I’m sort of split on whether to start this in Great Debates or IMHO, but to save those hardworking mods Czarcasm and TVeblen some effort I’ll just put it here and be done with. I’m not really looking for a debate, more of a collection of opinions.
Nonreligious prolifers: why are you opposed to abortion? If your case against abortion is in any way based on religion, please do not respond, I know your arguments already. I’m interested in the people who are not religious at all, or at the very least do not consciously base their prolife opinions on religion.
I’m definitely against killing a one-week old infant. Two weeks earlier, one week before birth, that infant is virtually the same being, so I’m also opposed to that. On the other hand, the loss of a fertilized egg doesn’t bother me a bit. The hard part gets to be in drawing a line between conception, where the immorality factor is zero (IMHO), and birth minus epsilon, when it’s full-scale. My own feeling is that in the first three months, abortion is fine. After that, it really starts to bother me.
Actually, I think you should limit it to those who are actually willing to see the banning of abortion pursued. There are more than a few people on the pro-choice side who have moral objections to abortion but simply don’t think it’s their choice to make.
I agree, except with the 3 month part. I’d look at when a fetus becomes viable, and then back up a bit on the assumption that one should err on the side of caution. That probably puts it at about 5 months. Assuming there is no risk to the mother (other than what is normal during pregnancy), it seems a relatively minor inconvenience to require the mother to carry the baby to term when weighed against the risk of killing a human being.
I’ll elaborate a little to let you know where I’m coming from.
I grew up in an extremely pro-choice household. My mother was a clinic escort for Planned Parenthood all my childhood. I heard the "my body my choice’ stuff all my life, and never questioned it.
In college I marched in pro-choice demonstrations and really couldn’t understand the other side’s point of view.
Then I became one of those young women the whole argument is about. Young, unmarried, broke, scared and pregnant. I’ve been in exactly that position.
Really I’m the 100% recipe for a pro-choice gal.
But in thinking hard about the whole issue, I must say I think the pro-life one makes a lot more sense to me. It feels right.
No one else in my close-knit family agrees, but it doesn’t matter. That thing inside the belly is a baby, and it’s wrong to kill it.
My bigger concern in about the logistics of doing anything about it. I don’t see how it can practically be made illegal, but I think if someone could some up with a law that worked, I’d certainly vote for it.
The rational, scientific view is that life begins at conception. If it doesn’t, then when does it begin? The whole viability argument seems like a rationalization to me. An abortion is the taking of a life. Does that make abortion morally wrong? I don’t know.
Having said that, I don’t want to see abortion made illegal. Like drugs or prostitution, making it illegal doesn’t make it go away. It just drives it underground, making it more dangerous for those who choose to participate.
In a perfect world, there would be no unwanted pregnancies and therefore no need for abortions. Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world.
To address the OP, I am an athiest, and don’t consider myself to me either pro-life (in the sense that I don’t want to ban abortions) or pro-choice (in the sense that I don’t believe that a woman has an inherent “right to choose (to have an abortion)” (how come pro-choicers never finish that sentence?)). Also, I believe that the father should have some say in the matter.
Perhaps you should have listened to less rhetoric. You still support the belief that it is your choice whether or not to keep your child, yes? You are actually allowed to hate abortion with every fiber of your being, believe that it’s your choice to make, and still be pro-choice. That’s why it’s -choice.
Why must this debate turn everyone into mushheads? Let me be simple: Some people believe that a fetus is a person, with all the associated rights and wossnames thereby conferred, including the right not to be killed for others’ convinence. Some people believe that it’s not, and that it’s wrong to screw over mothers over something that isn’t, by their definition, a person. Since we have no consensus as to what makes people people, trying to show that a fetus is like a child (or isn’t) is an exercise in futility. Not that it stops people.