Should abortion be banned?

[mrstickball]

highwaystar101 said:

mrstickball said:
I think they should be illegal. Of all the things I think that should be legalized, abortion is the only one that relates to the destruction of another human.

It should only be done in very, VERY extreme measures. Outside of that, I don't think it should be legal. Women (and the husbands) should strive to keep the child to full term. If they feel that they cannot take care of the baby (which is the reason in 90% or more of abortions), then it should be given up for adoption.

However, in the process, I believe adoptions should be promoted and reformed to ensure that the mother knows that the most honorable thing to do is to give the baby up to a loving family. Adoption has been destroyed since abortions became legal in the US. At one time, 10% of all children were adopted....The number has dropped 10-fold thanks to the fact that 40,000,000 babies were aborted.

Huh. I would have had you down as pro-choice to be honest.

About your destruction of a human being point, I would state that the definition would be hazy at best on that. Many people believe that it is a human life from conception, but other believe that it is only classed as a human life at some point down the development of the fetus.

Personally I believe that abortion is acceptable only for different circumstances for each trimester...

1. The first trimester or so is nothing more than belated contraceptive (although I would prefer it if contraceptive was used in the first place).
2. In the second trimester it should be held for changes in decision (based on sound reasoning, perhaps with a psychological profile).
3. In the third it should only really be accepted if the fetus poses some kind of serious threat to the mother or itself.

Why do I think this? Because I think that no clear definition can be determined for when it is human. In the beginning of the pregnancy I would consider it as just a bundle of cells. As it develops further, it become more human and the situation becomes more tricky. But in the third trimester it is essentially a mini baby, and the likelihood is that it can survive premature berth anyway, so only extreme situations are acceptable.

Abortion is about the only issue I have a non-libertarian view on. However, if I was given the ability to ban it, I am unsure if I would outright ban it (as it may not change the views of why people destroy life, which is the key component of why abortion even exists - we need to promote a culture of life and responsibility).

I understand that some argue that it's a human life from conception, others argue that it's at some other time, and I think that's a huge problem. Even if it's not human life, it is still life that will become human. That's why I consider abortion a bad thing. Furthermore, I am not very understanding of why it is more expedient to destroy the life as opposed to bringing it to term, and giving it up for adoption. As others have said, in most countries that allow abortion (western democracies) there is a high demand for adopting babies. If the reason for abortion is because a woman doesn't want the baby, and there are (litterally) millions of women that want the baby....Why not take the time, deliver the healthy baby, and give it away?

I understand your viewpoint, however, it's not one I can agree with. Women (and the men who impregnate them) take the responsibility of life very lax, and I think that's absolutely horrible. I think that getting pregnant is like getting drunk or high - you need to take responsibility for those actions. And I don't believe aborting the child is an action that should be taken.

However,

From a legal standpoint, I can't say I would instantaneously ban it if I was given the miraculous chance to get rid of such an atrocious practice. Our laws need revised concerning abortion - it's not a federal issue, it is a state issue and the onus should be on the state to allow (or disallow) the usage of abortion, as well as the praxis behind it (parental consent for teens, sonograms before abort, ect). States and their voting constituency should be the ones that decide how best to deal with the practice.

Having said all of that, the best way to deal with abortion from an inoffensive centrist point is that we absolutely must change the motivations behind abortion. When 90% of abortions are being done for mere social purposes - the mother does not want the baby - they are being done for the wrong reason, and we need to avoid that. We can best avoid that by promoting the usage of adoption, and instilling a culture of life, love and respect for women that decide to give up their baby for adoption. The link I gave earlier shows a strong correlation between cultural ideas - that single women raising or aborting by their own will - is greatly effecting why women abort, raise their kids in poverty, or decide to give up their children. Interestingly enough, it's the uneducated, poor American woman that decides to abort. There is a strong correlation between higher education and actually giving up the child. It's for that reason we need better education to instill a better understanding of responsibility that seems to lack from why women abort.

In the end, I think there's a way that we can remove abortion - through state law and cultural change - that respects the idea of being pro-choice and a culture being pro-life. Maybe the option needs to exist, but I think that most of the 40,000,000 kids that died in America are because of selfish women.

Also, one should note the interesting fact that the reason that Europe is well below the birth replacement rate is due to abortions. For every 1000 life births, there are 500 abortions. Do you think that this freedom is having a positive impact on your society?