A proposal for the abortion debate

Now, I realize that abortion is a hot issue,(to put it mildly), but I think that there is room for some common ground. Let's face it- few people like abortion, but some feel it is justified, and some don't. So maybe if we worked together, we could actually acomplish things. For instance- make effective birth control readily available, make sure people have accurate information to make educated decisions, give support to struggling parents, ect. The way I see it, it's win-win. Women have control of their lives, and the number of abortions go down. Thoughts?

Can we add a clause in there that grants more paternal rights in the matter?

But you see still from my view, just because there are less abortions it doesn't make it more pallateable. People are still dying at the hands of doctors and in the name of choice.

On a side note some medical bigwigs in Britain suggested that we shouldn't bother trying to keep alive premautre babies, because around 30% of them don't survive and 40% develop dissabilities(apparently having a squint means life isn't worth living).

Abortions for some, miniture flags for others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gokufusionss1

But you see still from my view, just because there are less abortions it doesn't make it more pallateable. People are still dying at the hands of doctors and in the name of choice.

On a side note some medical bigwigs in Britain suggested that we shouldn't bother trying to keep alive premautre babies, because around 30% of them don't survive and 40% develop dissabilities(apparently having a squint means life isn't worth living).

---

They cant die if theyre not alive in the first place and most people getting an abortion get one as soon as possible before it can start seriously developing.

I think it's a good idea. I have no idea of what happens in Britain, but in the US, adoption isn't promoted as much as abortion. So when a teen gets pregnant, she'll either keep the kid or abort him. If she keeps him, they're in for a life of poverty and possible abuse if she marries the dad and he's an ass. If she aborts, she'll be fine, but the kid obviously dies. Adoption would give both a decent life because the mom doesn't have to drop out to care for the baby, the baby isn't being raised by a single mother working 2 jobs to pay rent on a rat-infested apartment, and as a bonus two strangers who for whatever reason cannot have a baby get a baby to love. There aren't any losers here.

So promoting adoptions and fixing whatever it is that seems to be making adoption less of an option would probably go a long way to reducing abortions (and probably spending however many tens of thousands of dollars on fertillity treatments or overseas adoption). Of course preventing pregnancy should be a part of the plan too, but you need a backup.

I have a perfect solution to the problem. Make abortion 100% legal, but in order for an abortion to be performed, both the would-be mother and father will be permanently sterilized. Then they don't have to worry about abortions ever again.

I'm divided. Both options seem bad. On one side, you got pro-abortion. The problems are obvious, let's see, first, we are killing a foetus. I wouldn't consider it "human", but I consider it something that will be human. Can I even consider it alive? I guess it depends on the stage of pregnacy, although I really don't know much about that. However, it does look kind of freaky to kill an unborn child, the idea of abortion was always gross to me. Also...why is the mother pregnant? In most developed countries, sexual education is given in schools, the couple should take into account the risks of having sex without anti-conceptives. If now the couple is facing this problem, should they have the abortion option or must we leave them there to face the consequences of their own responsabilities, meaning a child?

On the other side, why should the State decide the destiny of the pregnant woman? Shouldn't she be free to choose? Both abortion and having the baby are tough decisions, but shouldn't we give her the option? Plus, if it's not legal, illegal abortion clinics will obviously appear, and well, we all know those aren't exactly healthy. Shouldn't the couple be able to decide what they do, instead of giving their lifes to a child they never wished? What if the parents aren't even prepared to take care of the child but won't give him into adoption? How many years will pass until somebody notices?

Of course, in the cases where the life of the mother is at risk, or it is a pregnacy fruit of a rape, etc, then I believe it should be legal. In the other cases? I am not sure, I'm slightly more towards abortion being legal, but I am unsure.

doc france's argument = make one mistake - get punished for life.

shadow nexus is right abortion is not something you can stop. even before it was done medically it was done herbelly (pennyroyal tea). and nowadays if it was made illegal all that would happen is either it would be done like that or it would be done as some people have it done, by putting a bicycle spoke in there and giving it a quick stir around.

all that would happen is that illegally or self aborted fetuses would be found in someone's trash.

it's not a new concept and so is not really preventable. there are just ways to make it better for everyone. that is not by not having it done by some half wit with a bicyle part. instead having it done by a proffessional.

here contraceptives are available for free. to everyone and anyone. and abortion rates have not went down. same with increase in education. in fact against all this teenage pregnancy and std's have actually went up.

more education and free contraception is not the answer. there is something at the heart of the problem and that needs to be tackled first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

there is something at the heart of the problem and that needs to be tackled first.

---

Yeah, it's called "personal responsibility". Without consequences, there's no reason to be cautious. Back in the day, unplanned pregnancies meant that someone was going to be beaten to death, hanged, or forced into a marriage. Not doing it in the first place was a good choice. Nowadays, people just aren't afraid of consequences when all you have to do is walk into a building, and walk out a couple hours later with the freedom to go out and do it all again.

And, as parents have lost the idea of responsibility for their children, they never bother to teach their kids about such responsibility themselves. Long story short: the problem is everyone. Of course, no one wants to hear THAT answer, because it forces them to take responsibility, and who wants to do that anymore?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

there is something at the heart of the problem and that needs to be tackled first.

---

Yeah, it's called "personal responsibility". Without consequences, there's no reason to be cautious. Back in the day, unplanned pregnancies meant that someone was going to be beaten to death, hanged, or forced into a marriage. Not doing it in the first place was a good choice. Nowadays, people just aren't afraid of consequences when all you have to do is walk into a building, and walk out a couple hours later with the freedom to go out and do it all again.

And, as parents have lost the idea of responsibility for their children, they never bother to teach their kids about such responsibility themselves. Long story short: the problem is everyone. Of course, no one wants to hear THAT answer, because it forces them to take responsibility, and who wants to do that anymore?

---

Yeah we understand that udsuna but if i was to be born into a world with unresponsible parents who dont care much for me.Then I would've rather died before i was even born.The thing is abortion should be 100% legal...This process strings out hte responsible to the irreponsible...MY sister was an accident but she wasn't aborted and they had the option to do so.Even if abortion is legal dude people who had an unplanned pregnancy.There will be those who take the easy way out and have an abortion and those who will suck it up like a soldier and have the baby and care for it until the person is 18.. then kick them out and call them a loser and tell them to get a job.

there's a few more problems then the baby boomer generation as parents. there's the degradation of morals in society. the amount of sex on tv, on billboards, in music. kids are bombarded with that every day. and we expect it not to have any influence on kids today?

there's a lack of morals in society today, a lack of repect, responsibilty.

this though was put in place by their parents (the baby boomers). and thus we are left with generation x. which is why society sucks right now because the baby boomers are in charge and went around being so liberal and pc about every little thing. maybe if we stopped showing kids sex as soon as they can learn to count they wouldn't be popping out sprogs at 13.

If everyone just wore a condomn and actually thought about what they were doing before they did it, there would be no need for abortions. If everyone respected life more than tossing it aside...

But then again, we live in the land of the almighty dollar, and that will ALWAYS decide what is moral and what is not

Quote:

---

But you see still from my view, just because there are less abortions it doesn't make it more pallateable. People are still dying at the hands of doctors and in the name of choice.

---

All-or-Nothing, then? Sounds a bit, oh, I don't know, hypocritical to me.

Quote:

---

In most developed countries, sexual education is given in schools, the couple should take into account the risks of having sex without anti-conceptives.

---

Sexual education in America (most of it, at least)... "Don't have sex". I'm not kidding.

The only time I see abortion as 'ok' is if that child was concieved due to rape and the victim was really to young to give birth and be a mother. If I was raped and got pregnant, true I would consider abortion, does that make a bad person? The option would run through my head. I would hate to look at my attackers face each time I looked at my child and I put myself in my childs shoes, would I like to be a child of rape? How could I tell my child that his/her father was my rapist?

But then again, I would most likely either raise the child or give it up for adoption.

Just think if you saw an 11 year old pregnant due to rape? Would you deny that child the chance to be a child herself due to some disgusting person who got her pregnant?

I'm not trying to justify abortion as 'ok'. I wish it was never dicovered or put into the mainstream market. I'm just putting out some argument for abortion. It doesn't mean I agree with it.

Quote:

---

I wish it was never dicovered or put into the mainstream market.

---

Not likely. Abortions have been around for a loooooooong time, and infanticide even longer. Me, I prefer abortion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

Nowadays, people just aren't afraid of consequences when all you have to do is walk into a building, and walk out a couple hours later with the freedom to go out and do it all again.

---

It's not that easy. Plus, I heard that doing it more than three times or so, you get to damage your womb to the point of being sterlile. I'm not sure about the scientifical value of that, but I just heard it.

Quote:

---

It's not that easy. Plus, I heard that doing it more than three times or so, you get to damage your womb to the point of being sterlile. I'm not sure about the scientifical value of that, but I just heard it.

---

Not true. Abortion is actually safer than childbirth. However, people who get multiple abortions are fortunatly in the minority. Frankly, I think after a certain number, they should impliment mandatory sterilization.

mandatory to me seems so...... barbaric.

to honestly say there is any circumstance under which you would forcibly sterlize anyone is wrong. i wouldn't castrate a rapist or pedophile, i certainly wouldn't do the same for some idiot, slut, or junkie.

there are other ways to prevent conception except for sterilization. semi-permnant options which can be remvoed or kept as long as possubly and that do not require to remember to take a pill or open a foil packet.

but to maim someone for such a reason is appauling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkLadyNyara

Quote:

---

In most developed countries, sexual education is given in schools, the couple should take into account the risks of having sex without anti-conceptives.

---

Sexual education in America (most of it, at least)... "Don't have sex". I'm not kidding.

---

lol thats so damn true they teach abstanence.(check spelling.)

BTW childbirth is more dangerous and its the most dangerous for european women due to the fac tthat there hips aren't as big as the other ethnicities.YEah a lot of them just split in half and die during child birth during the middle ages.

Quote:

---

Sexual education in America (most of it, at least)... "Don't have sex". I'm not kidding.

---

This is no joke... Hell, I didn't even get "sex education" until my sophomore year in highschool, it lasted less than a week, and all they did was tell me not to have sex. Ha... This countries education system is such a joke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

Sexual education in America (most of it, at least)... "Don't have sex". I'm not kidding.

---

This is no joke... Hell, I didn't even get "sex education" until my sophomore year in highschool, it lasted less than a week, and all they did was tell me not to have sex. Ha... This countries education system is such a joke.

---

To me it felt like they were almost making us want to have sex more because they're treating it like this obscuere taboo thing that you can't do for some unknown reason...like a taunting almost.

I agree though, if we worked together we could accomplish alot more, but it seems the bulk of America (I dunno about the rest of the world) just wants to stand on one side yelling "PRO-LIFE" or "PRO-CHOICE"....so eh.

When I had my first sex ed class I think I was in 4th grade then we had one in 6th then 7th grade. Each went a little bit more in detail then the last. Then my junior year we had health independant living which showed us how to live on our own from keeping a check book to carring for a child. You couldn't graduate unless you took the class. So I wouldn't say all of americas school systems don't teach you anything. Oh wait that's about all they taught us. So basically in other schools where there sex ed sucks my school had a good sex ed program but crappy everything else :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bert

When I had my first sex ed class I think I was in 4th grade then we had one in 6th then 7th grade. Each went a little bit more in detail then the last. Then my junior year we had health independant living which showed us how to live on our own from keeping a check book to carring for a child. You couldn't graduate unless you took the class. So I wouldn't say all of americas school systems don't teach you anything. Oh wait that's about all they taught us. So basically in other schools where there sex ed sucks my school had a good sex ed program but crappy everything else :p

---

Hey, that's better than alot of schools...it had something good.

Ouch.. DMKA.. that was low.. though true for so many :(

Our schools sex ed.. wasn't Don't Have Sex. It actually told us how everything worked etc. I think it was a 6 week program. 45 minutes a day... 5 days a week. Unfortunately we were 6th graders and are teacher was a bit.... shy?... any ways, the other guys loved making him go red in the face. Actually a couple of the "Sex Ed Movies" were... quite depicting... I had never seen anything like it till then... so my morals my parents taught me kicked in.. and I closed my eyes :eek: .

Yeah.. I didn't learn too much from the movies.. though by the end of the class I could tell you how the male and female reproduction organs worked.. I couldn't tell you what they looked like heh.


Yeah blushing teacher was fun :P

Quote:

---

to honestly say there is any circumstance under which you would forcibly sterlize anyone is wrong. i wouldn't castrate a rapist or pedophile, i certainly wouldn't do the same for some idiot, slut, or junkie.

---

Point taken. Norplant, then?

forgive my ignorance but what is norplant?

and can i just ask what is wrong with school sex ed being "sex is wrong". what else do you want to teach 13 year olds? "sex is cool go out and do it but do it safely" yeah cos that would bring down teenage pregnancy levels awfully quick.........

what other message is there to give 13 year old kid (minor and illegal to have sex" you cannot even legally or morally teach a child of that age that sex is a good thing to do.

the rise in teenage pregnancy's is due to the de-moralisation of the media and therefore (what is left of) soceity. kids see sex daily all around them and that is why sex at 11, 12, 13 is becoming so rife. to then go out and tell these kids that sex is cool is a huge mistake.

if sex was toned down on tv then possibly that ideas that are being discussed here might be implementable. but also a lack of thought in society also accounts for teenage pregnancy. you only need to look at the backgrounds, parents, friends, environment from which teenage pregnancyies come from to see that is a society and possibly class problem.

you need to fix this first before you can go out telling kids sex is great.

also while we are on the subject. does anyone know if england still has section 28?

Quote:

---

if sex was toned down on tv then possibly that ideas that are being discussed here might be implementable. but also a lack of thought in society also accounts for teenage pregnancy. you only need to look at the backgrounds, parents, friends, environment from which teenage pregnancyies come from to see that is a society and possibly class problem.

---

I have never been to GB, but know family who have been there. It seems they show nudity on public television with no problem, like its not a big deal. Forgive me, but isnt showing someones boobs a huge sex symbol or something? Yet we hear more abortions in America than we do in GB. Its the bad philosphy in this country that we have abortions for, the ignorance of truth, but the media does plaY a part in this

well i don't know by what you mean with no problem..... mostly it's after 9 (watershed) (doesn't stop kids watching it though) unless it is in like an educational way.

I've often thought that if the fervently anti-abortion lobby spent as much time caring for the welfare of babies AFTER they were born as compared to before they were born, then the abortion rate would plummet; same for contraception, sex education and many other things that the religious right despise.

But it's not all "their fault"... parents should take more responsibility. You just have to look at the Netherlands, a country so liberal with its view to sex, yet really low abortion, teen pregnancy and STD rates. It CAN work.

in today's society i believe you are correct. i believe though that abortion is completely wrong, simply because a woman has control of her life, but she shopuldn't readily have control to take her child's life. we look at mothers out there who kill their children after they've been born, and we look at them and ask 'how can they do that?', abortion is still taking a life in the exact same respect, except its legal and the child hasn't left the womb (partial birth abortion is different, don't get me started on technicalities). but to "control" the situation, as one might put it, making birth control and other methods of keeping women from getting pregnant should be initiated.

I will add my oppinionated input:

I am pro-abortion in the correct circumstances.

If a teenager was to fall pregnant, they would not be able to understand the responsibilities of parenthood, and they would not know how to react accordingly to certain situations.

Economically, and emotionally, they would not be prepared.
To be able to provide a safe, steady family, one requires a basic level of income, and independence. The child would be brought up poorly, resulting in an unfulfilled lifestyle, leading the child to be permanently disrupted.

There is also the possibility, that the parent would rely on her/his parents for income and shelter, resulting in the parents suffering economically, and having to put aside extra time to be able to raise that child.

Life is cruel, that is definate, and will never change. Humans will never learn, mistakes will be made, and people will suffer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMKA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:

---

Sexual education in America (most of it, at least)... "Don't have sex". I'm not kidding.

---

This is no joke... Hell, I didn't even get "sex education" until my sophomore year in highschool, it lasted less than a week, and all they did was tell me not to have sex. Ha... This countries education system is such a joke.

---

To me it felt like they were almost making us want to have sex more because they're treating it like this obscuere taboo thing that you can't do for some unknown reason...like a taunting almost.

I agree though, if we worked together we could accomplish alot more, but it seems the bulk of America (I dunno about the rest of the world) just wants to stand on one side yelling "PRO-LIFE" or "PRO-CHOICE"....so eh.

---

In 8th grade in my health class our coach(health teacher & yeah coach of the hockey and baseball team)Tried to scare us into not having sex by naming every single STD that is in existence and what it does and how its treated our found out.lol.Man if i ever have sex I'm putting on three condoms just to be safe.(yeah still a virgin don't plan to do it until i get married).

do remember to keep a sense of proportion when talking about holland. remember only amsterdam allows prostitution and cannabis. it is not the same for all of holland. people tend to take the view that holland is some liberal haven. people see amsterdam as the whole of holland however there are alot of right wing christains outside amsterdam who totally disagree with the running of amsterdam.

this creates a problem with surverying things like this. as amsterdam could have a really high teen preg rate but this would be hidden by the rest of holland's low preg rate.

Except I'm talking about the country's attitude to sex between agreeable partners, not drugs or prostitution.

sorry i didn't make myself as clear as i possibly should.

holland's liberalism really only exists in the way people think it does within amsterdam.

Okay, bit of a side-issue, but fair enough then :)

Sure, that would work, on one point. Make abortion legal.

In a free society, the Christian, militant right can do what they wish after the baby is born. I find it humorous that the same group who advocates no abortion (under the ridiculous concept that a fetus is the same as a walking adult) also are against sex-ed. Conservatives have a problem with evasion.

Someone advocated personal responsibilty. I agree. Don't let the state make decisions for men (or women, in this case) that the people are capable to make for themselves.

Quote:

---

forgive my ignorance but what is norplant?

---

It's a form of long-term birth control. 6 capsules are inserted in the arm, and can be left in for about 5 years.

Quote:

---

and can i just ask what is wrong with school sex ed being "sex is wrong". what else do you want to teach 13 year olds? "sex is cool go out and do it but do it safely" yeah cos that would bring down teenage pregnancy levels awfully quick.........

---

How about "sex isn't something you should do until you are emotionally ready, and if you do decide to have sex, take care of yourself and use a condom. :rolleyes2 California started teaching about contraceptives, ect. and our teen pregnancy rate is dropping faster than the national one. BTW, I was refering to high school sex ed.

emotionaly ready? are kids going to ask themselves that? are they not just going to think they are if they do? stop it if they don't?

and why still force something? people here would be shcoked if i was to start advocating the removal of hands from thieves. but to leave someone infertile for 5 years is a good thing?

I see no problem with an abstainence-based sex-ed program. Everything I've been through has told me the only way to keep from pregnancy or STDs is lack or sexual contact--which is obviously true--but that there are other ways to avoid pregnancy, different contraceptives, that are mostly effective. I've yet to be through any class that says "don't have sex" and nothing else.

And there are plenty of places a person can go to get free condoms. Most sex-ed classes I've been through have pointed out these places.

No-one is complaining about programs that inform their students yet still point to the obvious benefits of abstinence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gibsie

No-one is complaining about programs that inform their students yet still point to the obvious benefits of abstinence.

---

I realize that, however, I've been through nine different schools in my life, and I have yet to come across a program that teaches abstainence and absolutely nothing else. Every program I've been through has pointed out different programs, organizations, alternatives, and contraceptives.

Quote:

---

I realize that, however, I've been through nine different schools in my life, and I have yet to come across a program that teaches abstainence and absolutely nothing else. Every program I've been through has pointed out different programs, organizations, alternatives, and contraceptives.

---

I have. That's what they gave us in 9th grade.

Quote:

---

emotionaly ready? are kids going to ask themselves that? are they not just going to think they are if they do? stop it if they don't?

---

They're more likely to listen to that than "Just Say No". Nothing is perfect. Deal. (Oh, and by the way, yes, some of us do ask ourselves that.)

ok a few pointers here

1. abortions are for the majority carried out before the unborn baby is viable, this means that technically it is not alive and therefore the SURGEON (not doctor) who carries it out is killing nothing. DEAL WITH IT

2. people fall many pregnant for many reasons some of which were out of their control, should they have their freedom ripped from them for something that wasnt their fault in a world where justice is everything?

3. perhaps there should be more emphasis on teaching kids the way to have safe sex instead of poorly educating them and telling them not to do something they are going to do just because you told them not to.

4. regarding 'taking responsibility for your own actions' abortions are hardly pleasant experiences and ARE taking responisibility for your actions, its not as easy as walking into a clinic and having it amputated like a dying limb. It takes weeks of visiting clinics, checkups, scans and councilling and most likely you would have to travel a long way for these things, to major cities.

Abortion is the safest method of dealing with unwanted pregnancy for both mental and physical health of the unfortunate ladies who have dealt with it. Without legal abortions such women would have to refer back to before it was legalised and carry out completely unsafe home-jobs which mostly lead to infections and death.
And no, there should be NO paternal rights, I will be damned before some poor woman has to carry a baby against her will within legal rights.

i am greatly confused by this. why tell kids that it is okay to have sex at under 16 (uk law, adapt it for own state or country)? it is illegal. it is a crime and should be preached against. or do we want "be responsible when you take e, smoke crack, shoot up" talks as well in school? "make sure it's a clean needle". or talks on how not to get cuts while climbing through a broken window? just for safety's sake.

it is a crime and should not be endorsed by educational facilities.

I think abortion is fine in some cases. Such as if a thirteen year old girl is raped and gets pregnant she shouldn't have to suffer pregnancy if she won't keep it or can't. My mother is pregnant and I know it's a difficult time when you're pregnant. It's something an unwilling teenager should not have to go through.

For those who consent to sex I don't think they should unless their birth control didn't work or somethnig like that.

This is all just my opininon though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

i am greatly confused by this. why tell kids that it is okay to have sex at under 16 (uk law, adapt it for own state or country)? it is illegal. it is a crime and should be preached against. or do we want "be responsible when you take e, smoke crack, shoot up" talks as well in school? "make sure it's a clean needle". or talks on how not to get cuts while climbing through a broken window? just for safety's sake.

it is a crime and should not be endorsed by educational facilities.

---

Yet another rare instance when I completely agree with Cloud 9.

Quote:

---

i am greatly confused by this. why tell kids that it is okay to have sex at under 16 (uk law, adapt it for own state or country)? it is illegal.

---

As far as I know, an adult having sex with a minor is illegal, not two minors having sex.

Quote:

---

1. abortions are for the majority carried out before the unborn baby is viable, this means that technically it is not alive and therefore the SURGEON (not doctor) who carries it out is killing nothing. DEAL WITH IT

2. people fall many pregnant for many reasons some of which were out of their control, should they have their freedom ripped from them for something that wasnt their fault in a world where justice is everything?

3. perhaps there should be more emphasis on teaching kids the way to have safe sex instead of poorly educating them and telling them not to do something they are going to do just because you told them not to.

4. regarding 'taking responsibility for your own actions' abortions are hardly pleasant experiences and ARE taking responisibility for your actions, its not as easy as walking into a clinic and having it amputated like a dying limb. It takes weeks of visiting clinics, checkups, scans and councilling and most likely you would have to travel a long way for these things, to major cities.

Abortion is the safest method of dealing with unwanted pregnancy for both mental and physical health of the unfortunate ladies who have dealt with it. Without legal abortions such women would have to refer back to before it was legalised and carry out completely unsafe home-jobs which mostly lead to infections and death.
And no, there should be NO paternal rights, I will be damned before some poor woman has to carry a baby against her will within legal rights.

---

Put it better than I could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ravenmorghane

ok a few pointers here

1. abortions are for the majority carried out before the unborn baby is viable, this means that technically it is not alive and therefore the SURGEON (not doctor) who carries it out is killing nothing. DEAL WITH IT

2. people fall many pregnant for many reasons some of which were out of their control, should they have there freedomripped from them for something that wasnt their fault in a world where justice is everything?

3. perhaps there should be more emphasis on teaching kids the way to have safe sex instead of poorly educating them and telling them not to do something they are going to do just because you told them not to.

4. regarding 'taking responsibility for your own actions' abortions are hardly pleasant experiences and ARE taking responisibility for your actions, its not as easy as walking into a clinic and having it amputated like a dying limb. It takes weeks of visiting clinics, checkups, scans and councilling and most likely you would have to travel a long way for these things, to major cities.

Abortion is the safest method of dealing with unwanted pregnancy for both mental and physical health of the unfortunate ladies who have dealt with it. Without legal abortions such women would have to refer back to before it was legalised and carry out completely unsafe home-jobs which mostly lead to infections and death.
And no, there should be NO paternal rights, I will be damned before some poor woman has to carry a baby against her will within legal rights.

---

1. by who's defonition by 17th ceuntry standards black people weren't people. By Nazi Standards The jews were animals. The eye of the beholder will blind people to many injustices

2. The majority of situations are caused by the mothers and fathers own lack of responability, having a child does not restrict your freedom apart from selfish desire the fact you think like that concerns me.

3. Prehaps the emphasis should be teaching kids not to have sex until they are sure of the strength of their relationship to accept the consequences of sex.

4. Doctors appointments aren't the responibility the unborn child is the responsibility.

Backstreet abortions are horrible and scaring for the few hundred women that foolishly attempt them but 300,000 babies are aborted in the UK every year, everyone should consider which they consider the bigger tradergy.

Capital punishment is a-okay but killing a baby that can't be supported and may ruin someones life trying to support it is despicable. Forcing a girl to bear a child as punishment for being a slut is pretty disgusting. Let's ruin two peoples lives just to teach this stupid girl a lesson!

If someone kills someone, we won't demand he repent for his sins like the bible (I'm throwing out the bible because that's usually the basis for our morals in society) would have us do, we kill him. How much of the tax-payers money do we spend on orphanages? Is it justified to have EVERYONE pay? How many more people could we save if we didn't pay for oprhanages in hospitals? Just some thoughts. I'm feeling pretty indecisive myself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZeZipster

Capital punishment is a-okay but killing a baby that can't be supported and may ruin someones life trying to support it is despicable. Forcing a girl to bear a child as punishment for being a slut is pretty disgusting. Let's ruin two peoples lives just to teach this stupid girl a lesson!

If someone kills someone, we won't demand he repent for his sins like the bible (I'm throwing out the bible because that's usually the basis for our morals in society) would have us do, we kill him. How much of the tax-payers money do we spend on orphanages? Is it justified to have EVERYONE pay? How many more people could we save if we didn't pay for oprhanages in hospitals? Just some thoughts. I'm feeling pretty indecisive myself.

---

Do you have any idea how hard it is--how much it costs, how long the wait is--for adoption in America? How many YEARS, how many THOUSANDS of dollars that hopeful parents have to pay, just to have a child of their own? Parents that may not be able to have children of their own, but are ready for them, as opposed to parents that are too irresponsible to not have children and are not ready for them yet? I believe there are something like four times the number of parents on the waiting list for an adoption than there are abortions in America every year, but I could be wrong about that.

Shortening the life of a murderer is wrong, but taking a life shortly after it starts is "a-okay"? By the way, a lot of people--myself included--wouldn't have a problem with abandoning capital punishment if our prison systems weren't a joke, but that's an entirely different subject. And most orphanages are privately funded--charity and all. But even if they were government-funded, why would it be wrong for taxpayers to spend money on orphanages, but our obligation to pay for food and health care for every irresponsible citizen?

One other thing I noticed, that goes along with all the "animal rights" nuts--why is it that raising an animal to be killed for food is immoral, but killing a baby is a matter of convenience?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordblazer

Man if i ever have sex I'm putting on three condoms just to be safe.

---

You do realise that using multiple condoms increases the probability that one of them will break, don't you?

I'm okay with abortions if they're done before five months into the pregnancy, because from what I understand, the baby has no developed capacity to feel pain. After that, I'm only okay with them in cases of rape or in which the mother's life is threatened, and I don't approve of partial-birth abortions (in which the baby is killed as it's being born, hence the name partial birth at all).

To the people who are comparing sex to drugs: It's not the same. Drugs like E and crack are harmful no matter which way you slice it, but if you're careful and use protection and birth control, sex isn't actually that dangerous even at a young age; the only risk I'm aware of is that it increases the risk of cervical cancer developing. Granted, I don't think kids should be having sex, but it's their decision to make regardless, and if you give them the impression that sex is forbidden it just makes them want to do it more. Which a lot of them will.

I agree that adoption is preferable to abortion, but I also don't think it's a choice us males deserve to make, since we'll never have to deal with the physical symptoms of pregnancy. I do agree that women in long-term relationships should discuss it with their partners though.

Edit: And abstinence-only education is definitely happening in many parts of the country, and it's already been demonstrated not to have favourable results.

what is it with this ridiculous attitude that it's the child's choice? no it isn't. it isn't his choice to drink, smoke, drive a car, watch porn or perform in it. it is the laws choice and it stands. it is whlly wrong to promote criminal activity. you can try and ensure it is done safely but to encourage it as normal behaviour is morally and legally wrong.

As a man I'd only justify abortion if there were medical complications so bad that the doctors feared for the mother's life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

what is it with this ridiculous attitude that it's the child's choice? no it isn't. it isn't his choice to drink, smoke, drive a car, watch porn or perform in it. it is the laws choice and it stands. it is whlly wrong to promote criminal activity. you can try and ensure it is done safely but to encourage it as normal behaviour is morally and legally wrong.

---

It's true that schools shouldn't encourage it, but I think you havea slightly hysterical idea of what constitutes "encouragement". The sad fact is, that many students in a typical class are going to end up having sex before they turn 16, so it is in everyone's best interest that everyone know how to use a condom. That's not encouragement, that's being sensible and teaching responsibility. Ignorance helps nobody.

Gibsie is spot-on.

i concur. it's gonna happen anyway. so as long as you ain't telling kids it's cool then it's fine if you tell them what to do what if they go down that track.

another question? what has caused the increase in underage sex?

the most likely cause of underage sex is a slackening of morals in modern youth society and slackening of the discipline imposed on young people. Could also have something to do with the fact that amount of pressure on kids to grow up quickly between the ages of 12 and 16 before they're even considered as adults legally. They wanna do what adults do.
And im trying hard not to repeat myself but it has to be said that there are some people here who are being a little naive about a foetus' life and rights. a baby is not alive until 24 weeks when it becomes viable. before that it is nothing but an extension of the mothers body which feeds from her and could not possibly survive if unattached. Which is why before that time if the baby came out it would be called a miscarriage, and after that time it would be called a birth.

It's most likely due to the frequency of sex in the media, which itself is largely due to the fact that birth control and protection now exist. Before, if you slept with people before getting married you had to worry about getting pregnant or impregnating someone or getting syphilis or something. The advent of condoms and the Pill meant that people no longer needed to worry about that sort of stuff, and thus it was more common for people to sleep with each other before marriage. That eventually trickled down to a loosening of morals. I don't think it can really be avoided, which is why we need to drill it into people's heads that casual/extramarital sex without condom use is *wrong.*