Since Some People Were Offended By My Last Journal, I'd Like To Defend My Views And Give You All Some Statistics - Comments

There are no statistics to defend the fact that a lot of pro-lifers want to force women to be human incubators. I don't care who has the most abortions or why - it's always the womans choice because it's her body.

I find it morally wrong. I've never been through it. But I've lost enough babies in my family and have had enough disabled babies in my family to appreciate how precious life really is.

The fact is: There is enough help and alternatives in this world so that a life can be saved. A child does "not" need to be aborted "ever."

Kurtni: My thoughts exactly.

tinybirds: I think you have a good point. It's easy for me to say that I find abortion morally wrong (but I think it should be legal) because I'm getting married in a month in a secure relationship, I have a good job, I'l be graduating college soon with a very marketable degree and so will my husband. I could absolutely take care of a child, so who am I to judge someone in conditions that are worlds away from my own? I have no idea what their life or circumstances are like. I think thats the problem with prolife rhetoric.... it's so personalized. "I know so and so, and they were poor and had their baby and everything was fine!" Well, good for them, but not everyone is that lucky.

Honestly, this is all I can say since you messaged me about this too.

Until you are put in any of the scenarios in which Kurtni listed, I don't think any of us can really speak on the matter of abortion. We haven't experienced it, we haven't been put in a situation where we would have to choose and hopefully none of us will. We don't know what it feels like to be in the shoes of a woman who has to make the biggest decision of her life: To become a mom or not.

Your last statement was completely irrelevant. I'm not sure if that was your last attempt to get your point across or what but it just looked like propaganda. And like another user has said, your sources appear to be biased as well.

Everybody seems to be saying the same thing, why is this a debate?

Edited: Nvm, I see a difference of opinion here lol

I agree with you. Abortion is murder.

But you can't abort a fetus because you know twenty years from now the person it grows up to be won't want to be alive. That's your able-bodied bias guiding your thinking. You can abort a fetus because you KNOW you cannot take care of it, or because you KNOW you do not want it, or because you KNOW you will die carrying the pregnancy, but to abort a fetus because you THINK it may not want to live with a particular condition is purely bias without any sound reasoning.

I'm not saying I think it should be illegal, I just find that logic to be rooted in hateful, eugenics ideology about what the perfect person is and how seemingly inferior disabled people are in today's society.

Kurtni - I've heard of stuff like that, yes. But that's not the case in... all cases. As I mentioned before, just because it's rare, it doesn't give anyone the right to ignore its possibility.

I see it as something similar to that debate on whether or not to pull the plug with someone on life support.

And like I also said, that's probably the only case that really makes me cringe, when someone would decide to abort a baby because of a disability. I don't like that. I still believe that the mother is entitled to her choice, but it's still not a pleasant thing.

I was only trying to... defend the notion, I suppose.

v I agree. Like if someone were to ask me if they should abort their baby or not because of so and so and so. My answer would be straight up "no, I think you're wrong if you do that. but at the same time I can't stop you."

It absolutely sucks though.

I believe people should do whatever they chose to do in this situation. If they want to abort it for no reason, as much as it saddens me, it's really not much choice. I have to say I am against killing the baby at all costs unless it wouldn't even live out of the womb, there was something medically wrong with it (like lung disease of something, but you get it?) or if it will kill the mother. But, at the same time, it's not my business. If the mother can live with what she is about to do, she has to live with that pain of that choice.

" From the child's perspective, depending on the disability, never living at all might just be a better option than living an entire life in absolute misery and being unable to do anything about it. Like those people who are completely mute and nearly incapable of motion, who just sit in wheelchairs until they die. Who wants to be like that? "

I'm assuming you're an able-bodied person, but I think you'd be surprised if you read academic studies about how people with severe disabilities rate their quality of life. It may be different than how you live, but that doesn't mean disabled people spend their entire lives wishing they'd never been born.

I'm sorry but I absolutely look down on people so deeply who would abort a child because it is handicapped or has a disability. Omg..that is just .. no.

I think they should be allowed to develop until they do have it. A baby doesn't have choices either, especially a newborn. It has cognitive thought, but it has no ability to speak or make choices or do anything by itself. Germs are different because they wont ever develop further but a fetus will.

I'm sure someone has mentioned this, but I'm not about to go back and read through all of the comments just to be sure.

But, saying that an occurrence is rare gives you absolutely no right to disregard it. That's like saying, "It's extremely rare that you see a little girl being raped and murdered in a dark alleyway, so don't even worry about it. It doesn't happen often. If it does, then oh well, it's cool."

And by a woman "not being ready to have a child", I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean that she's uneducated. It means that she is psychologically and emotionally not ready to have a child. There is no class that can help with that, unless you want to pay thousands of dollars for therapy that isn't guaranteed to do shit for you.

As for the handicap thing, you act as if people are discriminating when they say that those fetuses should be aborted. I'm not so thrilled about the idea myself, but it's not as spiteful as you're making it out to be. From the child's perspective, depending on the disability, never living at all might just be a better option than living an entire life in absolute misery and being unable to do anything about it. Like those people who are completely mute and nearly incapable of motion, who just sit in wheelchairs until they die. Who wants to be like that?

Perhaps I'm only pro-choice because I believe in reincarnation. It's my personal opinion. If the fetus is aborted, then oh well. Better luck next time. The cycle carries on.

I think abortion is wrong point blank, I don't really care if that person was raped or not. The child had nothing to do with it, and therefore the child shouldn't be robbed of it's chance of being somebody.

If you don't want it, fine; give it to somebody who does, but don't kill it.

How can you have a right to life outside the womb when you're not physically capable of living outside the womb? You don't have rights to things you're incapable of doing.

And you're right- they didn't make the choice to be there because fetuses are not cognitive beings which is what defines humanhood and differentiates us from other forms of life. A fetus doesn't make a choice about anything any more than e coli. does.

It's fine to say that women should take responsibility and women should become good parents and should be able to support their children- I agree with you as I don't morally approve of abortion either, but the real world doesn't work the way it should, and to pretend it does is dangerous to both women and children and legally would put a lot of people in horrible situations.

Abortion has been made illegal before in various parts of the world- it didn't go away. It just resulted in abandoned children and dead women, which doesn't seem very "pro-life" to me.

Kurtni, but it being a living thing is exactly what determines that. I consider it a living human being, therefore it has a right to life outside the womb. It didn't ask for it to be put in there, but (except in the cases of rape) a woman chose to take a chance for that life to come about by having sex. You can say your protection failed, etc, but it still doesn't change the fact that you know by having sex you might get pregnant. It's less likely with protection but it can fail and you should know that. If you take that chance and you do get pregnant, then it's you're responsibility and I don't think getting an abortion is your responsibility.

In cases of rape, it's hard for me to say this, but I think, unless the paychological effect is too massive, she should carry it. She doesn't have to keep it, but it's still an innocent baby.

As for if a mothers life is in danger, I do believe a woman has a right to terminate it. But I probably can only feel okay about saying that if it's definite. If its a maybe, I think they should wait it out.

But I doubt abortion will ever be illegal, really, unless scientists are able to prove a fetus is a human being. I'm at least glad you can't get an abortion after a certain period.

I've never thought of it as a matter of what you consider alive or not- a embryo/blastula/fetus indisputably is alive by scientific terms, just like bread mold or a ring tailed lemur. I don't understand why prolife/prochoice go back and forth on this so much, it's a moot point, because the act of being alive is so generic and meaningless. We kill living things daily, we commit bacterial genocides everytime we wipe down the kitchen counter. The "real debate" is over when that life has substance/has rights.

Airi, I consider the baby alive inside you. It may not be able to live outside you, but it's still living inside you.