The Student Room Group

Banning abortion is inhumane, murder and is against human rights.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 200
Original post by joshohill
i appreciate this is a very sensitive subject but from an Agnostic point of view having an abortion is down to the women and should not be frowned upon! In the eyes of the law it isn't murder. However if a woman should get herself in a position where she has unprotected sex deliberately and then decides that she doesn't want the baby then she shouldn't be given a priority when it comes to having the abortion on the National Health Service (NHS)! The foetus should only be terminated in the four following situations
- The woman has been raped.
- The baby is going to be born into poverty or an extremely unstable environment.
- The baby will have a severe life changing or threatening illness.
- The mothers health will be detrimentally affected.
I personally strongly believe that someone should never be pressured into having or not having an abortion!


I agree. I don't see why a woman who choose to have unprotected sex should have the same choice as a woman who has been raped (unless any of those four circumstances came into play).
It's rather interesting because in my eyes it seems pretty 50/50, but then again most ethical dichotomies are 50/50 by definition! In any case, many people ask and or say that the baby or person will, in every case, prefer to live than die. What this really raises is another question about how people view their lives and whether they would prefer to be dead if they could find a pain free way of doing it.

Many of those kids may live horrendous lives, full of abuse, bullying, moving from house to house, the continuous torture of not being wanted by their parents and so on. Some of these kids may simply want to die. Is that acceptable? If someone wants to do something with themselves then why should they be stopped. If someone can't stand life any more can they not decide to relieve themselves of it?
Would abortion just solve these cases incipiently? It would save the mother the pain and the baby the torture and eventual suicide.

Ultimately, it is all a rather dark thing. There isn't really a right or wrong way, it is totally dependent on the situation and is something I think many young women nowadays should spend some more time thinking about. The best thing is simply to prevent the occurrence, stop having drunken unprotected sex, use protection, have coitus when in a secure relationship, discuss with healthcare professionals, family or friends (when you find you are pregnant before just getting the pill) - there are so many things and way to prevent this or make a better decision, people just need to take some time.
Reply 202
I love how there's a bunch of guys on this thread demanding that abortion be stopped. My question to you is this: are you going to help her raise the child? See, a lot of the pressure of potential pregnancy lies in the fact that the other party isn't going to bloody well be there to take responsibility. Personally, no guy is going to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body if he's not f***ing well going to be there to take what consequences there may be.

On the whole, I don't actually agree with abortion except in rape-cases, and even then, after a certain point in the pregnancy I don't really think it should be allowed regardless. But I digress. This is one of the rare occasions when I feel like gender has a very serious role in all this. As women, we're saddled with the child regardless of what happens. Don't forget, the act of giving birth is a deep, personal, emotional experience for a lot of women- whether or not they keep the baby. Thus giving birth is a HUGE life altering experience for many women, no matter what the outcome is. I hate to see people writing it off as if it's just "carry it about for awhile and then pop it out and you're done!" It's not like baking a bloody ham.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 203
Abortions should only be accepted if:
-The child is a product of rape
-The mother is at risk of death by having the child
-The child will be born with a serious mental illness that deprives it of a quality of life.

If they don't wear protection then it is there fault for getting pregnant, abortion because they don't want a child or can't afford it is basically murder for leisure and is wrong.

You wouldn't be here if your parents aborted you, think about that the next time you try and justify murder by preventing a life.
If you had sex,then you must face the consequences.If you don't want to carry a baby around for 9 months,then don't have sex.A Bad Life is better than no life.
I am so, so confused by this thread. The title and the post seem to contradict each other:confused:
Reply 206
Completely ridiculous, abortion IS murder!!
Original post by Mamiya
I agree. I don't see why a woman who choose to have unprotected sex should have the same choice as a woman who has been raped (unless any of those four circumstances came into play).


If it's right to have abortion after rape then it's also right to have abortion after unprotected sex. There can't be a middle ground for one simple reason: abortion is either murder or it isn't. If you agree that abortion is murder then, even if the woman was raped, she should NOT be allowed to kill an innocent baby. On the other hand, if it isn't murder and you're allowed to abort after being raped then why the **** not abort if you forgot to use protection?
The way I see it, abortion is morally wrong, but is sometimes the lesser of two evils for the reasons you've stated above. It's morally wrong to abort, but it's more morally wrong to, e.g, make a woman have a baby even though it will kill her, make her carry a foetus when she doesn't want to, etc.
Also there is no point in banning abortions because it wil just lead to more illegal abortions, e.g with a coathanger, that put the woman at risk.
Original post by Just Josh
If the woman has unprotected sex intentionally (like not rape) and gets pregnant, it is her own problem. The woman shouldn't have unprotected sex unless she is able to have a baby. If the woman does get pregnant, the woman should pay the price by the hardships of labour, and then give the baby up for adoption if she can't raise it herself. The baby shouldn't pay for it by being slaughtered for his/her mothers mistakes.

And about the whole adoption thing being immorral, i'm sure a person would much rather be alive and adopted than slaughtered before birth. I'm sure if you went around asking children who are in orphanages or who have been adopted whether they would have been preferred to be murdered before they were born, most would say no.


Agree with this, there is so much contraception available that there is no excuse to have unprotected sex. If a woman is, for example, on the contraceptive pill and gets pregnant then she should be able to have an abortion because she took the precautions but they just didn't work. However, if they don't use protection then it is their own fault. Though I am still conflicted. I don't agree with having unprotected sex if you don't want to get pregnant, but I still couldn't ever say to someone that they HAD to have a baby. Such a confusing issue!
I completely agree with you OP. You kinda included yet skimmed over stuff like rape. You mentioned unwanted children but it could be worse than just an accident, it could be rape and that child that is a burden on you for the rest of your life will always be a reminder of your ordeal and cost you thousands of pounds which you may not be able to afford. This means that the state might have to give you money to help out. Plus having to carry on with that baby may bring health risks to the both of you.


Original post by Sgt.Incontro
-rep

The Muslim faith considers it a human after 4 months of development. I don't care what Atheists think.


It's not what atheists think that matters at all. It's doctors and courts etc etc who can belong to any faith or non at all that decide stuff like when the limit of an abortion can be.
Original post by Clare~Bear

It's not what atheists think that matters at all. It's doctors and courts etc etc who can belong to any faith or non at all that decide stuff like when the limit of an abortion can be.


And Parliament in the first instance.
Original post by ScheduleII
And Parliament in the first instance.


But they're likely to be advised by doctors anyway. people in parliament might not have any qualifications in biology at all so they'd need to ask people that do know their stuff on biology/medicine.
Original post by Tel8
I love how there's a bunch of guys on this thread demanding that abortion be stopped. My question to you is this: are you going to help her raise the child? See, a lot of the pressure of potential pregnancy lies in the fact that the other party isn't going to bloody well be there to take responsibility. Personally, no guy is going to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body if he's not f***ing well going to be there to take what consequences there may be.

On the whole, I don't actually agree with abortion except in rape-cases, and even then, after a certain point in the pregnancy I don't really think it should be allowed regardless. But I digress. This is one of the rare occasions when I feel like gender has a very serious role in all this. As women, we're saddled with the child regardless of what happens. Don't forget, the act of giving birth is a deep, personal, emotional experience for a lot of women- whether or not they keep the baby. Thus giving birth is a HUGE life altering experience for many women, no matter what the outcome is. I hate to see people writing it off as if it's just "carry it about for awhile and then pop it out and you're done!" It's not like baking a bloody ham.


I'm still young but I would never leave a woman who had a kid of mine because let's face it if i got myself into the situation in the first palce i think it would be rather wrong to leave them to 'fend for themselves' in affect! LOads of interesting comments on here :smile:

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending