"Please tell me why you are the authority on which 'killings' are okay, and which are not."

First and foremost, I never deemed myself as the authority or make it mandatory for people to strictly follow what I deem as acceptable or unacceptable situations for abortion. Instead, what I did was set out generic examples on why abortion should be acceptable and unacceptable. If we were to debate about specific cases, there would be no end to possibilities that we could conjure. And secondly, I never wrote that 'killings were okay', I used the word acceptable throughout my point, and that brings a different weightage and seriousness to the issue. Not just one where, it is "okay" or "not okay" as if we were picking vegetables at a supermarket.

"Abortion is a consequence. Do you think it is a comfortable, fun activity people undergo in their leisure time? It is an emotionally trying, incredibly difficult decision to make, and it can be a scary and uncomfortable procedure in the best of cases. Especially for young people, it may be one of the most trying and terrifying periods of their lives. It is sadistic to force teenage girl through a pregnancy because her judgment lapsed, or her contraception failed her. Do you also advocate that if someone gets a curable disease from sex, that they do not seek treatment because it would be 'running away from problems' and refusing to 'take up consequences'? "

I never implied that abortion is a painless process, it is a very physically and emotionally painful process that may scar one for life. But what I'm trying to say here is that, teenagers should not treat abortion as a last minute measure to 'save themselves' when they indulge in that momentary 'lapse of judgement'. Instead, they should face up to what they have did and actually consider about raising the life that they created and not kill it simply because they just wanted the pleasure of sex at the point and nothing else. Of course I'm generalizing here by saying that teenagers are irresponsible people, but truth be told, many teenagers choose abortion as the easy way out, when actually they might be able to raise a child with the support of their families. How then, should abortion amongst these teenagers be condoned? Moreover, having curable diseases (I presume you're referring to STDs in this case) is yet another responsibility that has to be undertaken because of what you mentioned a 'lapse of judgment'. STDs occur, why? Because both parties weren't truthful about their past sexual experiences or had numerous sexual partners? If that was a mistake on their part, then yes, they should face it in the same way we should consider BOTH abortion and having a family. And not just choose abortion as the easy route route. Besides, when you're sick, you get treated am I right? There's only one option. When one is pregnant, she can choose to keep the child or abort it, that's two options. I see no relation between the two issues.

"It's sweet that you are so concerned about the mother's life. I only wish you were as concerned about her right to not be relegated to the rank of incubating machine for a fetus she doesn't want.

Stop using 'we' as if a pregnancy between two people who are not you is an event in which your opinion matters."

I do not see how you have thought of me treating the mother as an incubating machine for if I were to have done that, I would not have brought up the point pertaining to the mother's health risks during the pregnancy and it's grave importance. And secondly, I do not see why you have labelled a mother for "incubating a fetus she doesn't want" For if she doesn't want the fetus, she would not have gotten pregnant in the first place would she? Lastly, I have actually simply gave my honest opinions on the issue and not forced my opinions. I never said that if a mother is not in the perfect health state, she should definitely abort the baby. I instead mentioned that the couple's opinions should be duly respected and of course, be of the most importance. I simply brought up the point in which if a mother's health is at risk, abortion would be acceptable to avoid the loss of an innocent life at the expense of another.

Aside from religious views, there are more ways to look at abortion. By any means, abortion should never be encouraged because it is, indeed the killing of a life and we do not have the right to determine the undertaking of any life, save for our own. However, there are exceptional cases where abortion would be acceptable.

First and foremost. Abortion should never occur simply because of teenage pregnancy - a reason for abortion that has become more prevalent in recent years. That is because teenagers have to understand and take up the responsibility of what they have done. If they had had sex, then it's of utmost importance that they take up any consequences that come along with it. Thus abortion should not be encouraged if it is an escape route for people to run away from problems.

But, however, there are also reasons why abortion should be acceptable and one reason would be if it puts the mother's health at risk. If the mother of the child faces numerous health issues such a cancer, high blood pressure, it is of grave importance that we weight the pros and cons of the pregnancy. For if the childbirth of a newborn forsakes the life of the mother, aren't we killing another life as well? Of course, it is up to the couple as to whether which option they wish to take, but their opinions should be duly respected because the mother's life is at risk.

Nuclear power is definitely beneficial to the progress of a developing and developed nation. Moreover, with the rapid depletion of our natural resources such as coal and oil and we have no choice but to look for an alternative to pursue our exponential energy demands in the world we are in today. Nuclear energy is the solution.

Quite easily because nuclear power provides large amounts of energy with small amounts of nuclear reactants - something many power sources we have today fail to achieve. We build thousands of windmills, use up large spaces of land to tap on solar power, but they are not as efficient as nuclear power.

Yes, there lies the risk of radioactive radiation and radioactive substances polluting and damaging over already damaged lands. But, with proper and astute government intervention, we can ensure that these radioactive substances are disposed of properly and not damage the environment beyond repair.

Also, another concerned to be addressed when usage of nuclear power is the possible exploitation of use of nuclear power as a facade, a cover-up to fuel the country's nuclear weaponry ambitions. However, what we could do to prevent this would be to make it mandatory for countries adopting nuclear power to have to declare themselves as having nuclear substances. Only by this can we regulate use of nuclear power appropriately and aptly. Regulations should also be strict and without bias - best by a non-nuclear power organization or country, lest we fall into the situation the world is in today, political disputes over nuclear power.

Steroid use in sports is unfair and actually clouds the true definition of sport. Which is to compete with one another based on one's own natural ability.

Not only will steroid usage and abuse harm oneself irreparably but it then blurs the line between the maximum that humans can push themselves and what they achieve through drug abuse. Leaving drugs aside, Olympic athletes cannot even consume excessive caffeine before a race.

Steroid use in sports should thus be banned because it's not a true representative of what we are able and actually could achieve. It is unrepresentative of what we can actually do.