Re: Abortion

"Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> "Daniel T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The nine month gestation period is a very small part of the process of
> > raising a human being. It seems to me, if the father is willing to bear
> > the burden of the rest of the raising, then it is reasonable to expect
> > the woman to bear the smaller burden of having the child, even if she
> > doesn't want it.
> 
> With logic like that, anyone who invests ANY effort in the care or raising
> of
> that unborn child could file claim in court to prevent abortion. 

Not at all, no one else is the father of the child. The mother and 
father of the child both have a strong genetic interest in it. No one 
else can make such a claim.


> No man
> should
> ever have the right to make someone do something with their own body that
> they do not wish to do.

Then no woman should have the right to make a man pay for any share of 
the raising of a child that he doesn't want.


> There is only a limited window of opportunity for an abortion.  You can't
> just
> go and kill a fetus at any stage of the birth.  There are rules and laws to
> protect
> that child's life past that window.

I have no problem with killing the fetus at any stage of birth.


> > > I do, however, feel these days many women use Abortion as an alternative
> > > form of birth control.  Why bother using a condom or pills when you can
> > > just
> > > abort the unwanted fetus?  This is not common, but it is something of
> > > concern in today's push-button, use-and-throw-away society.
> >
> > No, it is not common. I would venture to say it is probably very
> > uncommon; but no matter how common it may be, I would rather such a
> > woman have the abortion than be forced to have a child that she will
> > despise or abandon.
> 
> That's an impractical statement, at best.  But you're right, a woman should
> have
> an abortion rather than give her child away, or worse, abandon it.  Children
> are
> not playthings.  They are people.

Or even worse... Selling it.