hug-a-tree said:
If I were to be pregnant, right now at the age of 16, I'd still have my child. Even if I was raped. Getting ride of the child isn't going to help me. And it really won't help me get over what happened to me.
Until you find yourself in that position, it might be best to not make promises or statements that you may or may not be able to live up to.
I've always been pro-life, because I think abortion is wrong.
And it is your right to believe it to be wrong. However you do not have the right to dictate to other women as to what their choices should be.
So what makes sense to you should also make sense to everybody else?
So she says that a women who has been raped should still have the right to have a child aborted. But still that's just as wrong as before. There's still another life involed, and whether you have an abortion if it's due to rape or just carelessness it's killing a child.
It is not a child until it is born. A woman can naturally abort a foetus at any given time during her pregnancy. That foetus does not become a live child until it is born, alive and breathing.
She argues that when the child is inside you, it's not a real child. But that's not true! I don't understand how someone could think like that!
And yet many mature and educated people also think along the same lines. If it is your personal belief that abortion is wrong, then if you one day find yourself pregnant, you shall simply attempt to carry the child to term. But who or what gives you the right to dictate what you deem correct and proper to everyone else? Don't you think that other women should be given the choice? Or do you think that while you may have a choice, other women should just not be allowed the same right?
The child is very much alive. It has a heart beat and everything. So it may not be out of your body, but it's still a living person whose rights are being ignored.
If the mother were to give birth to a pre-term foetus, the foetus can in fact die. It is not a living person until it is born. Its heart beats because that is what the cells programmed to be the heart makes it so.
If the mother dies, do you think the foetus were to have any rights then? What you fail to realise is that the foetus cannot survive without the mothers body. A foetus is in fact a parasite in the mother and in many instances, the body treats it as such and expels it accordingly. So do you think the foetus should have rights against the mother's body in these instances as well?
How could someone be so cruel to even think about having their child aborted?
And how can you be so cruel as to force someone to do something they do not want to do?
I have a question for you. What if the mother discovers she has cancer after the child has been conceived and if she does not receive immediate treatment, she can and will die. To receive this treatment, she will have to abort the foetus. So who's rights should come first? Should the mother sacrifice herself for a foetus that may or may not survive the duration of the pregnancy?
What really get's to me is that 99% of the abortions done today are done by women who are over 27 who are making an income over over 35,000 a year. My friend says "well they don't have to have a child, if they don't want too. Why ruin her career?" uh, well why'd she get knocked up in the fisrt place? It's amazing that someone could even get pregnant in this day in age, what with all the birth control out there?
I am not even going to bother argueing these points as they are not even worth looking at. You have failed to provide proof for your claims. And you have merely shown your immaturity in regards to birth control.