It can be. But it usually isn't. Even though people are reckless and stuff, like rape, does happen. An abortion does have severe psychological side effects on the woman/girl that has had it done. Because, most of the time they do feel that it was an act of murder and that "they took the life" of the would-be-baby. It usually goes to being depressed, etc, sometimes clinical help has to be intervened with because they just cant take the seriousness of what they did, or what they thought they did. In reality, I don't think any woman/girl will go out and have sex; unprotected, get pregnant for kicks, and go and get an abortion and have it like nothing happened.

people never stop surprising you with their stupidity.

You cease to amaze me sith god

Ne ways back ONTOPIC

There is definitely huge pros and cons of both sides. Some people think that an abortion is just a one stop shop and your in and out. But in the end like you said a lot of women do feel really guilty and in some cases really depressed. I have a friend who recently got an abortion, and I hate to say this but shes changed. She is still the same person but she needed to get prescribed for anti depressants due to the abortion. The one that she didn't fully want to do in the first place but she knew it was the best for the child.

[5+ sentences ^^]

Hell, ill play mediator and get some con's in here for conversation's sake.
My Cons:
Of course, human-rights should be respected, but it is never the case that a person has a right to make a decision with no reference to the rights and wishes of others. In this case, one might wonder about the rights of the father to have a say in the fate of the fetus. More importantly, though, pro-choice groups actively ignore the most important right – the child’s right to life. What is more important than life? All other rights, including the mother’s right to choice, surely stem from a prior right to life; if you have no right to any life, then how do you have a right to an autonomous one? The woman may ordinarily have a reasonable right to control her own body, but this does not confer on her the entirely separate (and insupportable) right to decide whether another human lives or dies. Unborn children cannot articulate their right to life; theirs are vulnerable lives and as such must be protected. Many laws have difficulties pertaining to implementation, but these do not diminish the strength of the principle behind them: people will kill other people, regardless of your legislating against it, but it does not follow that you shouldn’t legislate against it. Even though the Netherlands had more liberal drugs’ laws than in England, this did not lead, and nor should it have led, to a similar liberalization here. Whether we should actively restrain would-be ‘abortion tourists’ from traveling is a separate question, but one which can be answered in the affirmative given what is at stake. In ordinary circumstances such a move would indeed be draconian, but where a restriction in someone’s freedom is the price to pay for protecting an innocent life, then so be it. The question of what life is can certainly be answered: it is sacred, inviolable and absolute. It is unquestionable that the fetus, at whatever stage of development, will inevitably develop the traits to which you refer. The unborn child will have every ability, and every opportunity that you yourself have, if you give him the opportunity. The time-restrictions on termination had to be changed once, when it was discovered that feeling developed earlier than first thought, so they are hardly impeccable safe-guards behind which to hide. Whilst these are different circumstances, and such medical emergencies are tragic, it is by no means obvious that the abortion is to be performed. The ‘mother vs. child’ dilemma is one which defies solution, and aborting to preserve one of the lives sets a dangerous precedent that it is acceptable to kill a person in order to save another. This is a clear, and unpalatable, case of treating a human-being as a means to an end. Whilst an appalling crime has been committed, is it the fault of the unborn child? The answer is, of course, no. Denying someone life, because of the circumstances of their conception is as unfair as anything else imaginable. What right does anyone have to deprive another of life on the grounds that he deems that life as not worth living? This arrogant and sinister presumption is impossible to justify, given that many people with disabilities lead fulfilling lives. What disabilities would be regarded as the water-shed between life and termination? The practice of eugenics is roundly condemned by all civilized countries.

I say that the "mothers right to choose" takes away from a child's right to choose.

You all have brought up the points of the child having a bad life if it were allowed to live
I say, let the child make of his life what he will, (there have been very happy people come from bad childhoods or poverty)
If worst comes to worst, just give the baby up for adoption after birth.

Woah !? Doode!? you just said the most cleverest post in this thread. Simple logic!

Really, I'm pro abortion as well.

Anyway lets set some things straight first.

#1. You have no rights. If you think you have rights then your a dumbfuck and I wish you rot in a ditch, as you are irrelevant to humanity.

#2. Adoption! Just do that !? Rather not go through the pain of giving birth ? selfish, hope you get hit by a truck on your way home.

#3. In the instance of rape. Was you drunk at a party ? Your going to kill your possible child due to some guy who was touching you and you had consent until you found out he didn't have a condom ?

Well in any case. Having an abortion isn't really fair on anyone, no matter whether it is the mother or the fetus. However, an abortion is completely understandable if the mother doesn't want it ? Ye she's a selfish git and I hope she gets hit my a 4x4 while crossing the road. It's her choice and her choice alone. Before all the equipment abortion was done in the back alleys. No matter what happens it still will happen. Please come to the conclusion abortion will never stop. No matter what happens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61IE-SkAtug

/thread.

Knock off the less-than-one-sentence posts. And videos. This isn't a video topic. Especially you Sith God

And to be fair to Status, it DID pertain to the topic, (if you bothered to watch it), and so contributed to the debate. I took that video as his way of voicing his opinion on the topic at hand.

I think you're making the mistake of thinking that anything in offtopic will ever be well moderated.

In any case, if you count all the sentences that the comedian said in the video, then status's post was well over 5 sentences, and mine contains 5 if you read each part of the list like a separate sentence. edit: (IF it hadn't been edited)



Now can we move on past people actually thinking that just because they created a topic they're automatic moderator on it?
Gracias.


I personally think that while there may be differences of opinion of the morality of abortion, it's not the government's place to put this kind of a restriction on behavior. There are debates about all sorts of moral issues from premarital sex to swearing, but there are no laws put into place about those issues, and so none should be enacted against abortion. The only reason abortion is even debated is because we only recently developed the medicinal technology to do it safely and efficiently. If abortion were present 200 years ago, it would not even be questioned, just part of society.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4mFHqYr06k

/thread.

"We're sorry, this video is no longer available."

Only for me?

Let everyone decide for themselves if they want to kill their baby/embryo. You say it's not fair when someone decides a baby should get killed, but yet you decide to let it live, at the same time. Who gives you the right to say wether or not a woman should get abortus? Let them decide for themselves, cause the babies can't.

you know what murder is! taking a peace of dead meat from a garbadge bin and save people with it!
now thats bloody murder, Osama wished he figured that out more early!

Interesting to see if someone deletes Nokill's post like they did mine, cause it's in no way appropriate in the topic. If not ,then i guess we just have whitnesed the biased truth of some weakminded people here.


This is by the way a really fine example of censorship. Other people decide what you can say and what not, it's why i kinda hate internet. I preach for full freedom!


::EDIT:: Can't delete Nokills posts even if I wanted to