Teenagers and Abortion

[Harpist4u]

Over many years abortion has been a hot topic of debate. In the case of teenagers receiving abortions, it is even a hotter topic. The use of abortions in teenagers is just like another type of birth control. In 2000 there were 9,826,251 teenage girls (15-19) in the United States. From ages 15-19 there were 235,470 abortions in 2000. (http://guttmacher.com/sections/abortion.html). Although this is not 2000 it does let you get the picture of teenage abortions. The issue of abortions will probably never be settled. It has been faught over since the Egyptians ruled and it is still an issue. This proves to me that it will never be settled. Why is it, humans may be able to decide if we should kill a child before it is even born. For a baby can stand up, kick, yawn, suck its thumb, and other movements while in the mothers whomb. So wouldn't that mean that that baby is a human and abortions would be considered murder? When does a baby get its rights; before or after birth?

[kingjust]

Quote by: Harpist4u Over many years abortion has been a hot topic of debate. In the case of teenagers receiving abortions, it is even a hotter topic. The use of abortions in teenagers is just like another type of birth control. In 2000 there were 9,826,251 teenage girls (15-19) in the United States. From ages 15-19 there were 235,470 abortions in 2000. (http://guttmacher.com/sections/abortion.html). Although this is not 2000 it does let you get the picture of teenage abortions. The issue of abortions will probably never be settled. It has been faught over since the Egyptians ruled and it is still an issue. This proves to me that it will never be settled. Why is it, humans may be able to decide if we should kill a child before it is even born. For a baby can stand up, kick, yawn, suck its thumb, and other movements while in the mothers whomb. So wouldn't that mean that that baby is a human and abortions would be considered murder? When does a baby get its rights; before or after birth?

Just to start off an unborn child cannot stand up in the mothers womb, that assumption leads into the fallacy that an unborn child can hold it's weight (in which you say stand up). I don't know where you got that notion or where you read it.
Secondly, I would say when the imbilucal cord is cut, the magical wand of congress bestows rights onto a child. No, but really, no body can say when any one has any rights. You think we have freedom of speech, guess again. But with the abortion issue, the subject IMO is dead. I agree with abortion before 12 weeks, anything after, set up for adoption if you havn't already grown attached to your child. Be it as it may, everything boils down to the right to choose, which can never be taken away from the person making the choice. And the choice of when, how, where, and who will do the deed will always be left to the woman, period.

[The American]

The fetus has rights before birth. We have laws stating so.

[The American]

Quote by: kingjust Just to start off an unborn child cannot stand up in the mothers womb, that assumption leads into the fallacy that an unborn child can hold it's weight (in which you say stand up). I don't know where you got that notion or where you read it. Secondly, I would say when the imbilucal cord is cut, the magical wand of congress bestows rights onto a child. No, but really, no body can say when any one has any rights. You think we have freedom of speech, guess again. But with the abortion issue, the subject IMO is dead. I agree with abortion before 12 weeks, anything after, set up for adoption if you havn't already grown attached to your child. Be it as it may, everything boils down to the right to choose, which can never be taken away from the person making the choice. And the choice of when, how, where, and who will do the deed will always be left to the woman, period.

Even during this time period, you can be charged with murder of the fetus, if you have killed it and the mother.

[The American]

What I find ironic about teens and abortion, is that a teen is mature enough to make a decision to exterminate life, without parental consultation, yet 17 year olds who pull a trigger in shipings, are not allowed the death penalty. We deal with the decision to exterminate life. They both are the same, and the fact is, this is a killing nation of its people. We have come to accept killing as a way of living. it is accepted now. Who knows who will be next, it may be you or I, or your family members, and your killer will walk free, or get no punishment.

[Seeker_Of_Sins]

It seems to me that a child is incable of being a parent. With the youth of today being more childlike and self centred and demanding than at any time in our history, I would think it logical to terminate all teenage pregnancys. This would greatly reduce the number of solo mothers, unwanted and unloved children, poorer neighbourhoods and other social ills.

Abortion should not be a choice for teenagers, it should be a compulsory result of a poorly conceived action. Have sex, take some care, no problem. But enough already with making every taxpayer responsible for your decision to have a child at 16 because you cant be bothered getting a job or staying in school.

[Harpist4u]

As a teenager myself, I feel that it is the mother and the father's fault for getting into this situation. If they believe they are responsible enough to have sex they should also consider the possible consiquences. But many teenagers that I know only think of the moment and not of the future. But if that is the case, then they should not be having sex in the first place. Of course I can not go and tell them to stop because none of them would listen to me. I do not understand why older teenagers (16-19) are still considered children. 60 years ago they would be married and having children. Has our society taken away that many responsibilities that makes us children instead of adults? The girl who is pregnant is responsible enough to have sex but not bear the consiquences. That is what our society has allowd her to think, am I wrong?

[Harpist4u]

Quote by: The American The fetus has rights before birth. We have laws stating so.

What laws are there, can you send me the sites that they are on?? I want to use them in a scholarship research paper I plan to do on teenage Abortion.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Harpist4u What laws are there, can you send me the sites that they are on?? I want to use them in a scholarship research paper I plan to do on teenage Abortion.

No legal abortion after 3 mo.

[kingjust]

Quote by: The American Even during this time period, you can be charged with murder of the fetus, if you have killed it and the mother.

That I understand because of you killing the mother that lead to the fetus dieing. Intrigueing, they will charge you with a double homicide, but allow abortions...WTF. I never thought of this, thanks TA, they need to stop double charging murderers. One killing is enough to put his ass to death, IMO. Except in cases of accidents, where a pregnant got hit and they both died. The driver should not be charged with 2 homicides. Just one, IMO.

[kingjust]

Quote by: The American What I find ironic about teens and abortion, is that a teen is mature enough to make a decision to exterminate life, without parental consultation, yet 17 year olds who pull a trigger in shipings, are not allowed the death penalty. We deal with the decision to exterminate life. They both are the same, and the fact is, this is a killing nation of its people. We have come to accept killing as a way of living. it is accepted now. Who knows who will be next, it may be you or I, or your family members, and your killer will walk free, or get no punishment.

We feel the same, kill these teenage muderers. It's like once the get the taste of blood and know that they CAN do it, there is a higher probability that they will do it again. Avoid that and give him 30 percasets and 5 shots of 151, he will go to sleep really nice,... permanently.

[SVMc]

I can never understand why it is that in the states there is such a paradox between teen pregnancy and teen abortion. On one hand people get really passionate about making abortions illegal, but as soon as the issue of prevention is brought up no one wants to talk.

http://www.agi-usa.org/presentations/abort_slides.pdf

The above is the same study quoted at the begining.

The us has double the teen pregnancy rate of any other industralized nation, yet at the same time it has the lowest abortion rate of any industralized nation. Meaning while there are numerically more abortions occuring in the US this in not an issue of a large percentage of pregnancies being aborted, but a large number of teenagers getting pregnant.

So the question for the US really is how to prevent teen preganacy and in doing so the amount of abortions will drop significantly since 54% of abortions in the US are women under 20 years of age.

The answer is also provided in this study as well as many others. Teens in the US do not have more or even more frequent sex than teens in Canada, Australia, Sweeden or any other industralized nation, however teens in the US receive far less sex education than teens in other industralized nation. The majority of teens who requested abortions said they were using birth control -- evidently they need some education in this area. It is shown again and again in that providing teens with sex education does not promote more sex it promotes safe sex and good choices.

So it seems really ironic to me that the same people in the US who will picket an abortion clinic are also the ones lobbying for abstinance only sex education.

[jdk]

IMO let them decide. I am personally against it, but we have bigger things to worry about in this country. They need to make a timeframe and anything after that then they are stuck. Problem is we already have enough kids who live in foster care without parents. But the miracle of life is a powerful thing and no one should be denied that if they have the chance.

[Lone Gunman]

If your government condones the use of lethal punishment in applying the law, then how can they morally justify preventing access to abortions? Both are reactive solutions to problems. More emphasis needs to be placed on PRO-active solutions that prevent the pregnancy or crime happening in the first place.

Where the abortion argument falls down is on the issue of rape. If you give the mother a choice to terminate in the case of rape, then you must allow that same right to all mothers. Take away the right for termination of rape children and you take away the free will of the mother. \It is a catch 22\

No one ever gets everything they want and usually people don't turn out to support anything unless it directly affects them. If you want to retain the right to terminate a rape fetus then you must accept that some desperate girls will turn to abortion to 'correct a mistake'. Take away that ability to 'correct' for everyone you are still left with the paradox of a government that imposes the death penalty - a much worse crime than abortion.

Frankly all killing is wrong, but life is precious and we shouldn't enforce moralistic rules on people when we have the technology to help them. It is just forcing your views on someone else. People should be allowed the right to chose, not be condemned for getting themselves into trouble. If you're going to take that attitude why don't we just institute a death penalty across the board for ALL convicted felony? Why .. because that would be unfair - AND so is telling a 16 yr old girl 'sorry hon, although we can help you we're not going to because we think it will set a bad example' - FU*K YOU! who are you to tell me what I can do? Why is your liberty allowed to infringe on mine when mine cannot infringe on yours?

[Samildanach]

The us has double the teen pregnancy rate of any other industralized nation, yet at the same time it has the lowest abortion rate of any industralized nation.

They have to get their army fodder from somewhere...can't have senators children going to war.

[atheist]

all this talk about how precious life is is a bit hypocritical if you think about the way life is set up.

For example, in order to live you must eat like...eating a chicken. When you bite into a yummy chicken wing do you think about the act of murder you have indirectly caused for this individual once-living, being? Probably not.

Human's are so egotistical that we have to "protect" each other when really, the world only gets worse as we populate this planet (i.e. pollution, overpopulation). So pro-lifers scream and kick when they hear that a 1-whatever week old fetus is being aborted. Do they scream and kick when they find that the lobster they are biting into has lived past 5 to 10 years, and that they have stolen years of life from this lobster just because they were hungry? Probably not. Do they cry in stupidity (like how i usually see them do on tv...sorry if i'm insulting anyone) over the land and habitats they have destroyed because they needed shelter? LIFE in general is a cycle of life AND death. If you choose to live your life than you choose to die. A baby does not have the brain capacity to grasp this concept, so they have no choice, also, as they are guests in the host of anothers' womb (and life).

I am pro-life and i eat meat and i accept the fact that you must kill others' and steal others' lives in order to survive. If one ignores this reality than they are living in a fantasy world.

[tman_ndsu08]

Atheist, you arguments are perfectly logical from a scientific point of view.

However, the majority of the pro lifers are not arguing that life is special from a scientific point of view. They're arguing from a religious point of view. As we all know, religion is lifted of the burden of being logical.

[atheist]

Regardless of religion it's fact that in order to live we must consume others' lives. My view has as much to do with those of a religious person's than a non-religious person's.

[Brian]

First off there has always been good, then the absence of good was sin and now the overcoming of sin is great. And why do we grant more to the sinners and those who commit criminal acts, than to those who cant defend themselves. Ever heard that saying pick on someone your own size, what did those babies do to you anyway?? and why cant they experience this wonderful life? to sense, to love, to play, to remember, to laugh, to talk, to breathe, to cry, we forget sometimes how much freedom we do have and how much life is worth living. Now there is a war right from conception, grant the newcomers at least peace before they come into this everchanging and warring world, and I pray that all of you to stop being so selfish, have faith and get over it. Live and let live.

[gr8ridejester]

I say teens becoming pregnant should be required to go through counciling and be given notification of every possible option they have before a decision to abort the child can be made. I think it's time for American parents to start paying attention to their children and not put up with any BS from their own child. If a teen cannot handle the possiblity of having a baby, they do not need to be having sex in the first place. It's a responsibilty issue.

Americans have lost the sense of responsiblity and accountability. They want to scream, "It's my choice" to do this or "Why should I conform" to that. The laws that were made for us were not intended to infringe upon our "rights", however when does one person's right become more important than another's?

Just because you make a mistake doesn't mean your baby should have to suffer for your ignorance. In the case of rape, yeh, it's a sticky subject, but the baby should be given the opportunity to live. I know it sounds heartless to the rape victim, but there are other options besides doing worse to the baby than what the raper did to the victim. Of course, I also think a person who rapes should be deprived of his "weapon". Let him try to do it again.

It may be your choice to have sex to create a baby, but after you've done the creating part, it's no longer you're body we're talking about. It's the babies body and his/her choice.