It does if you don't want women being butchered. Illegal abortions are horrible. It's not that difficult of a concept.

It should be noted that you can't get rid of anything (abortion, porn, whatever) without addressing the need. Make abortion unnecessary by addressing the need for it and it will naturally go away.

The problem with that logic, is the basis for prolife tends to come from religious beliefs. Which if they happen to be Catholic, well the Catholic church is against all forms of birth control, save for abstinence. This even applies to married couples.

It makes perfect sense. You create a black market for things people need and/or want when you make those things illegal, and when its a medical procedure that's outlawed, underground operators fill the void, patient safety is sacrificed, and people die.

i dunno, i feel that there is no real answer here, i myself am prolife, but im not religious, i have a deep respect for innocent human life, and have come to the conclusion that a fetus does not magically transform into a person once it passes a set of labia, there is a point when those growing cells become self aware, and thats the point that it becomes human, and science has yet to tell me when that point is. anything past that is destroying a sentient human being in my opinion.

The main problem here as mentioned in the story is that basically it doesnt matter if abortion is illegal or not, people will still try to abort. However using that argument, people will do it even if its illegal, so might as well make it legal so they can do it safely, doesnt hold water when applied to other things.

People will always find a way to commit suicide, might as well help them do it safely.

People will always find a way to do drugs, might as well help them do it safely.

People will always find a way to self mutilate, might as well help them do it safely.

And on and on.

Its a complex problem looking for an even more complex answer.

"This phrase doesn't make sense." Which part doesn't make sense slick?

Drezz -- your logic is flawed (or poorly communicated). You say you believe a fetus is a person before it exits the womb. Ok, fine. Most people would agree with you on that one -- even pro-choice folks. That is why there are limits of when an abortion can be legally performed. A viable fetus (i.e. one that could reasonably survive outside the womb) cannot legally be aborted -- except possibly in very, very rare cases where there are extreme dangers involved to the life of the mother. (Don't buy into the scare tactics of the antichoice crowd that want us all to think late term abortions are a regular occurance taken lightly by doctors and patients -- that is simply a falsehood they have created). If you base your assumption of personhood on when the fetus becomes self aware, then there is a time before that when it is not a "person" (and, yes, science has a pretty good sense of when this happens, even if you do not agree) - so why would you deny a woman the choice of what to do with her own body -- as she is always and undeniably a person. Or is a woman not worthy of legal personhood and self determination? Or do you really believe that "life begins at conception" - in which case your whole argument about self awareness is an inaccurate representation of your true feelings meant to make yourself sound more reasonable and moderate than you really are. If that is the case, you are entitled to your opinions, but at least be honest about them.

As for your other situations, I think you need to give those a little more thought, too. Those who feel that safe abortions are better than unsafe abortions would most likely not see a logical flaw in safe drug use being better than unsafe drug use or safe self mutiliation is better than unsafe self mutilation. Obviously, it would be better if no one did these things, as it would be better if no one had an abortion, but given that they do exist, isn't safer better? Suicide is another issue entirely and does not belong in this list, except that you are trying to be controversial and provacative. The reality is, there is no "safe" way to kill yourself -- as the act is by definition and design unsafe -- but there are ways to mitigate the inherent danger of being a drug user (not sharing needles, doing it in a safe environment, etc) and there are ways to mitigate the danger of self mutilation (using clean tools, proper wound care, etc). So the argument that one can make these dangerous acts that people will do no matter what safer does, in fact, hold water. Unless you are of the belief that anyone who does anything dangerous or self destructive is on their own and are undeserving of help to mitigate the damage they can cause to themselves. If you feel they deserve what they get and good riddance... again, you are entitled to your opinion, but be honest what it is.

You are absolutely correct that these are complex problems that deserve complex answers, but your position does not at all seem complex. In fact, it seems quite simple. Abortion is a complicated issue, so don't allow them. Doesn't get more simple than that. However, simple does not work. The issue is not black-and-white. There is a lot of gray, and gray can be ugly and it can make us uncomfortable, even unhappy, but we can not and should not ignore that it is there just because it is easier to pretend it does not exist.

i have a deep respect for innocent human life

Me too... actual innocent human life (viable fetuses, newborns, kids) not potential human life (sperms, embryos).

there is a point when those growing cells become self aware, and thats the point that it becomes human, and science has yet to tell me when that point is

Science actually has a pretty good understanding on this. The vast majority doctors and Neurologists agree fetuses can't feel pain or be self aware until the brain and pathways needed to transmit the information is developed enough to do the job. Which at the earliest is 20 weeks. Only about 1% are done beyond 20 weeks, over 80% are done before 12 weeks, well before any chance of feeling pain. Just an excuse for pro-lifers to try and stir up emotions, so make sure to do your research!

I see nothing wrong with assisted suicide, making sure people who are doing drugs (ex needle exchange programs)/self mutilation (ex piercing) are doing it as safely as possible not to mention give them access to stopping the problem

drexx

People will always find a way to commit suicide, might as well help them do it safely.

People will always find a way to do drugs, might as well help them do it safely.

People will always find a way to self mutilate, might as well help them do it safely.

indeed. we need to do those things as well.

As far as I know, suicide and self-mutilation are not illegal? Furthermore, I think the danger from all four of these (abortion, suicide, drug use, mutilation) can be mitigated through counseling. I think, as a society, we tend to shun these people which makes the problem even worse. Abortion is a very serious decision. I am "prolife" (as I am pretty sure it is hard to be "antilife"...) but I can also see times where abortion could be necessary i.g., rape, incest, danger to the mother. I also believe that if intercourse is consensual and no one took the time to use contraception, the woman should not have an abortion because no one took steps to prevent pregnancy in the first place. Consequently, we need to be more open to helping women make a well-informed decision; taking into account her situation and her concerns and allowing her to weigh her options.

The law, as it stands today, permits abortion regardless of the reasoning, and is unlikely to change. Therefore, I think there should be mandatory counseling before and afterward and a limit on how many abortions one person can have within a certain period of time. Getting into the debate about where human life starts is frivolous and ultimately comes down to a fundamental debate about the subjective definition of humanity.

I also believe that if intercourse is consensual and no one took the time to use contraception, the woman should not have an abortion because no one took steps to prevent pregnancy in the first place.

Yeah sounds just like the kind of people I want reproducing lol But really, pregnancy should not be used as a punishment for having sex for pleasure only regardless if contraception is used. Not to mention, how could you prove if contraception was being used or not?

A women can do desperate things when faced with unwanted pregnancies, hence this whole article. Making it illegal will not stop it, I highly suggest you read the article it has a lot of statistics/information in it.

I do think birth control counseling should be given after every abortion and there are time limits in between them to give your body time to heal.

You want to decrease abortions? Increase access to contraception and support sex education. There is no other way.

For thousands of years, women have had abortions. There are not going to stop just because you make it illegal...

Yeah sounds just like the kind of people I want reproducing

Lol, I hear you there...

I did read the article, and was not surprised to hear that less women die in places where abortion is legal. I also realize that, because of this and the part you mentioned about proving contraception was used, the law will never change, which is why I suggested counseling and time limits.

pregnancy should not be used as a punishment for having sex for pleasure

Lol, Hey, I didn't make up the rules! ;)

Drezz... You're argument is akin to the argument people have when they're pro-gun, a gun doesn't kill someone just as a spoon doesn't make people fat. Come ON! As for "science stating when a fetus becomes human" here's an easy way to fix it... Brain function. If brain death is the main factor for calling a human dead at the end of life, why would we not use the same logic to "the beginning of life." If you are so pro-life you would want to protect the life of the LIVING HUMAN MOTHER that has a sustained life by making an abortion procedure safer. There are many people in these countries that should not have kids, many who do cannot support them, so any of them who want to abort fetus' (that they will not be able to support when they are children and the children end up dying as a result) I am all for. End the suffering before it begins. I believe that the fetus is part of the mother until it has it's own brain function (which science CAN TELL you when that happens), after that, make it illegal. However, I do not see the "ethical problem posed" by eliminating cells that are just cells... if it doesn't have brain function, it's not alive, sorry. And all of you who are going to argue about people who are in vegetative states blah-de-blah... since the brain is what operates the heart, lungs, etc, those people are not yet "brain dead" in a medical sense. Problem solved. Make it safer so that those who are currently a "life" can keep living after the procedure. Why do we always sacrifice the already self-sustaining life for a bunch of cells? that will never make sense to me... almost everyone who is pro-life is pro-fetus-anti-mothers-rights/health/life.

The bible -pounders don't give a crap about the mothers life - they are much more interested in cellular matter that is indistinguishable from any other mammalian
zygote.

Might be interesting to make abortion illegal, then require the people who are against it to raise and fund the resulting child up till the child graduates from college: Have the thumpers put their money where their mouth is - I don't hear a lot of them volunteering for such a program.

The only problem is that the kids would probably get the same brain-washing the parents had, so the problem would only get worse. Remember that these people think the earth is only 5,000 years old.

Ritdog, I totally agree!

Here's where I see the biggest issue with contradiction... If a fetus cannot be aborted because the mother is not ready to raise a child, most likely both mother and child will be on welfare. Your idea about making the thumpers pay for the kid until college is great, however, many of these people leech off of society welfare programs long into adulthood, if not their entire lives. The people who complain about how evil abortions are are the same people who don't want anyone on welfare... So their solution is this...

"if you're slutty enough to have sex, you need to deal with the CONSEQUENCES of that (their idea is that a child should be a consequence for such indescretions, even though sex is absolutely natural). But we don't want people on welfare... so it's better to carry a child to term and then let it live a miserable life full of poverty/starvation and possibly die young..." yep... much better than an abortion... You can't have your cake and eat it too... Either be for abortion/against welfare, or against abortion/for welfare... and a child should NEVER be a "consequence".

its possible my resoning and logic are just poorly communicated as i am quite conflicted over the matter, as i stated , its a complex problem. I try to look at it logically, but there are always those emotional questions that arise out of each scenario.

also in retrospect i suppose my examples were useless, as i was thinking about things people do that are self-harming more than harming someone else. as using "well murder will always be around", etc.

I know there are scenarios such as a woman being raped which abortion is a very logical choice. And my heart pulls for any woman that has to endure such a horrendous and life shattering ordeal. But at the same time im an emotional being which i always wonder "what about the child?" because it didnt ask for this, it now becomes collateral damage and loses its own life through no fault of its own.

No definitave answer, damned if u do, damned if u dont.

If a sperm is alive, there's going to be a ocean of it in heaven from all the teens masturbating.

Best to prepare for that sight now.

Drezz, if you do believe that a 20 week old fetus is indeed a child I can see how that would be conflicting. However, my issues arise out of these types of facts...

There are plenty of children in adoption centers/foster care that need loving parents, so the excuse of not enough children goes out the window.

Eliminating what many people, and science shows, is not a PERSON is a lot better than a childhood/life full of pain, poverty, possible early death due to malnutrition, child abuse, etc.

I work in education, and I love every child I have... but I see many examples of what improper parents/neglect can do to a child. And although I never think of how they could have "avoided it all" by having been aborted, I do think of the children who are beaten to death by their un-ready parents, those who are tossed away after having been born because the girl/woman freaks out and doesn't know where to turn/what to do, overpopulated countries with little resources that have children of all ages dying because the gov't doesn't believe in either birth control OR abortions... What about those children? Wouldn't it be better to legalize abortion and have unfit parents never become unfit parents than to have a lot of children running around who need love/support/shelter/food, etc? I guess I could possibly be jaded by what I see every day... children whos only meal is the one a school provides, who go home to nobody or an abusive parent... areas where birth control and sex education is sparse is where you see more of these examples... it's a crying shame.

I hate the rape/incest bs because if you really do believe a child is a child it is no less a child because of how it was conceived... however, I do not believe that a small batch of cells is a "human life"... it takes far longer than 20 weeks to become a life... if someone doesn't even know they're pregnant, how can whatever it is inside them be a life?? And I hardly believe any amount of medical advance would allow a 20 week old to be extracted from the womb and kept alive... Even premature babies, who are meant to be born but are early, suffer from great obstacles as well as developmental issues that arise from being born too early, not to mention other issues that come from having to live in a sterile environment for the first few weeks/months of life.

hofera, id go nuts in an environment where i know of kids being abused and not be able to do anything about it. or try and its a never ending conveyor belt of disaster.

hofera and drezz

i was following your exchange. no, i am not a newsvine stalker.

i wrote an horrific joke, and it is one of my jokes i tell, but it is really more of a political statement.

i have a big protest sign, which says,

"outlaw abortion.....because we need more microwave babies!"

yes, horrific and crass, but it does illustrate the point that, i believe hofera was trying to make. while abortion may be ending some form of life, or a future human life, it is far less intrusive, then some whackjob sticking his, or her, newborn in the microwave, and zapping them. unfortunately, this happens with some frequency. in those cases, if nothing could have been different, then i will that those children had been aborted, rather than suffer that fate. sorry, if this was an icky post.

The moment a woman or girl finds out she is pregnant the pregnancy is already beyond a single cell embryo. The heart beat starts at about 21 days past conception.

Rarely does one even know she is pregnant at that point, and the heart is already beating!!

These are the kind of scientific facts that I studied to become prolife. Those who try to say all prolifers are just pushing religious beliefs say that to make themselves feel better. They would be shocked to see the formed humans that are aborted each day. The viability argument doesn't work either because through advanced medicine this magic date has been moved lower and lower. Today a 21 week fetus could survive outside the womb that couldn't have 20 years ago. So now they deserved to be saved because we have figured out how to keep them alive outside the mother today but not then?

I wish religion never got mixed up in it, as it's just an excuse not to look at the facts.

It makes the issue about something it is not- religion.

So your argument is that endocardial tubes are the same as the heart in a newborn infant?

So what the embryo has a beating heart? Sorry but plenty of things have beating hearts and it doesn't make them automatically a person nor does having a heart beat give you the right to use someone elses body against their will.

The viability argument doesn't work either because through advanced medicine this magic date has been moved lower and lower.

And that's a problem why?

So now they deserved to be saved because we have figured out how to keep them alive outside the mother today but not then?

Exactly. Can't be using someones body against their will if you're not inside/attached to it, right? It's now an individual person capable of sustaining and performing all biological functions without needing to be attached to a body for continued life.

And if it can survive outside the body why not try to keep it alive if we have the technology to do so since it's not using her body anymore?

J.Block - I can make cardiac myocytes beat in a petri dish, so this point is not quite valid. I think the whole debate about where human life starts is convoluted and can never be definitively proven. This being said, I am pro-life in the sense that I believe if we are not sure where the start of human life is, we shouldn't meddle with it. However, I am pro-choice in the sense that the woman always makes the choice. Generally, the woman makes the choice when she decides to have intercourse. If she was raped, however, she was never given a choice and should get to make the choice whether or not to keep it.

I think we actually agree with each other. My point about the heart beating at such an early stage was in response to Noah R's saying "single celled embroyo". The single celled embryo exists only at the zygote stage, which is very a short period. By the time it's traveling down the fallopian tube, it is already rapidly dividing into a multi-celled organism.

Generally, the woman makes the choice when she decides to have intercourse.

You can't tell her that just because she had sex she is choosing 9 months of pregnancy. That's for her to decide. Sorry but when my husband and I have intercourse all I'm choosing is to enjoy some pleasure, I am NOT choosing 9 months of pregnancy which is why we use multiple forms of birth control and have money set aside for an abortion just in case.

Here's a good analogy: I drive even though I know there is always the risk of wrecking or being wrecked into, it doesn't mean I'm choosing to be in one. I make sure to drive very very cautiously to decrease my risk but still I know that risk is there. So I have insurance just in case one should happen.

It's none of my business. I am female but do not make decisions for anyone other then myself, and maybe my minor sons to the extent I need to as their mother.

All those who want "less government" should start with this issue. Government needs to stay out of people's personal lives.

Dick-

I don't think we should be sending foreign aid to help them pay for birth control and abortions. Despite my feelings on this medical procedure (see my post below) I am against sending aid to other countries when we are struggling here so desperately. We need to properly educate our children, in sex ed and life education as well as the what they need to learn to one day run the country. Lets keep our money to help our homeless, our uninsured, our hungry, our elderly.

Aid for sex education and contraception is indeed something we should be pursuing. The more education the fewer abortions, etc.. Pro-Lifers' (actually all of us) should be trying to educate people on the importance of 'family planning' and also adoption programs!

Thanks for sharing your story, I respect your position on this!

I'm glad you aren't being naive with your son and his girlfriend. My husband and I played that game off so well to our parents that my parents actually let me move in with him when I was 16. Totally believed we thought "Life begins at conception and a baby would ruin our lives and wouldn't be able to go to college or have a life so sex wasn't worth it since no birth control is 100% effective."

When really we were being little bunnies and had money set aside for an abortion just in case. Just easier to avoid the heartache of arguing with my parents over their beliefs/finding out I'm sexually active and all the drama that would come with it... not to mention they would be stuck up our butts to keep us from being able to have sex lol Kids aren't as dumb as some parents would like to believe, we can figure out how to get what we want. If my parents would have known the truth no way I would have been able to do what I did and I was fully aware of it

Many abortions are the result of birth control not being viewed as an emergency situation. Birth control is expensive too and many can't afford to buy condoms or spermicides. Medically accurate education about sex and birth control is a necessity. Some kids will wait until marriage for sex but most won't. They also need to learn BEFORE they become sexually active whenever that happens. Those girls and women who use hormone birth control need to know that antibiotics can render their birth control useless but doctors don't always tell the patient that. Aspirin can affect your IUD. Diaphragms can be put in wrong. Birth control is 99% effective under PERFECT conditions.

I think waiting until you are ready to have kids to have sex is ridiculous and generally not realistic. Waiting until marriage to have sex isn't going to work most of the time either. You can still have respect for your body and still have sex outside of marriage. There are plenty of people who are NOT suited for marriage. There are plenty of couples who don't want kids or are just plain unsuitable. Should both groups skip sex their whole lives or at least until they are no longer able to procreate?

There are many too restrictive laws for sterilization. Some doctors don't do any kind and religious hospitals all to often don't allow sterilizations. In Missouri, your age plus the number of kids you have has to equal 25. This stupidity results is a LOT of unwanted pregnancies. I knew about one girl, age 20, who was pregnant for the 5th time and would FINALLY be able to get her tubes tied. She obviously wasn't very successful at using birth control. She had asked to have her tubes tied after her 3rd kid. HEr family has to rely on SNAP, medicaid and other programs for support.

I agree with your last 2 paragraphs mostly. Worldwide, EVERYONE NEEDS ACCESS TO BIRTH CONTROL AND EDUCATION. Low and NO cost birth control would do much to reduce unwanted pregnancies.

Abortion needs to be available without harassment of any kind. You don't know what is going on a woman's life. Late term abortions need to be available too. The reasons are varied. Pregnancies can go wrong.

Those people who kill the doctors who do abortions are bringing really bad karma in their lives. You reap what sow. What goes a round, comes around.

Thanks, Lana. I thought I was bit long-winded but felt like I had to get that all out. My son and his girlfriend only hang out when either my husband and I are around or they are at her house with her parents around. That being said, after seeing his reaction at seeing a person his age with a child, i believe him when he says he's going to wait. She is a very conservative girl and doesn't wear revealing clothing. Her mother has the same views on sex that I do: honro yur body, honor the other person's body and know that every time you have sex is the potential to make a baby. We still find it amazing how these two kids have found each other, since they were raised with parents who taught them similarly on this issue and they seem to feel the same way. Most kids think their parents are living in a dream world!

Xena-

My point is that I am teaching my children to wait unil they are ready (equipped?) to be parents. Some people don't ever want children, that is correct. But, I didn't say wait until you WANT children. I said wait until you are prepared to be parent. My ex-husband still isn't prepared to be a parent, despite having children of his own. Waiting until you are prepared to be a parent is waht I said, please re-read the post; you comment that it is ridiculous and unrealistic to wait until you are ready to be a parent before having sex. Had you read what I wrote, you would see that is not what I said. I said PREPARED. I don't think I am being unrealistic or ridiculous to expect that my 16 year old son realises he is not ready to be a parent so he therefore should abstain. He is an intelligent, grounded, focused young man who knows that a child now does not fit into his life. He chooses then to not have sex so he isn't faced with a failed condom or failed hormonal birth control.

Awesome post Xena. 100% agree!

That being said, after seeing his reaction at seeing a person his age with a child, i believe him when he says he's going to wait.

Oh trust me, being a teen parent was the last thing on earth either of us wanted. I would have taken jail over that. We still want nothing to do with parenthood and decided when we first started dating we would remain childfree for life because we know what work it is.

His parents (and mine) thought I was a little conservative angel. I didn't wear revealing clothing because they wouldn't let me and I would be an idiot to ask so that wasn't an issue. We also honored (and still do) our bodies. Just because we use them to pleasure each other doesn't mean we don't honor them. Same goes for wearing revealing clothing, nothing wrong with showing off that body you honor!

and know that every time you have sex is the potential to make a baby.

I know that too which is why I have had the money set aside for the abortion to stop it from becoming a baby lol

I don't think I am being unrealistic or ridiculous to expect that my 16 year old son realises he is not ready to be a parent so he therefore should abstain

As long as you are 100% certain they believe life begins at conception you should be fine. But my parents would have told you there is no doubt in there mind I believed life begins at conception too...

you comment that it is ridiculous and unrealistic to wait until you are ready to be a parent before having sex

I'm also going to comment that it is ridiculous and unrealistic to wait until you are prepared to be a parent before having sex. Almost the same as saying don't do it until you want to be a parent. I didn't wait because I always knew I would never be parent because I never wanted kids so why wait until I'm prepared for parenthood that will never happen?

Can't say that I agree with everything that you say about abortion, but I completely and utterly agree with how you have raised your son. I wish more and more parents were like you and not just "I say you shouldn't have sex so I know you won't have sex" type. Way to be involved!

Mare-

I don't think it's just about access to contraception; it's about trying to teach our children how to properly use contraception. It's also about instructing our children that every sex act can lead to pregenancy (unless you are sterile) and the consequences of unwanted pregnancy. You can teach abstinence without making it a Christian principle and you should teach children how to use condoms properly.

That being said, poverty is an issue. If you can't purchase condoms, you can't even attempt to prevent pregnancy. That's one of the reason teaching abstinence would be effective if done with the right tone and principles. That's why I taught my sons about the consequences: quitting sports, music, other extra-curriculars; getting a minimum wage job to pay child support; having to forego college so you can provide for your childs in-the-moment needs. Instead of saying "don't do it because God said so" isn't effective, even with Christian children.

Anything that contributes to unwanted pregnancies will contribute to the abortion problem since that's the main cause behind it. If we get unwanted pregnancies to fall abortion will fall with them

That's why I taught my sons about the consequences: quitting sports, music, other extra-curriculars; getting a minimum wage job to pay child support; having to forego college so you can provide for your childs in-the-moment needs.

And that's STILL no guarantee abstinence will prevail. That's almost the exact route my parents took with me along with the "abortion is murder" junk. They totally believed I thought life began at conception and if I became pregnant I would become a mom and throw my life away. Little did they know I was quite sexually active and had money set aside for an abortion in case the contraception failed.

If my parents would have told me "I know you might get the urge to have sex before marriage but you want to consider the consequences *insert consequences* We know realistically you could give in to your hormones and if an unwanted pregnancy would occur we will help you decide whether you want an abortion, give the baby up for adoption or become a parent *insert consequences of abortion, adoption, parenthood* Then I would not have lied to them about my sexual activity or beliefs

Yes, Lana. I haven't even gotten in my moral beliefs on abortion with them. I chose not to take that route because I didn't want them hiding from me if they ended up in the position of having to decide whether or not to abort. They know I don't agree with abortion personally but that I feel it is needed in this world. They think it has something to do with my pregnancy history, since I am open with them and have told them about my miscarraiges and they know how difficult their own pregnancies were.

We have very open conversations about all kinds of things. We communicate very well as a family, probably because of how well I communicate with my husband. They all know there is nothing they can't tell me. "Outsiders" are surprised at the amount of information sharing that goes on in my house.

Traci, I wish more parents took your approach. Wish my parents did that's for sure. Kudos to you and your family, your kids are lucky to have parents like you =)

Thanks, Lana. I hope I don't sound preachy, because that isn't my intent. It's just that these seems so basic, so much common sense.

Not at all! I wish you would hit the streets and preach your method lol Common sense is lacking

A soul doesn't enter an egg/sperm as soon as they combine. A soul begins to enter the body about the time, it can live on its own out of the womb. For the soul to live in a body that immature is the equivalent of living in a house that has a couple of boards up.

The unborn can also communicate with the mother. They an also tell the mother that they have changed THEIR mind about their upcoming life. They may want fewer life lessons this go round. They may want to wait until the woman has better finances.

For the soul to live in a body that immature is the equivalent of living in a house that has a couple of boards up.

I LOVE that analogy. May I use it around please? Nice mental picture

Xena-

That's an amazing anology and a great take ont he soul/body concept. If your into movies that get into Christian thinking, there is an old movie that sort of talks about this concept. It's called "The Seventh Sign" with Demi Moore. She plays a pregnant woman and the soul coming into the body at birth is one of the focal points of the movie. it doesn't preach but is along similar types of stories that talk about the Apocolypse.

Not sure I agree with that Barry. I oppose abortion in the sense that it is destroying a life. I don't want it underground as you put it. I want abortion to become a rare procedure, not illegal. It is still too commonly used because people chose to have unprotected sex without thinking of the consequences.

I speak from some experience. I had an unplanned pregnancy when I was 17. No joke, the condom literally broke. I was devastated to find out I was pregnant but chose not to have an abortion, as it is not something I morally agree with in the circumstance I was in. However, I miscarried and still feel the trauma of that miscarraige every year on its anniversary. I am now 39 with children in their teens but still think back to that loss, and the others I had while married.

It is still too commonly used because people chose to have unprotected sex without thinking of the consequences.

I don't think I want those people reproducing anyway if that's the case lol But in all seriousness, pregnancy and children should not be used as punishments for someone making a mistake by having sex for pleasure and pleasure only regardless if contraception is used or not. All kids brought into this world should be wanted, IMO

When I was a senior in HS I had a pregnancy scare too (the only one in my entire life so far) and to this day I don't know for sure if it was just a late period and false positive test or if I miscarried but luckily my period came days before my appointment at the clinic so the abortion wasn't needed after all. However, I feel nothing but relief all the way around when I think back to this situation. No painful invasive expensive procedure for me nor do I have a 6 year old running around which is even better. See, everyone is different and I think actually wanting to give birth and have the embryo growing inside you become a baby is a big part of it

I agree that we may not want those people reproducing but I am not saying make them stay pregnant as punishment. What I meant by it was give people the resources to not become pregnant, teach them the consequences, adn it is less likely to happen. Planned Parenthood gives free condoms, at least in my area. If all children were taught sex education, we would not have people who didn't know the consequences and who didn't know that they can get free condoms.

You know, I am from Long Island, where we recently had the huge SAT cheating debacle. These same rich kids, who paid over $2K for someone else to take the SAT. are thesome of the same kids having unprotected sex. It is not only poor peole having unprotected sex.

My pregnancy scare came when I was in college, as I graduated a year early. I did what I was "supposed" to do as a sexually active teen- I used a condom. S$%t happens and I got pregnant. While I do mourn the loss of that pregnancy, I also know that it was not time for me to be pregnant and that it was "for the best" as they say. It enabled me to finish college and get a good job. Your last statement is perfect, Lana, by the way. You have to want to be a parent and be ready to be a parent, emotionally. Save for the rich, no one is ever really financially ready to be a parent.

According to my doctor, there a very few medical reasons to abort over birthing at this stage of pregnancy.

Which is one of the reasons why late term abortions are so rare. Only about 1% done after 20 weeks.

In the end it should be up to the woman if she wants to continue exposing herself to the risk of the pregnancy but I feel a viable fetus should be given the chance of survival outside the womb instead of being aborted if there is nothing wrong with the fetus.

Good point, J.Block. The difference, I think, is that the woman didn't choose to be murdered but has the right to choose not to be pregnant. There is another article on MSNBC today about a man about to be brought up on murder charges down south soemwhere (can't remember the details) because the woman he killed was 2 months pregnant. If you murder the mother, the baby (fetus) has no chance to survive. Since a pregnancy cannot be removed from one woman's body and implanted into another, we have no choice but to have abortion as legal. Women have a right to not be pregnant if they don't want to be. That is wahy sex ed is SO important and teaching all options related to preventing pregnancy, birth control and abstinence.

Bad analogy...For one, eagle eggs aren't using anyones body against their will and for two, potential eagles (as well as actual eagles of course) are endangered unlike humans.

she is choosing what to do with her body and another body.

It's not "another body" since it is absolutely completely dependent on the womans body

Didn't anyone think it was odd that Lacey's Law was passed in CA after the death of Lacey Peterson?

No, I think if someone kills or causes the death of a fetus agianst the mothers wishes they should be punished big time. You don't have the right to destroy someone elses property agianst their will even if they were just going to throw it away.

Ex: If my neighbors know I'm getting new windows they have no right to go break my old ones since I was just going to throw them out when I got the new ones anyway.

Also, I'm pretty sure she was far along in the pregnancy and couldn't just "walk into an abortion clinic" since after 24 weeks there has to be a risk to the mother or a defect with the fetus to obtain one. Only about 1% are done past 20 weeks to give you some perspective.

I'm not too sure I want to debate someone who equates a developing human, distinct from all others before or after, to an old window, but I thought I'd let you know that bald eagles were taken off the endangered species list in 2007.

Oh, and by the way, the child conceived by someone who doesn't want it didn't ask to be conceived, so it is abhorrent that you would say it is using a body against their will. They didn't ask to be conceived!

The point I thought was good was the laws being enacted against people murdering pregnant women, not the eagle thing. i just wanted to be clear!

Actually, the heartbeat argument is used when people say the embryo at that stage is just a "clump of cells". It's just a way to point out the scientific facts of development, not to assign "feelings" to the developing fetus.

And sperm and egg cells can't be "

alive".

Interesting assertion. I don't recall any reference to that at all, but plenty of push to force a woman who is considering an abortion to see a sonogram, listen to the heartbeat, etc., in a pretty transparent attempt to convince her she's trying to commit murder.

And, just look at the posts here - I've already seen the "beating heart" argument made to tug at the heartstrings, as it were, and convince someone that abortion is tantamount to murdering a child.

Actually, the heartbeat argument is used when people say the embryo at that stage is just a "clump of cells".

Where did someone say embryos are just "clumps of cells"? And they are just clumps of cells with a heartbeat

And sperm and egg cells can't be "alive".

Ohhh so they are dead then? They are very much alive, you shouldn't pick and choose which scientific facts you want to follow.

King V-

I wasn't using the heartbeat arguement to tug at heartstrings; I was simply stating my opinion as to when "life" begins. The minute I heard the heartbeat of my kids was the "wow, I'm really pregnant" moment If you noticed, at least in my posts, I support a woman's right to choose, despite my personal objection to abortion. No one should be forced to submit to what you refer (sonogram, heartbeat, etc.) to stop them from having an abortion. They should be counselled as to the surgical part and to the complications that can ensue.

Heartbeat talk aside, I do realise that this in and of itself does not equate life. After all, how many people are kept alive on machines every year with no brain function? I understand you are making generalities but not every Christian and not every person who objects to abortion has the same feelings you are insinuating. I believe my daughter or my sons' girlfriends, rape victims, etc. should have the right to choose. I also believe that no one should be kept alive on machines; I certainly have directed my family to "pull the plug" and have a written directive as such in case I end up in the situation. I am not a "kick 'em to the curb" kind of person and would (have) done anything I could to help people in need, yes, even complete strangers, even when my own funds were low.

As to anencephaly, a very good friend of mine had a child diagnosed with a similar condition while in utero. She was told that it was 100% certain her baby would die inside her if she did not abort. She choose to carry her baby as long as was necessary for the child to die. When her daughter died, she choose to have an epidural c-section so she can see the birth of this child. NOW I am trying to tug at heart strings. No one can know what they would do if faced with the situation. She choose to do a noble thing, in my opinion, and carry this child for as long as she was able.

Also, to back up Lana, sperm and egg cells are very alive. If a man is impotent it could be because he has sperm cells with no activity, meaning dead. Alive doesn't mean "with a heart" or "with a brain." Flowers, trees, shrubs, etc, are alive but don't qualify as having heart beats or brain activity.

You know, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. While Lana and I agree on some things, we disagreed on others. But, being rude and insulting isn't the way to effective debate. I don't recall anywhere in my posts did I use the term murder for abortion, and I believe I was the one who brought up the heartbeat issue. Again, heartbeat being my opinion as to when life begins. Even scientists can't really answer that question. Is it at heartbeat? Brain activity? First breath? Again, to speak from experience, lung funtion begins in utero. With my sons, I had an amniocentisis at 34 weeks pregnant to detect the presence of a chemical that the lungs give off when they are functioning. This was because I had to come off the meds that were controlling my pre-term labor. Guess what? Both my kids had the chemical present in the amniotic fluid, meaning their lungs were working. So, those who say it is not a child until born, think again. No one know sfor sure when this chemical begins to be present so this could have been there for weeks.

As to the "feeling pain" issue, per Dr. Paul Ranalli, neurologist, a fetus begins developing the pain receptors at 7 weeks. This process is complted by 20 weeks. At any given time between weeks 7 and 20, the process could be complete (even medicine isn't sure) a fetus will feel pain.

Again, I support a woman's right to choose but if "facts" against abortion are going to be presented, let them be correct. Unless we want to go back to the dark ages, women must have the right to choose or we become property. No human being, born or in utero, should be referred to as property.

I meant the heartbeat argument is used in the abortion debate in general, not just on this board. I have never used that argument to indicate the developing fetus has feelings as you asserted.

Nice posts Traci!

In regards to fetal pain, that doctors beliefs are not in sync with the vast majority of the medical and scientific community who have come to the conclusion that: fetuses at the 24-week stage of development do not possess the wiring to transmit pain signals from the body to the brain's cortex. Even after 24 weeks, the fetus likely exists in a state of "continuous sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation," due to the presence of chemicals such as adenosine in the surrounding amniotic fluid.

I highly suggest you do some searches on fetal neurological development so you can read up on the mainstream research and studies that have been done.

Murdering children never has been too hard.

some put up a hell of a fight.

Sperms, embryos, unviable fetuses= potential children

Newborns, viable fetuses, toddlers, 8 year olds, etc= children

This article has nothing to do with children

If this all knowing God didn't want his potential children killed he wouldn't be knocking up women who he knows will only go get an abortion. You know he is actually the biggest abortion provider, read up on how many pregnancies end in natural miscarriage

I think it's a good wake up call for us. Notice the countries that ban abortion also ban contraception. Banned for mostly the same reasons. If we would ban abortion I'm sure birth control will follow suit. Hence all the fear of the "personhood movement"

You do have a good point though, behind pretty much every abortion is an unwanted pregnancy so it only makes sense that preventing that will lower abortions

"Personhood movement"? Sorry, but that concept was already a given even before the Age of Enlightenment. Need to clarify terms: Sperm -and ova, for that matter- are "gametes", living cells that if joined (that is, a sperm and an ova/egg) conceive a uniquely new individual. This is known as "conception" and it takes place even before the new life is implanted in the uterine wall. "Embryo" means "offspring", which is what children are. Viable, meaning able to survive, isn't a qualification for deeming one a child/offspring or not. Nor does it offer protection necessarily in our current system for one's life. Many "viable" offspring are aborted, unfortunately, in spite of their ability to survive outside the womb. The new human life, from the moment of conception, is already "one of us". This was observed by Nobel Prize winning geneticist Dr. Lejunne, who is credited with identifying the cause of "Down's syndrome". Because he also happened to be pro-life, he is rarely mentioned today except in some science text books who only acknowledge his contribution in the science of genetics. He didn't have a problem with Down's syndrome individuals, though some do today. They are actually quite loving children/adults when you get to know them. Yes, it does require some actual effort to raise them, but so does the rearing of any child. BTW: God does not "knock up" (vulgar term!) women, nor does God delight in the destruction of life. Yes, miscarriages (=spontaneous abortions) sometimes happen, as nature takes its course, but not because we have interfered with that course as in an induced abortion. Does this article have anything to do with children? You bet! And adults, teenagers, toddlers, etc. Wouldn't you want to be included in something that impacted your life -such as the taking of it? The embryos -our "little 'Bros"- have as much right to see this earth and sky as you or I.

Oh I see sperm and eggs don't count as children to you because they didn't "join" yet. I don't see how that's anyway different from not counting a fetus as a person until it can survive outside the womb. You say "The sperm and egg have to join before it makes a new individual!" even though every sperm is it's own unique individual. Like I said, I would not be here if sperm me would have died on a sock

Only 1% are done beyond 20 weeks so it is rare for a viable fetus to be aborted.

Wouldn't you want to be included in something that impacted your life -such as the taking of it?

Not if I wasn't aware of my existence and was using someones body agianst their will

The embryos -our "little 'Bros"- have as much right to see this earth and sky as you or I.

LMAO they are hardly our "little Bros" unless you want to include sperms too. Millions of out little bros are killed in a single squirt. So upsetting =(

And the so-called "legal" ones wreak as much destruction and damage on women and children.

Lie

I would pose a different train of thought: what if we didn't have to have any abortions at all?

Definitely trying to work towards that. Stop the unwanted pregnancies and you will stop most abortions. There's a place to start

It will when it realizes that behind this euphamism is a human being who has a fundamental right to life like his/her mother, father and the rest of us.

None of us can use someone elses body against their even if it is for our survival. Ex: can't force someone to donate a kidney to save your life just because they are the only match. I didn't have the right to use my moms body against her will as a fetus and I certainly don't have it now.

Without that right, all the other rights and "rights" cannot exist.

Lie and curious how you come to that conclusion.

What is done to the human in utero who is not "wanted" would not be done to an animal!

Lie again wow We kill all kinds of animals for food and coats not to mention all the germs and bugs we kill.

He/She is a baby, is already "here"

Wrong. Potential baby and it has been here since it was a wiggling sperm in it's dads testicles.

like the rest of us former embryos (="offspring"), fetuses ("young ones"), infants, toddlers, children, adolescents, etc.

We are also former sperm and eggs. If my dad would have decided to take care of himself instead of having sex with my mom the night I was conceived little sperm me would have died a horrible slow death, drying out on a sock

They understood that the child in utero was included in that equation

The vast majority of scholars and constitutional experts disagree with you

which the abortion industries would like us to ignore the value and dignity of each and every human being

Lie again. I find actual people to be extremely valuable. Just not potential people. Sperms, embryos, fetuses I could care less about. Newborns, toddlers etc I will do everything in my power to protect

A person is a person NO MATTER HOW SMALL."

SO TRUE! However, a fetus is not a person just a potential one

I think the vast majority of scholars and constitutional experts -not to mention scientists, past and present, would disagree with you. You also seem to have a hangup about the beautiful (or so it was meant to be) act that brought you into being. No, you are not a "former sperm" (as per Hollywood in genre like"Look Who's Talking"). Nor are you are former egg. Each of these cells ceases to be what it was -a 23 chromosomed gamete- when it was joined to the other at the moment of conception when a new life came into being. YOU would not have been dying, "drying out on a sock"; YOU would never have been born (ala "It's a wonderful life"). If you had been aborted and left "drying out on a sock" (more likely in a container), then poor little you would have been snuffed out before coming to birth. But it still would have been YOU. I see you don't have much of a background of history and how our Founders thought, for if you did, you'd agree with what I said about the humanity of the unborn child being a given for them. Just see what laws existed at their times and the penalty for anyone who would have harmed a child in utero. A pregnant woman was a woman "with child". Well, if you are "with child", you aren't "with monkey" or "with pear tree" or "with rock". You were carrying a.... CHILD. Even the Hippocratic oath forbade inducing abortion. Oh, sure, they've changed it for today's docs, but the ORIGINAL oath forbade it. It went along with "do no harm". Inducing abortion was seen as doing harm to both patients -parent and child. For that matter, the fetus is a patient. When one is carrying through with the pregnancy to term, do they not have checkups? Sometimes even surgery or medication can be/is administered to the little patient in the womb. No one operates on a "potential" baby, but a living one! And it is true, what we do to living humans in the womb, we would not do to animals. Even if we use an animal's hide or flesh for clothing or food, it is supposed to be done in a humane way. Ever heard of kosher laws for killing animals? Try watching some footage of 3-D ultrasounds. You will never look at a baby the same way again. I hope you find peace.

I think the vast majority of scholars and constitutional experts -not to mention scientists, past and present, would disagree with you

Just because you think it doesn't make it true. I highly suggest you do your research

No, you are not a "former sperm"

Yes I was.

Nor are you are former egg

Yes I was. Couldn't be "me" without that specific sperm and specific egg meeting.

when it was joined to the other at the moment of conception when a new life came into being

Wrong. That sperm and egg were certainly alive. All they did was combine

YOU would never have been born

Embryo/fetus/newborn me would never have been born

then poor little you would have been snuffed out before coming to birth

I see no difference between sperm me and embryo me being snuffed out before birth. Regardless, I wouldn't be here.

I see you don't have much of a background of history and how our Founders thought

Nah I think that's you.

Just see what laws existed at their times and the penalty for anyone who would have harmed a child in utero

Harming a child in utero agianst the mothers will should be met with harsh punishment. No one has a right to go destroying another persons property, especially their potential child that they fully intend to become an actual child.

A pregnant woman was a woman "with child"

Nothing more than a phrase. Means nothing

Even if we use an animal's hide or flesh for clothing or food, it is supposed to be done in a humane way.

There's that perfect world again lol

Try watching some footage of 3-D ultrasounds.

I've seen them and personally they gross me out big time.

You will never look at a baby the same way again.

If anything seeing those 3D ultra sounds just made me want to have something like that inside my body even less (if that was possible).

I hope you find peace.

Oh I have plenty of it, no worries.

If you had been aborted, you would not be participating in this discussion.

Like I said, if my dad would have snapped one off instead of having sex with my mom on the night I was conceived I wouldn't be here participating in this discussion. Your point is??

simply because they happen to be living in someone's womb.

Um yeah, plenty good reason. None of us has the right to live inside someones body

It wounds women and reduces them to objects.

LMAO No, forcing a woman to be an incubator (an object) and give birth (a wound to the entire body not to mention v-jay) to a kid she doesn't want is closer to that statement

What would you tell this child? Sorry, but I'll ignore you because you weren't wanted?

Well since they are an actual child now I would hold their life just as valuable as any other actual childs life and wouldn't draw any distinctions.

How silly is the argument that pushes to continue this barbaric practice!

How silly are all your ridiculous arguments (especially after reading this article) into making it ok to try and force women to be brood mares and slaves to their uterus. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant she will find a way to end it risks be damned. Desperate people do desperate things

No one in this day and age should have to resort to aborting their children.

You do realize we don't live in a perfect world right? Judging from your comments seems like you might be on a different planet so maybe over there you guys are close to ending unwanted pregnancies but we still have a way to go over here unfortunately

such as respecting every human being, even the little guys in the womb.

Yeah I still consider fetuses to be potential human beings like sperms. All you did was find a different point in the life cycle than I did to decide when it becomes an actual "person". So we might as well respect our little guys in the testicles too, there are religions who would agree