I want to ask your opinions on abortion, as I don't think we've really debated this before! When does, in your opinion, life begin? Is any abortion murder? Or is it not fair for a child to be created when he/she is, infact, unwanted?
I wasn't an unwanted child... but if I grew up the result of a real "accident" - I don't mean a couple who had been together for a while but a teenage pregnancy or a one-night stand and was, indeed, an unwanted child - then I'd rather not have been born at all!
Indeed if the parents were not capable of raising a child then an abortion may be the kinder thing to do.
When it comes to babies who are going to have a disability I'm really not sure... Coventry Uni does have a lot of disabled people on roll and it's been an eye opener for the year I've been there... I always worry now that something's going to happen to me and I'm going to end up with something ampuated or I'll be in a wheelchair - but it might not bother others.
Where do you stand on abortion, and why?
Abortion: Good or bad?
My mum, bless her, found out she was pregnant with me after she and my dad, bless him, had split up. It was a messy split-up and they still had feelings for each other apparently, so they gave it a go together to raise me and my brother when he arrived 2 years later. They are still together, despite the misfortunes which have occured in my Dad's health in the last 5 years.
In my heart, I am against it, as I believe life begins at conception. And I am not religious at all or in the slightest before anyone asks, although I could understand why you might think it from that statement.
But in my head, I know it is impractical. There are enough teenage charva mothers brining up the next generation of louts, and we frankly don't need any more. For those who complain that non-whites and immigrants are the problem in British society, I say take your frigging blinkers off and enter the world of Kappa and charva.
When it comes to disability, I am even further torn. I would appreciate hearing other people's opinions on that to help me make my mind up.
In my heart, I am against it, as I believe life begins at conception. And I am not religious at all or in the slightest before anyone asks, although I could understand why you might think it from that statement.
But in my head, I know it is impractical. There are enough teenage charva mothers brining up the next generation of louts, and we frankly don't need any more. For those who complain that non-whites and immigrants are the problem in British society, I say take your frigging blinkers off and enter the world of Kappa and charva.
When it comes to disability, I am even further torn. I would appreciate hearing other people's opinions on that to help me make my mind up.
-
Dr Lobster*
- Posts: 2106
- Joined: Sat 30 Aug, 2003 20.14
as far as disability is concerned, i think when a child has severe mental abnormailties which will mean they will never have any quality of life, and will almost certainly spend the rest of their lives plugged into machines laying in some bed, there is no point in allowing this pregnancy to continue. there is too much suffering in this world already and i think it is curel to bring a life such as that into the world.
-
MrTomServo
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Mon 11 Aug, 2003 14.15
- Location: California
My family keeps it simple. Abortion as birth control is very wrong. Abortion out of necessity to save any life is regrettable, but necessary.
-
James Martin
- Posts: 1011
- Joined: Sun 15 Feb, 2004 19.26
Hmm... but what about lesser disabilities such as being wheelchair-bound? I know a lot of peeps who are in wheelchairs yet are pefectly sharp mentally. Indeed even spastics (don't like to use the word but I hope you know what I mean) can be very sharp mentally.Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:as far as disability is concerned, i think when a child has severe mental abnormailties which will mean they will never have any quality of life, and will almost certainly spend the rest of their lives plugged into machines laying in some bed, there is no point in allowing this pregnancy to continue. there is too much suffering in this world already and i think it is curel to bring a life such as that into the world.
On this one, I'm very torn.
I agree with Rob that prevention is better than cure though - abortion isn't a birth control and I even think the morning-after pill is wrong. I'm not against the contraceptive pill totally - my ex used it - but I don't agree with altering your body chemistry like that, I know they're a pain but at least condoms put a physical block in the way. I'd rather use a condom than force a partner onto the pill... I think the problem is that girls don't trust men to be responsible for contraception.
-
Ed Hammond
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.59
- Location: London
I don't think that those on the extremes of the debate - saying either that all abortion is wrong or that it's a woman's right to make the choice irrespective of any other consideration - are correct, as with so many issues.
And a great deal of balls has been propagated on this topic recently. For example, the recent photographs from the 3D ultrasound imaging which have been appearing in the press - apparently showing babies dancing, sucking their thumbs and looking around the womb at the age of 12 weeks - don't show any evidence of sentient thought or understanding of a sense of self, or independent thought even, but merely the random movement of muscles. A baby's nervous system, or brain, simply wouldn't account for anything more advanced. To use those pictures as evidence to show that abortion should be much more restricted wouldn't be a sensible or justified approach.
On the other hand, recent advances in medical technology have made it possible for babies to survive after more and more premature births. The Abortion Act, framed in the 1960s, could not have taken this into account and the current legislation, allowing for abortion up until 26 weeks and in some circumstances up to the moment before birth, is probably not satisfactory and needs reform.
Whether this will involve a reduction in the period to permit abortion only up to 20 weeks remains to be seen. Personally, I think any kind of arbitrary cut-off period is bound to promote difficulty. But what other technique is there? If you accept that birth control as a concept is permitted, and that abortion is in some circumstances the only way for this to be carried out (and there are always situations - for example, after a rape, or where birth would cause profound mental and/or physical ramifications both for the child and the mother - where even a pro-lifer would admit that the case for banning abortion isn't made), then you have to accept that a balance has to be made and a line to be drawn somewhere. It's finding that's balance that's the tricky part.
And a great deal of balls has been propagated on this topic recently. For example, the recent photographs from the 3D ultrasound imaging which have been appearing in the press - apparently showing babies dancing, sucking their thumbs and looking around the womb at the age of 12 weeks - don't show any evidence of sentient thought or understanding of a sense of self, or independent thought even, but merely the random movement of muscles. A baby's nervous system, or brain, simply wouldn't account for anything more advanced. To use those pictures as evidence to show that abortion should be much more restricted wouldn't be a sensible or justified approach.
On the other hand, recent advances in medical technology have made it possible for babies to survive after more and more premature births. The Abortion Act, framed in the 1960s, could not have taken this into account and the current legislation, allowing for abortion up until 26 weeks and in some circumstances up to the moment before birth, is probably not satisfactory and needs reform.
Whether this will involve a reduction in the period to permit abortion only up to 20 weeks remains to be seen. Personally, I think any kind of arbitrary cut-off period is bound to promote difficulty. But what other technique is there? If you accept that birth control as a concept is permitted, and that abortion is in some circumstances the only way for this to be carried out (and there are always situations - for example, after a rape, or where birth would cause profound mental and/or physical ramifications both for the child and the mother - where even a pro-lifer would admit that the case for banning abortion isn't made), then you have to accept that a balance has to be made and a line to be drawn somewhere. It's finding that's balance that's the tricky part.