With regards to abortion, Who's rights are more important .. women or foetuses?

[Morality Games]

Quote by: Maryjane Three healthy and happy little boys...yea, I'd say that was what it was all about. You kinda forget about the pain till it comes time to deliever again. Imagine slamming your uterus in a car door over and over and over for ..oh say...8 hours or so. Prolly why I waited 9 years to do it again. (oh, you can't...men don't have a uterus)

Something I'm very thankful for, to be honest. I can take some bruises and falls without complaint, but a pervasive month to month pain that disrupts my mental-emotional state is just the kind of thing I don't want. I'm too receptive to ongoing hurts to think effectively during such times.

[gela]

Do you?

a)
This is irrevelent because I'm not the one claiming to be saving the 'innocent babies'. Nor am I the one talking about how life is a gift.

b) Yes I do. My family has sponsored a child for the last 8 years.
We also sponser a charity monthly which does alot of aid work over there for communities, and every year, I raise over $100 by doing the 40 hour famine.

If human life is so important, then you would care about it universaly; not just the debatable life in your community.

[Pale RIder]

Quote by: gela Yes, we can give people rights when they don't chose to exercise them. But there is no point in giving something rights - that they cannot use; when it infringes upon someone elses rights. That being the mothers rights. My point was, that a mothers rights take priority - because the mother has the capability to exercise her rights.

I suppose you could be more wrong, but personally, I don't know how.

The core issue of abortion is a clash of rights between a woman and her child. Whenever a clash of rights exist between individuals, the rights of one must give way to the more fundamental rights of the other. No right is more fundamental in this country than the right to live.

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: Pale RIder I suppose you could be more wrong, but personally, I don't know how. The core issue of abortion is a clash of rights between a woman and her child. Whenever a clash of rights exist between individuals, the rights of one must give way to the more fundamental rights of the other. No right is more fundamental in this country than the right to live.

The woman's rights supercede any life inside her.

Once you are born you have a right to life, but really not before. The mother has the rights and calls the shots. This is as it should be because there are too many potentially very harmful occurrences that can happen if abortion is not allowed. MO is this was thought out pretty carefully when the woman's rights were interpretted. There was a need for interpretation, and it was made way back in the 70's.

I personally don't see a clash of rights. The woman has all the rights. Nobody in this case has more, she alone has them all. Her body is being used as a vessel, and she doesn't have to let anybody in if she doesn't want to. She has the right to kick out intruders.

[Clementine]

The fully grown adult woman. Obviously!

[SoylentGreen]

Quote by: Pale RIder The core issue of abortion is a clash of rights between a woman and her child. Whenever a clash of rights exist between individuals, the rights of one must give way to the more fundamental rights of the other. No right is more fundamental in this country than the right to live.

What of the right to liberty, IE, the freedom for the individual woman to choose for herself what is best. Or the the right for pursuit of happiness, IE, not to be forced to be burdened with an unwanted child.

[Calam]

To answer the original question: both are valuable. Both should be saved if possible. If not possible, then the one that is most likely to survive should be saved, and the other should be helped to live as long as possible (or made comfortable before their death.)

[SoylentGreen]

Quote by: Calam To answer the original question: both are valuable. Both should be saved if possible. If not possible, then the one that is most likely to survive should be saved, and the other should be helped to live as long as possible (or made comfortable before their death.)

The discussion is more related to a matter of choice . Not on the question of surviving.

[Calam]

The discussion is more related to a matter of choice . Not on the question of surviving.

Sorry, I let my thoughts from the other abortion discussion carry over to this one.

So to re-answer the original question: I believe neither life is more valuable, and neither should be chosen over the other if it is not necessary.

[ironeagle]

Human life is far more important than some irresponsible girls feelings.

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: Pale RIder I suppose you could be more wrong, but personally, I don't know how. The core issue of abortion is a clash of rights between a woman and her child. Whenever a clash of rights exist between individuals, the rights of one must give way to the more fundamental rights of the other. No right is more fundamental in this country than the right to live.

Most kids don't live on their own for a very long time, and if Momma doesn't take care of the child it will probably have an unhappy life for sure, possibly criminally unhappy, but that's another story.You might be able to pick out a few happy endings out of millions, but it would be tough to find them.

The issue has elements of common sense to it, like everything else. You can go with some very antiquated ideaology of what God thinks about it, or you can go with the gut instinct that says here and now what it wants to do. The woman has the rights, and that's as it should be in a common sense, no nonsense sort of way. If that fetus could pick itself up by it's bootstraps and say, "to hell with the old hag, I don't need her anyway, I'll make my own way", that would be just ducky for the kid, but for the world I'm not sure. God in His omnipotence probably created this situation because He always knows the ending, and the ending is just, because it's a faulty setup as so many things are in life. There are too many people to save to start saving even the one's that aren't even breathing. Fetuses are on life-support, that's the real fact.

[ironeagle]

As I see it there is no constitutional right of a woman to murder her child. Therefore the child who does have the constitutional rights to life, liberty and hapiness, are the only rights to determine when asking such a question. A mother can choose not to have sex (perhaps not in rape cases) she can also choose to adopt out her child, but what right anywhere does she have to murder her child? Other than an invalid law allowing abortion, there is no such right. The only acception is to save the mother's own life, which is self defense, not only in the Biblical terms but also in the law.

[Tycoon]

As I see it there is no constitutional right of a woman to murder her child. Therefore the child who does have the constitutional rights to life, liberty and hapiness, are the only rights to determine when asking such a question. A mother can choose not to have sex (perhaps not in rape cases) she can also choose to adopt out her child, but what right anywhere does she have to murder her child? Other than an invalid law allowing abortion, there is no such right. The only acception is to save the mother's own life, which is self defense, not only in the Biblical terms but also in the law.

The bible does not apply in this discussion at all. Religion and law are to be kept seperate.

Getting past that, it is up to women and their partners to take the necessary precautions to avoid a pregnancy. However, this should in no way be kept black and white. Certain situations require different approaches.

When a woman is raped she should be allowed to get an abortion, as the child was not conceived through her irresponsibility and she in no way wanted to bear it.

Teenagers, and I know this, being one myself, are extremely irresponsible. If a teenage girl becomes pregnant she should be allowed an abortion as no doubt it will attract not only a lot of negative attention but also distract her from school among other things. It's also risky to somebody's health to have a child when they're young.

It's also dangerous to have a child the older you get. Once a woman reaches a certain age she should be allowed an abortion, as it should be within her rights to maintain her health.

Last of all, if the blood samples or other tests of a fetus shows it will likely have abnormalities such as Down Syndrome, abortion should be allowed. In some cases the parents will not want to take care of it and doubtless nobody else will want to either.

[ironeagle]

No they don't have the right to murder just because it's a sad situation. I can use the bible in this disusion if I want to, but even without it no one has the right to murder. There are no excuses, the people who have trouble dealing with pregnancy caused by rape or at a young age need mandatory counseling and if necisary need to be put in jail until the baby is safe and can be adopted to a worthy parent. I have no doubt in mind these are horrifying situations, being a teen parent myself, but this does not excuse murder. Abortion is murder, aborting a child of rape or incest is murder, aborting a child because you didn't know the condom would tear is murder, aborting a child because you are poor is murder, aboprting a child because you are young is murder, the only abortion which is not murder is to save one's own life, which is self defense. Say what ever you want, but it is really about women who do not want to tak eresponsibility for their actions, and about parents who no longer are able to contol their teenages sexual behavior because this country has allowed too many teens to freely gian access to birthcontrol methods, giving teens the false impression that it's ok for them to have sex, or that they will be invincible from pregnancy and disease. This is a law made for people who think they have the right to play God and toy with human life. As I see it in our consitution noone, has the right to that.

[SoylentGreen]

ironeagleAs I see it there is no constitutional right of a woman to murder her child. Therefore the child who does have the constitutional rights to life, liberty and hapiness, are the only rights to determine when asking such a question.

But it is not a baby till it leaves the womb, till then the fetus has no rights whatsoever and is not even considered a citizen.
It is more akin to removing a cyst than killing a child.

[SoylentGreen]

Maryjane(oh, you can't...men don't have a uterus)

Women make so much about the pain of childbirth, but let me ask you this , have you ever seen a man get kicked in the balls and then a few years later decide its something worth doing again.

[ironeagle]

You are just plain sick and live in constant denial there is no difference bewtween a fetus and a baby except a word that irresponsible murderers use to justify killing them. Poeple like you are a cyst in fact you are cancer on this earth killing and doing evil things against babies who have the right to live. I wish I could "abort you" right now. There is nothing different about you and a fetus except you are bigger and less intelligent.

[ShadowFox]

Quote by: ironeagle You are just plain sick and live in constant denial there is no difference bewtween a fetus and a baby except a word that irresponsible murderers use to justify killing them. Poeple like you are a cyst in fact you are cancer on this earth killing and doing evil things against babies who have the right to live. I wish I could "abort you" right now. There is nothing different about you and a fetus except you are bigger and less intelligent.

Question for you, if someone gets an abortion what do you think the punishment should be if it were against the law?

[Tycoon]

No they don't have the right to murder just because it's a sad situation.

I never once used any excuse along those lines. Maybe if you'd actually read my post you'd understand that. I gave clear reasoning in every case.

I can use the bible in this disusion if I want to, but even without it no one has the right to murder.

No, you cannot use the bible in this discussion, this discussion being about the rights of a woman to abort an unborn fetus. The bible is not a factor of any sort in the judgement of what falls within anybody's rights.

There are no excuses, the people who have trouble dealing with pregnancy caused by rape or at a young age need mandatory counseling and if necisary need to be put in jail until the baby is safe and can be adopted to a worthy parent.

Do you realize how completely ridiculous that is? A woman who has a rape fetus growing inside her has gone through not only the trauma of rape, but also finding out that a child has been conceived through it, and you suggest throwing her into prison and forcing her to have a baby that will have no family and will simply be thrown into an already overcrowded adoption system? That's not even considering that she might be needed at home or at work in order to provide for or take care of her family, and it's also not considering the costly medical bills that come with having a child. Who is going to pay those bills, particularly if the rapist is not found?

Abortion is murder, aborting a child of rape or incest is murder, aborting a child because you didn't know the condom would tear is murder, aborting a child because you are poor is murder, aboprting a child because you are young is murder, the only abortion which is not murder is to save one's own life, which is self defense.

Law cannot be made so black and white! I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who said a quote that's been circulating here, "My rights end where the other person's begin." Well, an unborn fetus's rights end where the woman's begin. She has the right to take care of her body, her family, and she has the right not to go through the trouble of childbirth, not in all, no, but in some cases.

Say what ever you want, but it is really about women who do not want to tak eresponsibility for their actions, and about parents who no longer are able to contol their teenages sexual behavior because this country has allowed too many teens to freely gian access to birthcontrol methods, giving teens the false impression that it's ok for them to have sex, or that they will be invincible from pregnancy and disease.

Now tell me, what is the difference between a girl becoming pregnant and then having an abortion and the girl never having sex in the first place? I'll answer for you. There is none whatsoever. The end result is no child. Technically we kill children every day by not impregnating every woman as often as possible.

This is a law made for people who think they have the right to play God and toy with human life. As I see it in our consitution noone, has the right to that.

Clearly you don't understand the idea that every situation has a different set of circumstances and thus a different assessment.

[Tycoon]

You are just plain sick and live in constant denial there is no difference bewtween a fetus and a baby except a word that irresponsible murderers use to justify killing them. Poeple like you are a cyst in fact you are cancer on this earth killing and doing evil things against babies who have the right to live. I wish I could "abort you" right now. There is nothing different about you and a fetus except you are bigger and less intelligent.

Technically an unborn child fits the description of a parasite. A woman has the right not to let a parasite leach off of her health.