Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Well I say no as a personal choice and yes to legalisation, because the two are different things with different implications.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    You really think an eighteen year old would make an adequate parent? Would this not be to the detriment to the child?
    You believe that a baby is a blessing - I agree. Doesn't abortion mean every child being brought into the world is consiously wanted? Therefore abortion is a good thing.
    i'm not saying everyone is ready for children - i just don't think killing the child for silly reasons like someone hasn't lived is reason for taking an innocent life away - if you don't want the child put it up for adoption - people need to understand however having sex is a decision to open yourself up to teh possibility of a child - if you do the adoption thing every child is wanted - planned or not - murder is not an option in any circumstance
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    You may well have died along with your mother, on a brutal and barbaric backstreet abortionists' operating table. Legalising abortion saved lives.
    Saved lives! Are you out of your mind. So you think that there would be as many babies being aborted if it were illegal. Having an abortion is just the easy way out, and the mother is just not facing up to her responsibilities.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simon12345)
    If you knew that, why make a false statement? It doesn't matter how many are surviving, the fact of the matter is some are surviving. That vote was marginal. The current 24-week limit is an absolute joke tbh. Murder in all but name.
    Why is it murder?! They are foetuses who would have the most minimal chance of survival outside the womb!
    I did not make a false statement; the fact remains that most foetuses could not survive independent of their mother at the current abortion time limit.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DC Doberman)
    Oh, brother. Are you implying if she weren't "young and naive," and she realized that motherhood is hard, that would make abortion okay in her eyes? I can't even begin to express how sickening this is to hear. You know what else "isn't a walk in the park"? Caring for old people. Should we kill them, too? Sometimes teenagers are a pain in the ass, too. Should we kill them? How about mentally disabled people?

    I agree with most reasonable people, that there are instances when abortion is acceptable (such as rape or danger to the life of the mother), but the argument that babies are inconvenient is truly disgusting.

    Besides, there's always adoption.
    Foetuses aren't people. It's obvious from your post that you realise this on some level.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm totally for it. Unless people are just having sex and then going "Lets 'ave an abortion then."
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by usainlightning)
    Saved lives! Are you out of your mind. So you think that there would be as many babies being aborted if it were illegal. Having an abortion is just the easy way out, and the mother is just not facing up to her responsibilities.
    What about the father, his? Why should the mother have the burden of a shared responsibility?

    I don't think there would be as many babies being aborted as when it was illegal - I do know that many women now have a safe and humane way of aborting their unborn child. Legalising abortion has saved lives because prior to its legalisation, thousands (if not millions) of women lost their lives to backstreet abortionists who operated unlicensed, with unsterilised equipment and inadequate training.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    Why is it murder?! They are foetuses who would have the most minimal chance of survival outside the womb!
    I did not make a false statement; the fact remains that most foetuses could not survive independent of their mother at the current abortion time limit.
    Babies can, and have, survived under the 24-week abortion limit. If a baby is born at 24-weeks, survives, but is then deliberately killed, it is classed as murder. Yet, if a child is aborted at the same stage before birth it is not. Seems pretty illogical to me.

    At the current abortion deadline, the foetus cannot survive outside the womb, independently of its mother.
    This statement is false. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Pro Choice
    Pro Abortion
    The more stem cells, the better.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    What about the father, his? Why should the mother have the burden of a shared responsibility?

    I don't think there would be as many babies being aborted as when it was illegal - I do know that many women now have a safe and humane way of aborting their unborn child. Legalising abortion has saved lives because prior to its legalisation, thousands (if not millions) of women lost their lives to backstreet abortionists who operated unlicensed, with unsterilised equipment and inadequate training.
    Lol. No.

    Also, far more people carry out abortion now because they see it as an easy way out. That was not the original intention of the legislation.

    Lives have been saved, many more have been lost.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kultist)
    Foetuses aren't people. It's obvious from your post that you realise this on some level.
    yes, I realize this. I also believe that a baby is not a fetus the moment before it is born. What about a month before? What about two months before? I'm not sure, and I think it's playing with fire to invent some arbitrary line as to when a human being starts having rights. I'm certainly more against later-term abortions than early-term.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simon12345)
    Lol. No.

    Also, far more people carry out abortion now because they see it as an easy way out. That was not the original intention of the legislation.

    Lives have been saved, many more have been lost.
    Ludicrous. You cannot deem foetuses lives in that sense.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    What about the father, his? Why should the mother have the burden of a shared responsibility?

    I don't think there would be as many babies being aborted as when it was illegal - I do know that many women now have a safe and humane way of aborting their unborn child. Legalising abortion has saved lives because prior to its legalisation, thousands (if not millions) of women lost their lives to backstreet abortionists who operated unlicensed, with unsterilised equipment and inadequate training.
    I agree that the father has responsibility to support the child, it is a shared reponsibility to keep the child or if the parents are not willing to give the support the baby can be put up for adoption.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DC Doberman)
    yes, I realize this. I also believe that a baby is not a fetus the moment before it is born. What about a month before? What about two months before? I'm not sure, and I think it's playing with fire to invent some arbitrary line as to when a human being starts having rights. I'm certainly more against later-term abortions than early-term.
    Why not have birth as the arbitrary line?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    Ludicrous. You cannot deem foetuses lives in that sense.
    I do. Deal with it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DC Doberman)
    Oh, brother. Are you implying if she weren't "young and naive," and she realized that motherhood is hard, that would make abortion okay in her eyes? I can't even begin to express how sickening this is to hear. You know what else "isn't a walk in the park"? Caring for old people. Should we kill them, too? Sometimes teenagers are a pain in the ass, too. Should we kill them? How about mentally disabled people?

    I agree with most reasonable people, that there are instances when abortion is acceptable (such as rape or danger to the life of the mother), but the argument that babies are inconvenient is truly disgusting.

    Besides, there's always adoption.

    If you'd taken time to read my other post as well, you would have realised that I'm definitely not of the opinion that abortion is an easy way out, nor should it be taken 'lightly' but the fact of the matter is the girl was being a bit naive as to suggest that because she has A Levels and GCSEs she'd be able to support a child at 17. Unless she's extremely fortunate to have parents willing to support her or a man who's stuck around then she's basically ****** for life. Fair enough single mothers get their own homes and money given to them by tax payers, but is that really fair? Why should other people have to pay for the mistakes of someone who got knocked up at 17 and has no one else to turn to?

    Fair enough there is the choice of adoption but I don't think any man, God or law has the right to say what a woman can and cannot do with HER body. It's not an easy decision to go through the pain of an abortion, just as it probably wouldn't be easy to live with the fact that you gave a child away - especially seen as the emotional connection with the child would have been greater than it would have been a few weeks into the pregnancy.

    It's so easy for a man to say a woman should keep their child when if push comes to shove they can easily just say 'look it's not my problem, you deal with it' beacuse at the end of the day, any male can walk away a woman has to deal with it for the rest of her life: whether she has an abortion, puts her child up for adoption or keeps it. There is NO easy way out for a woman when it comes to something like this.

    And as for your 'burden' speech, give me a ******* break. Over reaction much? There is a huge difference between me saying that a seventeen year old girl could not handle the hardships of motherhood and the fact that the elderly need taking care of and teenagers can be dicks. Seriously man. :facepalm:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nouvelle_vague)
    If you'd taken time to read my other post as well, you would have realised that I'm definitely not of the opinion that abortion is an easy way out, nor should it be taken 'lightly' but the fact of the matter is the girl was being a bit naive as to suggest that because she has A Levels and GCSEs she'd be able to support a child at 17. Unless she's extremely fortunate to have parents willing to support her or a man who's stuck around then she's basically ****** for life. Fair enough single mothers get their own homes and money given to them by tax payers, but is that really fair? Why should other people have to pay for the mistakes of someone who got knocked up at 17 and has no one else to turn to?

    Fair enough there is the choice of adoption but I don't think any man, God or law has the right to say what a woman can and cannot do with HER body. It's not an easy decision to go through the pain of an abortion, just as it probably wouldn't be easy to live with the fact that you gave a child away - especially seen as the emotional connection with the child would have been greater than it would have been a few weeks into the pregnancy.

    It's so easy for a man to say a woman should keep their child when if push comes to shove they can easily just say 'look it's not my problem, you deal with it' beacuse at the end of the day, any male can walk away a woman has to deal with it for the rest of her life: whether she has an abortion, puts her child up for adoption or keeps it. There is NO easy way out for a woman when it comes to something like this.

    And as for your 'burden' speech, give me a ******* break. Over reaction much? There is a huge difference between me saying that a seventeen year old girl could not handle the hardships of motherhood and the fact that the elderly need taking care of and teenagers can be dicks. Seriously man. :facepalm:
    Yes :yes: :yes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kultist)
    Why not have birth as the arbitrary line?
    Because that's crazy. There's nothing to distinguish a baby before its born from a baby after its born except that the baby after it's born has taken a breath. Who do we think we are, that we can say that's when a human has rights? And if we think that we have that power (which no one does or should), then what's to stop us from making other arbitrary distinctions, like a "human" is only someone with an IQ over 70, for example? I'm not saying that that's likely, I'm just saying it's every bit as arbitrary.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simon12345)
    I do. Deal with it.
    Fair enough. Just don't try to encroach upon my reproductory rights in the process.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DC Doberman)
    Because that's crazy. There's nothing to distinguish a baby before its born from a baby after its born except that the baby after it's born has taken a breath. Who do we think we are, that we can say that's when a human has rights? And if we think that we have that power (which no one does or should), then what's to stop us from making other arbitrary distinctions, like a "human" is only someone with an IQ over 70, for example? I'm not saying that that's likely, I'm just saying it's every bit as arbitrary.
    . . .Other than the fact while it remains in the womb it is reliant upon its mother, and consequently is a secondary organism. The mother has priority when it comes to abortion.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.