Abortion - the debate goes on.

Abortion has raised it’s head on the blog again. Might be a good idea to answer this guy in comments who finally came up with some “good reasons” to replace Mia’s, er, “flowery” attempt!.

I am personally a pro- choice activist. and since everyone is big on this website on reasons, Ill name five

1. It is a womans choice what to do with her body. Yes, I agree careful measures should be taken to avoid an unwanted pregnancy. But what happens in the case of the condom ripping or the contraceptive fails out? What happens if the womans in no condition to support a baby, even for the nine month term? only the woman can decide if she is ready to have the baby, no one else.

Unfortunately, abortion is not about a woman’s body - it’s about the new body that has been created. There are really two different situations presented here.

A. The woman does not want the baby - in this case adoption is available. Yes, the baby must be carried to term, but this is a small price to pay for a clear conscience, and a new life.

B. The woman cannot medically support a baby - this case is much harder. I know of women who have compromised their health for their child, but ultimately that decision must be made by the mother. In many cases, there is however a clear-cut case whereby there is no scenario that the baby can live, and I for one would not begrudge a woman an abortion in those circumstances.

2. If a baby cannot survive outside of the womb, is it even a person at all? I can understand moreso if the baby had a chance, even with special equiptment, to survive. But if the baby cannot sustain itself outside of the womb, it’s almost the same as saying a child can build a house, whether it can perform that function or not.

Given the debate is about whether abortion should be available “on demand”, that sort of misses the point.

3. In the case of rape and incest, why should the woman be burdened with a pregnancy she did not bring upon herself? It’s the equivalent of someone forcing you to buy a house you never even wanted. Just one day, some psycho comes to you and forces you to put a down payment on a house you never prepared to have nor were ready for.

Again, that misses the point. I am not suggesting here that victims of rape or abuse should not have access to abortion. I do consider that “on demand” abortion lets abusers get away with it by easy destruction of the evidence.

4. What if a woman is physically incapable of bearing children? There have been cases of even twelve year olds dying in child birth because there body simply could not handle it. Dont they get a right to live?

Again, see above.

5. A child predestined to live a life of fetal alcohol syndrome or even addicted to crack at birth because of poor choices by the mother should not have to be put through that misery. People will think I am radical for this, but do you let a dog live who is blind and becoming paralyzed? No. Why? Because even if the dog could survive a few more years after that, it would be inhumane to see the dog suffer day after day, nevermind the financial burden it would be to prolong the inevitable

Now this one is more than irrelevant, it’s actually sick. Yes, you are a radical for saying this.

I personally believe that life is sacred, and should not be terminated just because it’s inconvenient or difficult. I know people who have taken on the most hopeless cases, and God has provided his grace all the way through. No, it’s not easy. No, it’s not for everyone. But just because someone is disabled, does not mean that they have no right to live, no right to love.

It’s also a funny thing - what Doctors think might happen is frequently wrong. Lives can improve. Aria was written off at birth, but has survived over a year thanks to information originally supplied from outside the medical profession.

I hope that even the extreme pro- life activists on this site can see my reasoning when it comes to abortion.

When one turns up, I’ll ask. The human beings are still trying to digest your last “reason”.