I think you’d find most women hesitate and put quite a bit of thought into their choice before either going forward with the pregnancy or ending it. The stories of all those women who party through their 20’s, legs open, and pop in to the AB clinic every six months or so are just that…stories.
Also, it isn’t just the woman who “lives more comfortably.” If a woman puts off having a child until she is in a better situation, the child(ren) she does have will benefit from that as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnieEnigma
if the end result of the conception is a human being than it only makes sense that life begins at conception. Where am I wrong?
I know. 
but we know this to be true that the result of conception is indeed a human being. How could you say otherwise?
after the conceived item has been born he is indeed a human being… which is the basic result of conception. That’s all I’m saying. It’s pretty simple and it happens everyday, so I can’t be wrong.
Oh, I didn’t read this thread… I didn’t realize it was an abortion debate. I was just responding to the thread title and why I thought life begins at conception.
But now that abortion is on the table, this would be the reason why I support the life of the unborn moreso than a woman’s right to choose. I’m not too keen on a woman’s right to choose, which is my choice, as a woman.
@ Naja…
Well, I’m really only speaking to those that would choose abortion as a way of “after-the-fact” contraception. If you’re in a position where a pregnancy would pose a risk to your health (especially if we’re talking death as a probable possibility), then, of course, there’s little in the way of willy-nilly.
Shoot, my sister is a Type I diabetic, and she’s now in her 3rd pregnancy. Her last one just about killed her. She fell into a coma 2 times, and there were several nights where it was almost impossible to rouse her awake. Still, she decided to keep the kid.
She’s now having another, and it’s a boy. She’s probably braver than I.
Then your belief is misplaced, as your definition is incorrect. Many fertilized eggs do not adhere to the uterine wall; approximately 40%.
Do you think you might be a bit pedant about this? We know that if these fertilized eggs did adhere to the uterine wall, the end result would be a human…
arguing that 40% of pregancies end up in miscarriage is irrelevant. If they made it they would be human.
Ironically, it’s not a what-if. There are such pills, though i’m uncertain what the success rate is on them and at what stages in pregnancy they still work at. There’s something of a big debacle over some pill-form contraceptives which in addition may stop an egg that is fertilised from being able to attach to the wall of the womb (if I remember right. Biology = not my strongest subject). So while I would certainly be willing to believe something as essentially easy as that as a method of abortion would very likely raise willy-nilly-ness levels, I think the existence of similar things shows the generally people are more willing to use preventatives than after-the-fact methods even then; at a guess, I would suspect that people prefer to decrease the amount of pregnancy risk as much as possible, as after all pretty much none of these things are 100% effective. And in addition, there should be a poll on willy-nilly-ness levels, because it’s a fun thing to say. 
I did think of another point to add while I was writing this post; condoms and the like aren’t just used to prevent pregnancy. Condoms can help prevent STDs. A lot of women use the pill because it can help regulate and control their periods. There’s reasons to use such things other than in trying to prevent pregnancy that having an abortion afterwards doesn’t also help with.
Right, I understand. But knowing that a certain percentage of fertilized embryo are indeed implanted into the uterus and pregnancy occurs which results in a human, wouldn’t this give the conception value? Shouldn’t life be valued?
Hey, is a letter of willy-nilly-ness too much to ask here? I’d prefer it written in her blood too. And I’d say at least 10 months of deliberation is in order. I’m going to write my congressman about this now!
No, it’s an important distinction. Your definitions are incorrect. It isn’t a miscarriage. It’s a fertilized egg that never becomes a zygote/embryo/fetus. It’s flushed away in the woman’s menstrual cycle. The woman isn’t even aware of it. Sort of like those eggs you find in the supermarket occasionally with a spot of blood in it. Fertilization=/=conception.
We do. Medical AB’s (medication abortions) are non invasive, are only performed during the first trimester and trigger a menstrual period. I would have to look at the actual numbers, but they don’t seem to be more “popular” than surgical AB’s.
Volume!
Because I don’t believe the result is indeed a human being. Human, yes, being, no.
But after the concieved item has died he is indeed a corpse - which is the basic result of conception. That’s pretty simple and happens every day, too. But we don’t say that because we’re a corpse at one point, we’re therefore a corpse at every other point in our lives as well as the beginning; we don’t say that because we will cease to be a being at one point (albeit still a human unbeing) that we’re never beings. So why should we say that because we’re a being at one point, we are a being at all points?
No problem, I agree with that part alone.
There’s two important aspects of the “right to choose” - the first is that you get a choice, obviously. But the second is equally important - you get to choose for yourself.
Anyway, I think I may have misunderstood a bit; I can certainly sympathise with your reason for valuing the life of the unborn over choice, though I may disagree with it, but I don’t see what you’re indicating as your reason. Which is your reason for putting the life over the choice?
We hit it on our first try also. However, by a rough calculation, my wife got pregnant less than 0.1% of the time. Now, people get hit crossing the street, and people have accidents driving, but don’t you think it is reasonable to be surprised when this happens?
WhyNot, back in the pre-AIDS days when all contraception was created equal, condoms were well known to be the least effective method (beside rhythm and other fairy tales.) They were useful for a first encounter, or if a guy was nervous about whether a woman was really using birth control, but they tended to not be a long term solution. IIRC, the reports said that there was a good bit of human error contributing to the problem.
It’s deja-vu all over again! 
Well, you know, those women are decidedly in the minority. I’ve met plenty of women who are irresponsible with their birth control, but only ever one, single person who consciously chose to have continuous, unprotected sex knowing that pregnancy would result, and choosing abortion as her method of birth control.
By the way, eventually she decided to stop having abortions, and now has two kids she abuses and neglects.
As soon as you can demonstrate to me why not valuing this particular form of ‘life’ would be bad.
Now you’re just being foolish. It’s a serious question - you want to require that the decision be a toughtful, serious one, but there are women (and men, for that matter) who can make important decisions immediately and some who waffle. Suppose a woman spends all of ten seconds weighing the idea of terminating her pregnancy? Is that not long enough or serious enough for you? What is long enough?
Am I wrong, or does this statement:
…imply that if a woman thought long and hard enough, you’d be okay with her terminating her pergnancy? Unless I misunderstood you, what serious standard did you have in mind? If you had none, can this seemingly-reasonable statement of yours be considered null and void, since no amount of thought, serious or otherwise, is in your view sufficient?
My reason is I think a good majority of abortions are done for selfish reasons, and not so much out of need. Real needs, for instance a teen who too young to be a mom, or the life of the mom is compromised, or even rape and incest. We know that the percentages of rape and incest victims becoming pregnant is very small. If there were real valid reasons for the abortion, I would understand… But lets face it, just too many pregancies are due to carelessness. Some women use abortion as their form of birth control, they’re on their third or forth abortion. Or a mom with 3 kids doesn’t want another mouth to feed, etc…
No, I don’t condone this especially since I believe life begins as conception. Look, it’s their body, it’s their life and it’s their choice. But they could have been more careful - in this day and age where we have numerous forms of birth control, I can’t see how a woman would let an unwanted pregnancy happen to her.
Legalized abortion is the law of the land…it’s not about to change. I don’t think the laws will ever be overturned. And even with a republican pro-life president in office for 8 years, nothing has changed, has it.
It’s a woman’s choice, but not everyone will agree. Some people value the life of the unborn over this choice. That’s the thing about abortion. It’s an emotional, heated topic that opposing beliefs feel strongly about… I don’t think there will ever be a happy medium.
Can you explain why it should be your criteria as to what constitutes “real need”? And again; very few women use abortion as a “form of birth control.” It isn’t nearly as prevalent as some people seem to think.
I don’t have to demonstrate anything to you. You either see value in a pre-born life or you don’t, it’s your choice. I’m not your keeper. We’re not all going to value the same things.
I don’t have a problem with your belief, value or morale system, you can think what you want. I just feel differently from you regarding the unborn’s life.
What I see as real need could be different from you see as real need. There are many differing beliefs; it’s not a matter of who is right or wrong. It’s a matter of different beliefs and values.
You’re entitled to think differently from me. And I’m entitled to value the unborn life differently that you do.