People say 'Yes' to this?
 

This is a highly sensitive topic; you probably should place a disclaimer. There are many who feel strongly about this.

I'm going to move this to Mature Discussions as it is a sensitive topic.

Could someone find a way to display this without using Facebook? My curiosity is piqued, but not enough to sign up.

This is not the same video but it's similar.

Had to put it in a spoiler because the picture on the video might be disturbing for some.


--

I dunno.

I'm not against abortion because I think it's better to not bring a new life to the world if you're not gonna be prepared to look after it, but if making abortion illegal would make people think twice about having unprotected sex, then yeah, illegalising abortion might not be a bad idea.

But in reality, I wonder if it would really make a difference to how people think, anyway.

Ah, that's what I thought it might be. An appeal to emotion about a medical procedure. Gotcha.

Hahaha, I did think about that. The music and camera angles is kinda misleading.

They should have a sad and moving video of all the abandoned homeless kids and kids doing the "wrong" things because their parents didn't go through an abortion and just irresponsibly brought them to the world.

Then let's see what people think.

I agree with that.

Not all almost aborted kids turn into criminals.
And not all people consider abortion because they can't take care of it, but simply because they just don't want it.
And there are always alternatives if you don't want to keep the baby, like maybe giving it to a family who wants a baby but cannot have one due to some medical issues.

And there are also cases where an abortion is the better option.

Believe it or not, getting an abortion is usually not as easy as saying that a person simply doesn't want their babies. People wanting to get an abortion usually have some conditions they have to fulfill (according to their state law) before they can have one.

If what the statistic in the movie is true, I doubt the already overloaded child adoption system can handle another 1.3 million babies.

That's also true, not only due to the law thing, but because of the emotional trauma that goes with abortion (or so I've heard).

If they can easily (emotion wise) go through abortion just cos they didn't want it, then that would have probably been the better option for the baby.

But what would of happened, if it was an unwanted baby, as in a rape victim? It could cause more harm to baby after birth. There is also the conciquences that the mother wouldn't cherish the baby, and would with a wanted baby.

Well-put, even though that the father really has no say over the decision, even if he is still around.

It is my opinion that if someone wants an abortion, let them.
Who are we to say who can and cant do what to their bodies ?
It is because of those views that I resent the religeous fascists who believe that we should all follow their way of living.

Their body isn't the only thing their harming.

If by that you mean the baby then I still say it is her body untill the baby is born, as thats what I believe.
If by that you mean her mind then I would still classify that as her body.
If you mean something else then please elaborate.

I ment the baby.
I classify the baby and the womans body as two different things.

The "baby" can't even think or breath yet when abortions occur..

Its still basically a bunch of cells still trying to form this thing, isn't it? O_o Well.. I mean there's kind of a shape of a baby but its still not really.. human yet. (I know. I sound stupid, I can't put what I am thinking into words, apparently..)

Are you trying to say it's not a "living being" yet?

I suppose.. but any time someone says that, almost everyone disagrees.

I was trying to figure out another way of saying that and kind of trying to explain why. :/

I'm lazy. Leaving this discussion.

^ No.
As every single cell is living. Every step you take you kill stuff.
I think she means that it is not collectively considered a living being.
It is alive in the sense that it is not dead.
However I believe that it cannot be considered seperate from it's mother until it is born.

Some people believes it becomes a living being once the sperm meets the egg, others when the baby is born. So if you believe it's when the sperm meets the egg, then abortion would be murder to you. If not, then abortion isn't. (Those are the two main arguments right?) And I believe it's when the sperm meets the egg, which is why I'm against abortion.

Edit: took me awhile to type that G__G.
@BDEX so would you also consider the egg as part of the hen?

It all comes down to when you consider the clump of tissues to move from fetus to baby.

Edit:

If you consider that the point, then nature (or God, whatever actor you wish to chose) kills trillions all on it's own before it even implants into the uterus.

What?
Explain please.

How much do I have to explain? I'm sure there are some good online resources to show how the reproductive system works. Once the sperm and egg get together, the zygote has to move through the fallopian tubes and then implant on the lining of the uterus.

Then where does the "trillions of death" come from?

...It's called a miscarriage o-o

And yes I would call the egg part of the hen, until the egg is external from the mother.

I never thought that having an abortion is "wrong" because you're killing something, it's "wrong" because you're not taking responsibility for your actions. Which means if a baby was concieved by a rapist, I think the woman has every right to abort it.

We kill things everyday, a bug, a cow for beef, a pig for pork, a plant for vegetable... you better not be eating an egg coz that's killing a chick.

But yeah I agree with what Loki said, in the end it's up to the person living the situation to decide.

And whether the baby is a separate entity or not, the mother is most probably the one to look after it in the end, so you can't discount her decisions.

Adoption Agencies, anyone?

1% chance of the baby reaching happiness someday > 0% chance, in my belief.

personally, i think abortion should only be considered if the mother's life is directly at risk. there ARE adoption agencies out there. and besides, once you've had sex, you know what can happen. it's one of the risks you have to accept when you preform the act. :/

If we could sustain the population, I might agree with you, but we're pushing it like it is. We're bursting at the seams and we're going to hit starvation levels fairly soon, unless with come up with some sort of technological marvel in food production/distribution.

You do know that the USA has more food then we even need? We distribute more food around the world then any country, but we also waste the most food than any other country.
And I agree with Jikanu, I'd rather have a chance of living a happy life than not living at all.

Logistics.


Maybe if you can get that food to them in-time without going through the political, financial and manpower / time hoops.


I don't like the idea of abortion either. Especially some people who seem to treat it as a form of contraception. But I do think it's a necessary 'evil', for lack of a better term.

Adoption agencies don't work. Why do you think there are so many kids in foster homes right now and that parents that want to adopt have to go to a foreign country?

It's not because of a lack of kids.

How is this even an argument? People know that they can die in a car crash but that doesn't stop them from driving.

cars werent made specifically for crashing. Sex was made for the specific reason of reproduction. Using it for other reasons is fine, but you accept a risk when you do.

@Hrae: I think the main population issue could be solved through sex ed and empowering women in nations such as India. in places like China, it's a bit different, though. But abortion isnt really the best solution, due to it being considered unethical, immoral, and the fact that it's only really viable in majorly developed countries where population isnt a huge issue.

You may consider it as such, but that doesn't make it so. Prevention is the best solution, but a lot of these involve kids too young and dumb to really understand the consequences.

Did you see the purely factual part of my comment? Developed countries dont have such a huge population issue; women's empowerment in countries in India can help massively. Also, i forget the name, but there was a country that had one of the world's highest populations, and started a huge birth control campaign that lowered it to the point where it was sustainable again... As for your prevention assertion, wouldnt TRUE prevention be keeping them from getting pregnant in the first place?

I think I was unclear.

That was the bit I was referring to when I said "You may consider it as such, but that doesn't make it so."

And prevention does mean not getting pregnant in the first place. The only way to make that absolute is to spay and neuter teenagers, which I might consider as an option. People keep saying "eugenics" like it's a completely bad thing...

you still havent replied to the parts of my statement that were purely fact.... women's empowerment, etc...

@Loki- once again, that's a bit of a different situation. i was referring to the people who have abortions because they dont want to deal with the baby, or because they're not sure financially. when there's a 100% chance that the baby will not live, it's totally different.

And at that, i would like you to know that im totally sorry for your loss.