Originally Posted by Hessah
|
Or in a more related issue, if a to-be-mother needs to have an abortion (if you call that murder) to save her life. She may be able to get better and deliver more children in the future.
Is that still wrong?
|
Hessah, i believe i stated something about this earlier. let me find the post... ah. here it is:
|
Originally Posted by Jikanu
|
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. :/
|
Also, i'd like to emphasize the "Considered" part.
@Loveless: While i agree it's a horrible situation to be in, once you have sex, you accept every single risk that comes with it, including STD's and pregnancy. While it's "unfair", to a degree, sex exists for procreation, and although using it for pleasure is a personal decision, and i dont have a problem with it, you take all risks that come with it. If you DO get pregnant, there ARE alternatives. There are plenty of families who cant get pregnant, or would be happy to take in a child. Even if that doesnt work, as i said before, an adoption agency or foster family offers at least a 1% chance at happiness, a chance to live. Abortion takes away all possible chances.