There are Republicans who want to curtail, even restrict abortion in the United States. They use the pretext that life begins at conception & the act of murder is murder. There were some states who even tried to pass the personhood law, giving human status to pre-borns from the first stage of conception. There are even politicians who want to outlaw abortion altogether, even in cases of rape & incest. These politicians want to turn back the hand of time when women & girls had very few reproductive rights. These politicians say on its face that they value life; however, there is an underlying purpose to they want to implement more draconian abortion laws. Women & girls have reproductive freedom as never before & THAT threatens more ultraconservative, reactionary, & retrogressive politicians who believe that women & girls shouldn't be as sexually autonomous & independent as they are. Your thoughts?
Whoso ever says that abortion is good is a murderer.
Abortion isn't murder. It is a sound medical procedure that has been performed since ancient times. In fact, abortion was seen a normal procedure among certain classes because contraception or birth control was rudimentary at best. Abortion was, is & always shall be. No protests by fundamentalist & fanatical religionists will ever stop abortion. No totalitarian draconian laws & mandates will ever stop abortion. The only way to stop abortion is to invent a foolproof contraceptive which will be effective at near 100% percent!
Hi, Gus, I do not take abortion to mean taking birth control measures to prevent pregnancies. I mean after the foetus is formed, you terminate it. Is that a right mental attitude? Thanks.
“Abortion isn’t murder”. Why? Because some people have decided some heartbeats/lives are worth living and others not. It’s dehumanization that also leads to the growing mass shootings we experience now. The rhetoric that sometimes celebrates abortions, is gross. It desensitizes people into believing some lives are worth more than others. Not much different than a mass shooter deciding who will live and who will die.
This isn’t a republican versus democrat issue. It’s a real issue for real people- stop making it about politics. It’s about morality.
I'll ask you the same question that so far I haven't been able to get an answer to.
Why should the law be based solely on your personal beliefs?
Sorry, but it is political because pro-lifers are using politics to enforce their religious and moral values upon those who don't share them. That makes it political
Of course pro-lifers purport that the issue of abortion is solely political but that is a subterfuge or pretext. The TRUE reason for pro-lifer's animus against abortion boils down to religious belief or rather fundamentalist religious belief. Liberal religionists believe in women's reproductive freedoms such as birth control & abortion whereas fundamentalist & fanatical religionists believe that women's reproductive anatomy dictates that sex = procreation & that any form of reproductive freedom is unnatural. Pro-lifers typically are against birth control as well as abortion. Pro-lifers don't want any "interference" in reproduction.
Its a matter of their being against MURDER. They are for God's presence at the time of conception. It is respect for God and LIFE.
God has nothing to with this. God is your imaginary friend and not everyone else’s.
Well, you are not an imaginary figure to God ...
and you should be thankful for that.
You say you value freedom, yet you use your personal religious beliefs as justification for labeling abortion as murder and support creating laws that would label those who participate in abortion as murderers. Further, you assert your personal knowledge of what God wants, sees, knows, and believes as though it is fact, even though others will assert the opposite, also claiming knowledge of what God wants.
You are personally demonstrating why religion has no place for n government and should never be used as justification for laws.
Honestly, I really don't think most Republicans give a rip about the topic of abortion. Its just a very VERY volatile talking point that revs up their conservative base. If a politician actually cares about the topic, it is highly-likely that they are an uber-conservative, as well. Pence is a good example of that kind of politician.
You know how they paint the picture... How those of us who are for freedom of choice are FOR murdering babies, which is the most ridiculous, frustrating accusation ever, I swear!
Don't tell me that I don't care about babies... Here's the kicker, though: I ALSO CARE about the girl making the choice. Mostly, I care about the reason why she feels that she has to make that choice, and there are so many of them.
I think its high-time we started addressing the real reasons why abortions happen, in order to diminish them - instead of trying to force contradictory ideals down each other's throats. There are so many things we CAN agree on to change.
Once we get those things nailed and are able to observe the results - if it turns out that we don't like them - THEN we can talk about whether or not we should remove a basic freedom through law.
This topic is so disturbing I am having trouble formulating an intelligent response. It is very challenging for me to accept that some groups of people feel they have the right to dictate to other groups of people what they can and cannot do with their own bodies.
Regarding this sentence in your post - "There were some states who even tried to pass the personhood law, giving human status to pre-borns from the first stage of conception. " , all things being equal (not), perhaps men should be incarcerated for jerking off and wasting sperm required for conception?
ShyeAnne, it is beyond disturbing. There are some Americans who have Dark Age thinking. They pretextually contend that abortion is "murder" & that "life" should be saved when in actuality, they don't want women & teenage girls to be sexually autonomous & independent. Such advocates want to control & even eliminate female sexuality unless it is traditional female sexuality i.e. being subservient/submissive in a marital role as wife & mother, nothing else. It is analogous to the handmaiden's tale where the sole purpose of females is to have children & as many children as possible. Yes, some politicians want to create an actual handmaiden's tale in America. They are threatened by women's sexual & reproductive freedom & want to repress women's sexual & reproductive role into strict, ultratraditional roles as wives & especially mothers. They want to feel superior while women are "in their place" so to speak.
When sperm has a heartbeat (insert eye roll).
At the moment the egg and sperm join together creating the zygote, a soul enters. The (human) soul contains/IS the blueprint of everything human.
Animal souls will not enter a human zygote.
That is very fortunate, isn't it?
PS This fact is evidence of a law of Nature in action:
Each soul to their own kind.
As you can provide no proof whatsoever if this, is your opinion sufficient to deny abortions to those that want them? What makes that opinion better than theirs, or mine?
Can you give me scientific proof about the soul entering the zygote....
Kathryn is speaking of metaphysics. However, each metaphysician differs as to when the soul enters the body. Some contend that the soul enters the body MONTHS after conception while there are others who assert that the soul enters the body...…...AT BIRTH. No one really believes that the soul enters the body at conception. At conception, there is no consciousness at all-just a formation. People have to THINK ANALYTICAL regarding the issue of abortion. The idea of personhood in the beginning is beyond illogical & going into the preposterous realm.
Medieval scholars contended that life started at conception because they weren't versed in science & metaphysics. They relied on religious superstition to explain the mechanics of the body. Unfortunately, there are people who believe in medieval concepts of the human body.
So in the end we are talking about religion.
A religion wherea differnce is made between a human and an animal. It is fine to slaughter a cow but you are talking about murder when aborting a fetus.
As animals apperently dont have souls.
I find this all an extremely debious line of thinking. And called it before hypocrite and still do.
The abortion issue is a contentious one at best. Of course, the opposition to aborton comes from an overwhelming majority of ultraconservative, ultratraditional, fundamentalist, & fanatic religious groups. They are against any type of sexual & reproductive freedoms for women. They want women to be in strict roles as submissive wives & mothers who should have as many children as possible. Peterstreep, the quiverfull movement comes to mind. There are pro-lifers who eschew not only abortion but any type of birth control. They view sex as solely procreational. Yes, there ARE people like this. They aren't extinct yet......
Probably the reason why the series "A handmaid's tale" was so successful. It could be close to reality if extremism gets it's way.
It's beyond me that people defend pregnancy even if it's caused by rape and incest. Even if the mother is only 14.
Peter, such people are beyond brutal. People who have feelings are pro-choice. It is only humane to believe in a woman's right to a safe & legal abortion. What is the big deal, abortions have been performed for millennia. Reproductive freedom/choice is a right. People who don't believe in abortion can be deemed as primitive in scope, consciousness, & mindset. They are reactionary. They AREN'T human.
I get your point. But science can't measure everything yet. Still, I often wonder what is a soul.
I can't believe that people are splitting hairs about what's murder and what isn't. First, if you want to be independent, that doesn't mean you have to have sex, for crying out loud! Second, I have 2 words to tell you what will end up happening if these ignorant individuals don't sit down and quit screaming "Killing babies should be a RIGHT!" Those words are NEW YORK! A woman (I use the term loosely in this instance) can go into a doctor and, as long as the baby's HEAD IS NOT CROWNING(!!!!!!) it can be aborted. Do you KNOW what that entails? Shoving a needle in the base of the baby's skull or injecting the poor thing with meds to induce a heart attack!
If it manages to survive that, it's entirely acceptable to just LEAVE IT TO DIE! That is genocide and women who choose to do that, unless there is a threat to their life, is not a woman but an conscienceless, murdering shell of soulless humanity who doesn't deserve to be called a woman in the first place. It makes me absolutely sick that WOMEN are turning into whatever this is they are becoming.
Go do some research on Hitler. You realize he enacted a set of laws that allowed for genocide^^^^ and then the holocaust killed innocent people, and not just helpless children.
Hi, masonmom2015, you'll be welcomed. I agree with you.
Abortion isn't murder. To believe that is totally illogical. Abortion is expulsion of a nonviable being. Murder is defined as doing away w/a viable or sentient being. Thank you. To believe that abortion is murder isn't using logic but instinctive emotion.
Hi, Gus, you'll totally wrong. Human beings are not animals. What happens if the mother died in the process? This you have not taken into consideration.
You said "nonviable being"? What then is a being? Here is one definition online: "A living thing that has (or can develop) the ability to act or function independently." How do you determined that the growing fetus is nonviable? Do you think it is already dead in the womb before performing the abortion? In that case, many will agreed with you. Thank you.
"A woman (I use the term loosely in this instance) can go into a doctor and, as long as the baby's HEAD IS NOT CROWNING(!!!!!!)"
The copy of the Reproductive Health Act on the New York Senate website says an abotion may be performed when:
". . . THE PATIENT IS WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR WEEKS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF PREGNANCY, OR THERE IS AN ABSENCE OF FETAL VIABILITY, OR THE ABORTION IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE PATIENT'S LIFE OR HEALTH."(uppercase in original)(1)
Which of those criteria means " . . . as long as the baby's HEAD IS NOT CROWNING", in your view?
If the Reproductive Health Act is not the legislation you are referring to, could you clarify which part of New York state legislation allows abortions using the criteria you describe? That would be appreciated.
(1) https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s240 (Article 25A, p.2)
Don W, the poster in question is just creating an emotional hyperbole totally devoid of logic. As we are well aware, pro-lifers are quite adept at creative illogical hyperbole. Pro-lifers view all reproductive freedoms is an affront to life. Not only are they against abortions, they are also totally any artificial contraception. It is their view that all sexual acts, whether consensual or not & romantic or not SHOULD result in pregnancy & generation. Many pro-lifers have a fundamentalist religious purview on life.
Hi, Gus, that may be to some extend. But the reality is that a growing feotus has a head. Any animal bird, insect, and even plants must have a "head" to grow however minute! Note the word I use minute, and not small. Hope that helps in the discussion.
This makes much sense. How can they be a life without a head I may ask? Are doctors that will perform the abortion out of their senses? Thank you, Don W for the submission.
"How can they be a life without a head I may ask?"
I assume you are referring to the phrase "head is not crowning" used by Masonsmom2015.
If so, it would be wise for you to to look up the term "crowning" as it relates to childbirth. I can tell you, it doesn't mean not having a head.
If that isn't what you are referring to, then I don't understand your comment.
Don W, logic isn't some people's forte-just proceed Don W. You can't argue w/people who have illogical premises.
Don, if without a head is equal to "the head is not crowning," then that is what I mean. Can you understand that right now? Which logic can say that within twenty-four weeks of pregnancy that the baby's head is not crowning? A big shame on illogical and unreasonable thinkers. These are those who like abortion without considering a life safe or not.
As Don says, "crowning", in reference to childbirth, does not mean what you assume it does. Google "baby head crowning".
Do you know what the word genocide means ?
"holocaust killed innocent people"...
Hitler has just as much to do with abortion as vegetarianism has to do with Hitler. Get real!!!
You are throwing with words that have no connection whatever with the discussion.
The discussion was about abortion. Not killing babies. It has nothing to do with the extermination of Jews, Gypsies, Atheists, Communist. prisoners of war or Fascism.
But apparently you call this splitting hairs.
one baby killed is suddenly a holocaust.
You should think twice before you take those words into a discussion.
“Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy by removal or expulsion of an embryo or fetus before it can survive outside the uterus.”-Wikipedia. What is the difference between the baby outside the womb and the uterus? Thinking and reasoning? Eyes, nose, head, limbs, ears…? Or is it the third eye?
Let’s say there is still birth, and doctors are going to incubate the fetus or baby, right? Is the “still birth” human?
The concept of the West about abortion is disguising! Don’t you westerners think that the fetus is as much life as the baby born maturely?
The discussion is not about Adolf Hitler, vegetarians, or a holocaust of the first or second WW. I don’t know why it should be.
But one thing that is clear to be is this. The growing fetus is life. When a woman naturally aborts due to unforeseen circumstance or ill-health, which is acceptable. Or the fetus is dead and the doctor performs the necessary operation to save her life. All that is welcomed. I hope I am of much help here? Thank you.
A fetus is not the same as a baby.
And to be honest. If you eat cow, pig or any other meat. Those animals are killed. And if you are ok with killing an animal but you are not ok with killing a fetus. Think again, because to me it sounds hypocritical. but many people don't even think about the killing of a cow when they eat a hamburger.
You are aware that you are agreeing with a completely false statement ("as long as the baby's HEAD IS NOT CROWNING(!!!!!!) it can be aborted.")? There is no law in any state that says that.
"A fetus is not the same as a baby." I will not be pretending here on such a serious issue. And I am thinking again and again. I had already thought through the question in my biology lesson as a boy of 16-years.
Have you ever read the story of Louis Brown the first test tube baby? I did when your news magazine both the TIME and News Week run the gig.
The important thing is that the fetus is life. From the test tube, doctors had to insert the fetus or what ordinary is "the thing" back into the surrogate mothers' womb! Why not destroyed it? Though it was an experiment. It should not be.
Hypocrites are those not agreeing that the fetus is life. When a stillbirth occurs, why then do doctors, why do doctors nourish the fetus in an incubation? They are saving a dear life!
At times the “mother”? had a car accident and is in shock. Doctors tear up the womb and bring out the fetus, then incubate it, saving both lives! Is this being hypocritical? Doublethink now?
What is the issue of eating beef, and hamburger here? It is relevant.
A cow is life too. A cow is more intelligent then a fetus. And if you have no problems with killing a cow and eat meat, but you have a problem with killing a fetus. Then you live with a double standard.
A cow is life, yes. So is a cancerous tumor (or any tumor). So is a skin tag, and breast tissue. The male foreskin is. A basal cell carcinoma. The clouded eye lens I had removed and replaced with a piece of plastic.
Not only are these life, they are human life, with human DNA...and we cut them out and throw them away.
A person is more than "life"; to deny abortion because that flesh is alive doesn't make much sense. IMO.
Hi, wilderness, I agred with your minute analysis. "A person is more than "life"; to deny abortion because that flesh is alive doesn't make much sense." I am not against abortion if it is to save the mother or the fetus. So if the mother's life is in danger, what could be right? Saved the mother? Yes, I agreed. Is it not then equally necessary and important to save the fetus by incubating it? By the way, what does IMO means? Thank you.
It is not necessary to save a fetus, because it is not a person any more than any other chunk of flesh. It takes far more than being alive to make a person. IMO (In My Opinion).
But somewhere between fertilization and birth, that fetus does become a person. I am not smart enough to know for a certainty when that point happens, but am pretty confident it is after the first trimester, and probably after the second. Makes sense to me, then, to set an abortion date somewhere in the second trimester.
So...let everyone decide for themselves just when in that trimester it magically becomes a person rather than just another lump of flesh, however complicated it might be.
Hi, wilderness, welcome home. At any stage of the heart-beat, the African determine life has begun. I think some doctors also hold the opinion or respect it.
Everyone can not think for himself or herself. Thanks for the IMO explained.
As has been pointed out several times here, life begins long before that. And an African cannot "determine" that that life is a person at all, for it is a defined point, not something that can be discovered.
So...yes, everyone MUST think for themselves and stop trying to decide what that definition is for everyone else. IMHO (In My Humble Opinion )
Hello, wilderness, with much respect, life begin long before the heart beat. But as much as I respect your humble opinion, it is not a yard stick for me and others. To the African woman, that fetus is a person as much as a one month baby boy or girl.
I have noticed in this forum that only two ladies are against abortion. These are Maonsmom2015 and Izetti. Mjority of the men are in favor of abortion whether it is life or not.
My humble opinion likewise is this: no woman will like to perform an abortion unless the fetus is dead. It has happen in my family. But should her doctor promise tearing up her womb, removing the fetus and incubating it, and then perform the necessary operation to save her life. They will be an agreement with doctor and mother. Again, I have see the experience within my immediate family.
One serious contributor who has highlighten the issue well is Masonsmom2015. She is a woman. She knows what she's saying, and that is not mumble-jumbo.
In my country Nigeria, (which is the giant of Africa?) many bad things has happen when abortion is done. This has been depicted in movies and films warning mothers to be. Some mothers are unable to carry again because of aborting the fetus a sign of a curse from God. The fetus is more than a person, it is a soul, and it hurts the mother at times. This may be regard as primitive, but thank you.
not primitive. don't say that, please.
"But as much as I respect your humble opinion, it is not a yard stick for me and others."
Then, expanding on the thought, you respect other's opinions as well, and will not interfere in their choices on abortion. You will not demand that YOUR yardstick be applied to others - they may define and use their own yardstick.
The air that we breath is life likewise. The water we drink is life as well. The pumpkin leave and parsley I enjoyed with my fruit salad is life also.
All animals depends on these, right? My question now is which of these: the elements, the greens, and beast that is more intelligent? Thank you.
A cow is more intelligent then a fetus. You must agree on that or not ?
EXACTLY! Actually, the totality of a human being's blueprint (of light/energy) is present as it is contained within the fetus,(soul) How else could it become a human adult?
The blueprint guides the process of creation through the replicating of RNA and copied-pairs, etc. ... What a miracle, as spirit becomes flesh!
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/bl … ndividuals
"cows display the ability to rapidly learn different tasks, display long-term memory, extrapolate the location of a hidden moving object, discriminate complex stimuli, and discriminate humans from one another. "
Would you call the morning after pill a murder weapon?
The morning after pill ISN'T a murder weapon-neither is abortion in the early stages before viability. Life is defined as viability. Development isn't defined as viable. Viability is independent existence. Had to interject here.
If a zygote is defined as a human being then yes, the morning after pill can result in abortion. It will prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterine wall - that zygote dies as a result and flushed from the body.
People who define a zygote as a human being are religious zealots or not well informed.
People who define a zygote as a human being are illogical. People who are thinking & logical know better. A zygote isn't viable in the least. It is in the development stages. A life is defined as viability outside the uterus. There are people who have an atavistic mindset. They are the type of people who can't be reasoned with. They are beyond reason.
None of the things you mentioned (with the exception of a cow) have their own heartbeat. I’m a vegetarian BTW @wilderness
"A cow is life, yes." Plus, of course, the observation that neither does an early fetus.
Whether electrical signals detectable in the cells of an embryo constitutes a "heartbeat", is a matter of opinion. Whether an embryo constitutes a human being is also a matter of opinion. If you hold either of those opinions, then of course you are free to not have an abortion.
But why should women who do not share those opinions, be forced to live according to your beliefs? What makes your personal opinion on these matters superior to any other woman's opinion? And why should your opinion be the basis of violating the Constitution, as established by legal precedent?
Can you can put forward an argument in favor of banning abortion before 24 weeks, that does not rely solely on opinion? If so, I'd be happy to hear it. If not, is it reasonable to penalize women and medical professionals for what amounts to simply disagreeing with your personal opinions?
A human is in formation as soon as it is conceived. It will go through the stages of life: a baby, a child, a teenager and finally an adult ... it is not destined to become a B L O B.
It is destined to become a human being.
Some people, these days, are very conscious that it is murder to abort a fetus and they want a stop to it.
Those who are selfish and just want to enjoy their sensual pleasures and escapades without having to deal with the consequences of conception in a humane, responsible and loving manner, are for abortion/murder.
That's all there is to it.
Q. Are we becoming more loving and more enlightened
N O T ? ? ? ? ?
Hello, Kathryn, you're must welcomed. But let me have ameaning of B L O B.
Moments ago, I just respond to wilderness. Iwould have include you among the two ladies discussing positively and sense into the challenge. Hope you read it? Thank you.
A police officer recently shot and killed a pregnant woman. If human life begins at conception, is he guilty of murdering an innocent human life? (I'm speaking of the fetus hete, setting aside the question of whether killing the woman was justified.)
On a very simple level, what if we could ask God about this issue?
Would God consider that removing a zygote via a poisonous pill and a fetus via suction are both equally murderous?
Or would He say,
"Listen, you made a mistake, and even though it seemed like a good idea to allow the egg and the sperm to get way too close, you may terminate the formation of (what would have been) your child. I don't mind. We won't call it murder in this case."
After all, there is a lot of traffic going back and forth between earth, (the physical plane) and heaven, (the metaphysical plane.)
Sadly, God does not say this to me. He says ," It is a tragedy and why you guys have at it without keeping the egg and the sperm away from each other, I have no idea."
And he says, "Stop sending back the souls who want to enter the physical plane! They cry and cry. I can't stand all the crying!"
Or maybe he is aloof to all the suffering.
Or maybe there is no suffering.
... except when the dissolving or ripping/vacuuming ensues.
We need to know.
When did God ever care about humanity and what its doing?
Hi, peterstreep, could you be alife at the moment if God does not care for your existence? Think about that for a few minutes. Who is God here in the forum?
I exist because my parents had sex with each other. My mother gave birth to me,
You would probably respond with : but who created your mother.
And I would say, her mother and father.
This is an evolutionary process.
You do not need a God theory to explain this.
Given that God removes around half of the zygotes he mistakenly places, I doubt He would care much. If He can err in forming one, certainly His creations, far less able than He, can do so as well.
Besides, an omniscient god already knows, before conception, that an abortion will occur, and will surely take steps to ensure that no souls are lost.
Hi, Wilderness, I had not seen in nature where God has erred. The human being is the problem. If God or a god can make a mistake, how come that "doctors in India have transplanted light-sensitive cells from the eyes of 14-19-week-old healthy aborted foetuses into the eyes blind adults suffering from Retinitis Pigmentosa"? So, my God cannot make a mistake of misplaced zygotes.
Apparently, man has misused some drugs that can make it happen. Thanks, and enjoy the week end.
The flash of light attracts a waiting soul ... waiting to (re) incarnate onto the earth plane from the metaphysical plane. When the flash of light occurs, the soul enters the union of egg and sperm. It carries the light blueprint for the body/brain and directs the process of (its own) formation.
Believe it or not, your choice. I believe it because it makes sense.
Further conversations with God:
Me: Oh, You say that the Golden Rule should be applied: Treat others as you would have others treat you?
Me: Well, tell us this, do zygotes care about how they are treated? Do fetuses with a heartbeat care about how they are treated? What DO they feel as they are removed from the womb? If it is nothing at all, then you need to tell us.
God: if I told you that, there would be less souls kept in their mothers' wombs. And some births are such blessings.
My conclusion: No, he will not tell us the whole truth, here. Some realities must be veiled. Great good can come from receiving new souls straight from heaven ... onto the material plane where so many have forgotten the love and warmth of Heaven. Children come with renewed faith, love and grace. They are great forces of change and renewal, saving the planet from degeneration and people from spiritual maladies such as misery, depression and corruption.
But, keeping a child has to be a positive choice; the choice of each woman.
God, it seems, does not force anyone, ever. (Yes, there are consequences for our actions.)
But, can we legislate moral laws?
How do you know that God would answer your questions like that. You are just making things up.
He could also say.humanity has made a mess of things and is ruining the earth. The less humans there are the better.
uff...so you think earth is there for human kind. To us ewe see fit. As a commodity, nothing more.
Tell you what. Earth will do fine without humanity. It did just fine before homo sapiens walked on its soil.
Do you understand that by seperating humans from nature. Somthing you just did by asking this question, is one of the main reasons why people are so disrespectfull for their surroundings. To see the earth only as a commodity is why we now live in dire times with a climate breakdown on its way. Earth is not there to be used. We as humans are part of the eco system that is global. The climate is breaking down because of our life style. And you say what is the point of the earth.if not as for us to use as we see fit. You say the earth is made for us. I say we are part of the earth.
Why should the law be based solely on your personal beliefs?
If we’re going to take away someone’s right to make choices about their bodies I think forcing men to have vasectomies would be a much more effective way to go about all of this.
I mean, we’re already chopping off foreskins, what’s a little more penis interference?
(And yes I know a vasectomy is a balls thing and not a penis thing, I just really wanted to say “penis interference” alright?)
Thank you Aime F. There should be EFFECTIVE male birth control. It takes TWO to tango. Why should the onus of birth control be placed upon women. I contend that the UNDERLYING animus against abortion is the male being threatened by bold female sexuality. There are men who want women to be corseted sexually. Well, this isn't going to happen. Intelligent & right minded women will continue to keep abortion legal. No women or girl should endure an unwanted pregnancy- that to me, is the height of brutality & barbarity.
Again, thank you Aime F. for contributing to the discussion.
Hi, Gus, birth control for the man? You're welcomed. But have you considered the issue of reversing it when need be? What if the women undergo the very opposite? Would they welcome it in place of legal abortion? "Physical complications of local will include cervical injury, 200% increased risks of miscarriage after two or more abortions, 160% increased risks of tubal pregnancy, increased risks of breast cancer, and decreased fertility." Thanks for weighing in, and enjoy the weekend.
Hi, Aime F, your point or suggestion is good. But who among the men will likely go for a vasectomy? Would rather your husband or boyfriend? Birth control cannot be 100% effective. Even if it does, nature can over-ride it, and a woman becomes pregnant with an effective birth control method that is monitored.
I did that with my wife. Yet she takes in again with the right birth control device. Mother nature cannot be fooled. Thanks for your inputs.
It seems Christians should be in favor of abortion, at least under certain circumstances....Numbers 5:11-21
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s … ersion=NIV
"But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[b] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell."
by Phocas Vincent 18 months ago
Do you believe in your opinion that in the topic of abortion, the US Government should regulate the procedure or should it be a left to the discretion of the individuals involved? (Please keep it civil and clean guys.)
by Jackie Lynnley 2 years ago
I read this was true and I just have to know if it is, please! Please provide links to prove what you say. Surely we are not going to be aborting babies ready to come into the world fully developed and healthy?
by Grace Marguerite Williams 6 years ago
liberalization and the broadening of women's reprodutive freedoms, especially in terms of a woman's right to choose and the issue of contraception? What makes some conservative men view a woman's greater reproductive freedom and/or choice is an affront to "morality" and "family...
by Kristen Burns-Darling 3 years ago
What are your personal beliefs on abortion?Not the political side of whether it should or should not be legal, but how do you feel about it on a personal level? If you or your partner were faced with an unexpected pregnancy how would you feel about terminating? At what point do you believe that a...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 6 years ago
Abortion is THE MOST CONTENTIOUS arena and subject of American politics. Abortion also generates the MOST VISCERAL reaction among people. However, what business and concern it is whether a woman elects to have an abortion. She knows the reason and the circumstances as to why she...
by Amber Verville 6 years ago
What are your opinions on abortion?
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|