Re: Abortion

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (under_the_bridge) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Cranium) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > What is your view on abortion?
> 
> 
> My recomendation is to have abortions within the first three months of
> pregnancy.  I have no opinion on abortions past the first three months
> of pregnancy.
> 
> I note that if you have sperm and an egg in a petri dish, destroying
> them is not very different than allowing the sperm to first fertilize
> the egg and then immediately destroying them.
> 
> I also note that it is only irresponsibility which can keep a woman
> from realizing she is pregnant and failing to abort within three
> months.
> 
> > 
> I note also that the risk of unwanted babies is what makes sex
> "immoral" yet note also that married couples share in that risk.
> 
> I thus point out the idiocy of any position on the morality of sex,
> yet heavily heavily encourage the use of both birth control and
> condoms at the same time.

I note also that while the woman may have no right to terminate a
> living baby's life, a baby has no right to use a woman's body against
> her will, yet I note also that some may argue that the woman took on
> that responsibilty by having sex, yet I have no opinion on that
> argument.

You seem to have very little opinions on anything. Let's further delve
into what you actually have opinions on.

>I note also that while the woman may have no right to terminate a
> living baby's life, a baby has no right to use a woman's body against
> her will, yet I note also that some may argue that the woman took on
> that responsibilty by having sex, yet I have no opinion on that
> argument.

Firstly, the baby is not using the womans body. The
baby/fetus/embryo/zygote is actually a consequence of actions that
were not it's own. The baby never asked to be there, it is there
because someone else put it there; but like every other living thing
it ask only that it be permitted to live. The woman has no right to
terminate the baby's life. Full stop. Wether it be using the body of
the woman, as long as no actual physical harm can come to the mother,
the baby must be permitted to live. It is human, it is alive, and it
must be protected by law, just like any other living human being. I
know most of you don't think a fetus, or an embryo is alive, but it
is. Have you seen ultra-scans, I recently saw one , and it was
beautiful. My first reaction to the photo was 'hey it's smiling' and
the mother replied 'yeah that's what i said'. If I cannot appeal to
you scientifically, then i appeal to you emotional. For all the
science in the world, can't explain why we do what we do. But for the
Love of a child, to protect an innocent child from being murdered
simply because the minor inconveniences it may cause ,is modern day
holocaust.

As a catholic, I cannot encourage the use of birth controls. Though as
a realist, this may reduce dramatically the number of abortions . You
cannot abort if you're not pregnant. Birth control regulations
sometimes encourage sex, rather than the better approach of abstaining
from it all together. However back to the topic, abortion is immoral
it is wrong. Can we justify a killing of human life under any
circumstance. Under Law, the killing of human life is not permitted
under any circumstance with the exception of self-defence. If the
mothers life is in jeopadry, then I believe she has the right to
choose, either attempt the birth or not. Most of the time, if he
mothers life is under threat then most probably she'll be uncouncious
and her husband, next of kin or in their absence the doctor in charge
shall make the decision. Under these circumstances and only these
circumstances should abortions be legal.