside of it (for those who are religious)." This is the heart of the anti-abortion argument, the idea that what makes a human being "human" is his or her soul, and that that soul is present from the moment of conception on. It matters not that at the moment of conception the zygote has less cells then you have fingers on one hand, it is the moral equivalent of a human being because it has a soul. Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the idea. It is a religious idea and in this, a country with religious freedom, you are free to believe that idea and to live your life in accordance with that and other religious beliefs. But you should realize that there are many people who do not share your religious beliefs and we also live in a country with religious freedom. Why is it that you would deny us the right to live our lives according to our religious beliefs when we would fight to protect your right to do the same? Side: pro choice
Also, why is it always the atheist, the vegetarian, the liberal, and all the left wing guys make such a moral issue out of it? It's the way life is and always has been and always will be. I only see the people who agree with backward beliefs the ones making moral issues out of them NOT people who don't believe in it. Side: pro life
Ok, really? You could have just kept this to yourself. I say these types of things in my head when I read some debates but, I don't post it. Alright, let me put it this way. Once a human "organism" is made it is alive. Whither people like it or not it is fact that it is alive. It moves, it eats, it grows, it thinks. Are these not all the contributing factors of how our bodies are alive? Side: pro life
-1
points
I don't think that it should be completely pro life, but rather what the circumstances are. For example, if the abortion is because of rape, incest, mother's life is in danger, then I completely understand the reason. However, if abortion is done because protection, either a condom or birth control pills, were not used, then abortion should not be allowed. Be responsible for your own actions. Side: pro life
1
point
Please not that this debate has nothing to do with the legality of abortion. I believe that it is better off being legal, but moderated as well. If the mother wants an abortion bad enough she shall get the fetus out any way possible, but if it were illegal she would be going into dark alleys to get it done. Side: pro life
1
point
I strongly think that we should stop abortion, if you don't want the baby put it up for adoption. I'm sure there are hundred of families who would love that baby as it's own. Couples out there who cant produce offspring that desire a baby. Then your taking away something you can get and they can't. Side: pro life
1
point
I think every woman has a choice--but that choice comes before the unprotected sex...not after. ;) My opinion on babies that are a product of rape: we have to remember that the baby itself is not "evil." It was the act that was bad, not that baby. Yes...it is unnecessary pain for the woman, but that baby didn't do anything wrong. If it pains the mother to keep the baby, then adoption is always an option. My opinion is that the only acceptable case of abortion is when the mother's life is at risk. Side: pro life
|
