Views on abortion

I don't see human foetuses as more worthy of ethical consideration than animals. Animals are known to be able to suffer and feel pain; foetuses younger than 24 weeks seemingly cannot. Abortions are unpalatable, but not in my opinion immoral. If pro-life people care about reducing suffering in the world, they would be better to become vegetarian than oppose abortions.

While I agree with the message of your answer, I prefer the comparison of a fetus to a parasite or pest than an animal we'd kill for material gain.

On your first point. Humans are natural organisms, and 'disorders' (or whatever you call them) are natural and they do happen. When you commit to have a child, you in turn commit to loving that child you're going to have. You thereby must accept the fact that, whilst you have every right to hope that your child is 'normal', there is a chance that your child will require more maintenance. If you are not in the position to love your child indiscriminately and do whatever you can to make their lives worth living then you should not, in my view, have a child in the first place.

And yes, the gender argument is basically exactly the same as the whole disability argument I made. The interesting thing about that is that it's actually happening at the moment (or in the recent past) in China, where there was a strong economic incentive for parents to have boys due to the one child policy and lots of unborn girls were being 'aborted' (or murdered, depending how you look at it).

My favourite comparison is to a violinist, but there you go.

I think, in your first paragraph, you may be falling prey to the naturalistic fallacy - that just because something is natural, it must therefore be good, valid, and right. While these disabilities do happen, we as a sentient species can do things to prevent them. Centuries ago, massive pandemics killed off vast swathes of the human population. This is a natural occurrence that would still be happening if these sicknesses had not mostly been eradicated with the advent of modern medicine.

I myself am unresolved on the issue of abortion to prevent disabilities, although I am absolutely in agreement with you when it comes to abortion for the sake of gender. I would just like to point out that the argument that we should not interfere with the birth of disabled children because their disabilities are naturally occurring is invalid.

I'm 100% pro-choice, and wouldn't take away a woman's right to control over her own body.

In terms of the 15 year olds getting pregnant, I'd blame that on improper sex education, or lack of it. If I think back to my own sex education talk, I'm not surprised there were girls in my secondary school classes falling pregnant and needing abortions, they didn't teach us stuff. I've never come across attitudes that scream 'I'll use abortion as a form of contraception,' more just situations that read of young girls going 'I thought you couldn't fall pregnant on your first time' or 'I thought we'd be alright if he pulled out.'

"Murdered" is subjective. It can't survive outside of the mother's body, and if the mother doesn't want it in there, she has every right to remove it. Can't be bothered to descend into a pro-life vs pro-choice argument too long.

Do you believe it should continue to be allowed or do you think it should be made illegal (worldwide wise)?
Some background:
''According to World Health Organization (WHO), every year in the world there are an estimated 40-50 million abortions. This corresponds to approximately 125,000 abortions per day.

In the USA, where nearly half of pregnancies are unintended and four in 10 of these are terminated by abortion, there are over 3,000 abortions per day.''
http://www.worldometers.info/abortions/

Personally, I am not against it. There are some cases when I think it should be allowed, such as let's say accidental pregnancy (due to matter such as rape) or if the fetus was screened in its early developing stage and it was found to have some kind of strong disability. I think if the parents wish, they should be allowed to proceed with their decision to abort it.

It does make me angry when you have the 15 yr old teenage girls ending up pregnant because they couldn't be bothered to use the contraception; literally, but even in these situations if they really really couldn't afford/wouldn't have time to look after their babies, I believe only then should they be allowed to abort their unborn child. I am not saying it's right, nor am I promoting it, but it's their choice in the end.

Also, if my fetus was screened for disability, I am pretty sure I'd abort it. Look at the case of Shiloh Pepin; known as 'the Mermadi girl' - who was born in the USA and had condition 'sirenomelia'; in other words her legs were fused. She wasn't supposed to live as long as she did, but she lived to the age of 10 and then sadly passed away. Her parents knew that there's something wrong with the fetus when they went for the screening, yet they never aborted it. I cried when I watched a show about her (you can find it if you type ''mermaid girl'' into YouTube) because it was really emotional and I wouldn't want to get attached to my child and then suddenly lose it. She was a beautiful child and she didn't get to live too long. I'd rather have my child aborted then get attached to it so much and have it die before me. Also, even if my child had a strong disability but let's say they survived and grew to be an adult, they would still be dependent on others (most likely) and what kind of life is that.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223035/Girl-born-mermaid-syndrome-dies-aged-10.html

But what are your thoughts on this? Does your religious background clashes with such decisions&actions? For example, the Roman Catholic Church says that deliberately causing an abortion is a ''grave moral wrong''.

I dont think you can blame sex education (or lack of) for that in most cases. I knew a few girls when I was younger whod regularly have unprotected sex and as a result many of them ended up pregnant and having abortions (in a few cases more than once). They knew about contraception but theyd make excuses not to use it like "oh lads dont like using condoms", "I cant go on the pill I might get fat/my mum might find out" and even "oh I cant be arsed". Dont get me wrong I do believe a woman has a right to choose, but there are girls and women out there who use it as a method of contraception which I dont think is right.

Posted from TSR Mobile

But the fact they're having to resort to it as 'contraception' still speaks volumes, does it not? I'd argue there might be an element of peer pressure in letting their sexual partners get away with no condoms, because they don't want to upset them by telling them no, or risk them being funny about it.

They've been misinformed about birth control pills, that could be down to lack of sex education. Not everyone gains weight, and there's different pills available to women to suit different needs.

Getting an abortion is not the easier method, granted. But not all parents are open/accepting of their children having sex, and yes they could incur the wrath of parents if they find contraceptives, so they might rely on methods I said originally i.e. pulling out and hoping for the best. Abortions are necessary in this case, parents can and have thrown pregnant daughters out of the house. (I'd be made to move out if I came home pregnant. My sister was homeless at 20 with an 8 month old, that's the reality many women face if they keep unwanted pregnancies.)

Perhaps there are some women who 'can't be arsed' but I'd be willing to be that number resides in a very low percentage. There's a bigger picture at work behind even the most dismissive excuses on women not using contraception and later needing an abortion.

When I've used that argument, people usually find the comparison to be facetious so quoting Re (A) (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) [2000] is a nice alternative and an interesting case

And to brutally murder someone at the same time.

Pro-abortion
Pro-euthanasia
Pro-suicide
Anti-death penalty
Pro-killing in war.

I'm 100% pro-choice, and wouldn't take away a woman's right to control over her own body.

In terms of the 15 year olds getting pregnant, I'd blame that on improper sex education, or lack of it. If I think back to my own sex education talk, I'm not surprised there were girls in my secondary school classes falling pregnant and needing abortions, they didn't teach us stuff. I've never come across attitudes that scream 'I'll use abortion as a form of contraception,' more just situations that read of young girls going 'I thought you couldn't fall pregnant on your first time' or 'I thought we'd be alright if he pulled out.'

I'd say anti-suicide, and pro-death penalty for me.

Well they received the same sex education as I did, we were told the pill could cause you to gain weight as it could increase your appetite, but it didnt happen to everyone. Pill packets and condoms could be found by parents but there are options such as the implant, depo injection and coils which don't carry that risk, all of which we were told about in sex education at school.

How would you define 'disability' in this context? Is there a level of severity a disability must meet before you would consider abortion? Would you classify disorders like Thalassaemia as a disability?

Note that I'm not trying to argue against your pro-choice stance, I'm genuinely interested in what people think about this.