DEBATE: Abortion
The Crux of the Issue
When does the right to life begin?
- Most will agree that the child has the right to life after birth. Does the fetus have that same right at conception or only after a certain amount of time to develop?
- What about unfertilized eggs: since the potential for life exists in each one, should they have the right to be fertilized, develop, and be born as well?
- Should termination only be illegal once the fetus reaches the minimum threshold for self-sustainable life?
- MY ANSWER: I feel that life begins at conception. Anything else becomes a slippery-slope argument.
Protecting the Privacy/Sovereignty of a Woman's Body vs. Accepting Consequences for Unplanned Pregnancy
- People should be held accountable for their decisions, and thus an unplanned pregnancy should force a woman to accept responsibility for her actions rather than allowing her to kill an innocent fetus.
- Should the government have the power to force a woman to complete her pregnancy or does she have the sole right to decide about her body?
- How far should the government be expected to protect unborn fetuses? Should it just be when the woman starts to "show" or does it include weekly pregnancy tests of all menstrating women? 24-7 surveillance?
- If you take away the choice, might some mothers be resentful and unloving of their children, leading to abuse and poor self-esteem for the children?
- MY ANSWER: People must be held accountable for their actions. If a woman has an unwanted pregnancy after having sex, she must live with the consequences. Since our Constitution says nothing about Abortion, the power to decide the issue belongs to the States, NOT the federal government. If a State decided to outlaw abortion, it should NOT spy in order to ensure no women violate this law. Rather, honest citizens should report the crime of their own volition. That State must also be willing to take unwanted children with no questions asked if the mother decides she doesn't want the baby after birth. Thus, the State must pay to find foster parents as well as be willing to raise the child if no foster parents volunteer.
Risks of Pregnancy
- At what point is the medical risk of a pregnancy a viable reason to terminate the fetus? If there is a 99% chance that the mother will die from the pregnancy if it isn't aborted, should she still have to carry to term? What about a 10% chance of danger to the mother?
- Is the mother's life more valuable than the fetus, is the fetus's life more valuable than the mother's, or are they of equal value?
- If abortion is outlawed completely, there will still be some women who are in a situation desperate enough to seek out an abortion (not enough money, don't want to get fired, child fathered by someone other than the husbad, etc.) and these women will do the abortion themselves or through black market channels, putting their lives at risk from lack of professional care.
- MY ANSWER: First, it should be acknowledged that this dilemma is very rare. It is very rare that killing the fetus is the only means of avoiding major risk to the mother. Since all human life is equally valuable, doctors are bound to ensure both lives are preserved. However, in those rare cases, if the doctor concludes that there is significant risk to the mother in carrying the child any longer, then the mother should be given the choice whether or not to terminate the fetus.
Circumstances of How the Pregnancy Occurred
- Should abortion be legal in cases of rape or incest? Regardless of how the child was conceived, it still exists, and it has as much a right to exist as any other fetus.
- Is it cruel and unusual to force the mother to endure a 9-month pregnancy and to raise the child which is a constant reminder of a traumatic victimization?
- MY ANSWER: The fetus is not the culprit, and does not deserve to die. After birth, the mother can give the child away if she wants.
Birth Defects
- This spills over into the issue of euthanasia. Who has the authority to decide when the pain and suffering from a genetic abnormality should allow for termination? The mother, father, the doctor, the government, or no one but God?
- Is it torture to do everything possible to sustain a pained life?
- Should the parents be forced to take on the economic burden of paying for all the most advanced medical procedures possible for sustaining such a life?
- MY ANSWER: You cannot force people to pay exorbitant doctor bills. Again, in such cases, if the doctor believes the quality of life will be significantly impaired, then the choice may go to the mother.
Underage Pregnancy
- If a woman younger than 18 years of age is pregnant, should she have the right to decide for an abortion or should that decision go to her parents/guardians?
- MY ANSWER: The parents have no authority over their daughter's pregnancy. If she is old enough to get pregnant in the first place, she is old enough to decide for herself and have her doctor-patient privileges respected. The doctor, however, has an added responsibility to ensure the woman has regular appointments.
The goal of intelligent debate is the joining of ideas and perspectives in order to arrive at a general consensus on the crux of the issue. Good debate is NOT about winning and losing. By persuading with logical arguments, participants might not leave the debate with an altered stance on the issue, but hopefully everyone will better understand the complexities of the issue and respect opposing viewpoints. Eventually, this awareness of the complexity of an issue leads to fair and balanced laws. Many of the problems of the world occur when debate turns into irrational, emotional word-fighting. Such word-fighting deteriorates into insults and hatred, leading to a breakdown of communication which, at best leads to an attitude of "us versus them", and at worst leads to violence and war.
Remember, the goal of debate is to offer insightful ways of looking at the issue so that all participants can work towards a common consensus on the crux of the issue. It is about common understanding, that builds the groundwork for fair and balanced law.
TERMS:
"fetus" is the proper term for a child still in the womb before birth, nevertheless it should be permitted to interchange the term "fetus" with the term "child" because "fetus" connotates something of significantly lesser value than the word "child"
Well, I guess I don't understand why people automatically assume those who are "Pro Choice" are going to be "Pro Abortion."
I don't understand how people want to force their beliefs* on to someone else and say what they can't do instead of supporting in whatever decision they choose. Just because one may be "Pro Choice" does not exactly mean they will always, if ever, choose abortion.
I am Pro Choice, but that doesn't mean, if I were female, I would choose an abortion at all. Ultimately, I would only go for an abortion depending on the situation (like if a girl were to be raped, or if having the child would be worse than having an abortion (such as not being able to support the child, if the girl is doing heavy drugs, etc...)
I don't know. Abortion is an interesting topic, but honestly, I feel abortion is only an attempt by politicians to get attention by pushing the issue one way or another as a political issue.
You have to ask yourself, if you're "Pro Life," if someone has an abortion, how and why would that effect you? Does it really matter to you the way other people choose to live their lives? And, don't you think you should focus on your own life and not someone else's?
To some it up, I am Pro Choice, but that does not mean I believe abortions to be "right" (or "wrong" for that matter, because it doesn't directly affect me one way or the other)
* I consider my views to be Christian, and believe in God and the truth found in the Bible.
Note: Before someone asks how I can't see abortions being wrong even with my beliefs of Christianity, I just have to point to Matthew 7:1.
Note 2: Sorry for any typos and my rambling. Interesting subject, but I don't see why it is as big of an issue as it is made out to be. Like immigration, it is an inflated topic to garner the attention of the public by politicians (if politicians were really concerned about immigration, we would close down the borders of U.S.).
Thanks for your comments. I respect your point of view. I've been a supporter of pro-choice for a long time. I recently lean towards pro-life for the reasons stated in my list. However, I feel both sides have extremely valid points that they make. In truth, I'll support people on either side as long as they promote their point of view with an understanding of the complexity of the issue and an open mindedness to opposing viewpoints. Even if someone agrees with something I believe, it would infuriate me if that person was close-minded and contentious because then that reflects badly on the point of view itself.
In counterpoint to some of your specific comments...
1. I like the libertarian stance that you should be able to do whatever you want as long as it isn't hurting anyone else. The governments role should be limited to protecting our freedoms and stopping those who harm other people. I don't believe in forcing my moral views of gambling, alcohol, or drugs on others. But the reason I could not ignore abortion is because it entails terminating/killing a human fetus/baby. From my point of view, that is hurting another person. However, if you believe a fetus/baby does not have the right to life until it is born, then I can see leaving it upto the mother.
2. Although I believe strongly in a woman's right to have complete control over her own body, I feel that when a woman has sex she needs to accept the responsibility of motherhood as a potential outcome. The fetus/baby was made alive because the mother made a conscious decision to have sex. I feel that decision warrants an added responsbility of seeing the child through to birth as a consequence of her choice.
Again, I totally respect both pro-choice and pro-life. I generally prefer to err on the side of individual freedom, so pro-choice seems to be the place to leave things at for now. Maybe once we've got our economy and foreign policy straightened out, maybe it would an appropriate time to revisit the issue. I may change my mind back and forth several times over the years, but what I really liked was what you said about this issue being manipulated for political gain. In my opinion, this issue gets WAY too much time spent on it when there are MANY other important issues to discuss.