Amazon.com Widgets
  • I believe it is

    In order for something to be considered immoral, it must cause some kind of unnecessary harm to an innocent party who has not consented to such harm. In order for something to be considered a "party" worth considering, it, or its constituent members, must be capable of suffering. A foetus does not meet this requirement, and as such I do not consider abortion immoral, but I would consider unnecessarily harming the pregnant individual by forcing them to go through a pregnancy to be immoral, and hence abortion is a human right.

  • It is not necessary

    Here, in Britain at least, condoms can be obtained from clinics for free, and there are a plethora of other cheap contraceptives. People already have the right to not have sex, or if they choose to do so, have sex in a way where pregnancy will not occur. Contraception should always be first option, abortion is only for the rare cases where the contraceptive hasn't worked. Abortion done purely out of lack of planning is certainly a privilege, and not a human right

  • Taking away a human beings right to life is not a human right.

    I fail to understand how taking a human beings right to live or have a chance at life is human right. The logic can be comparable to that of owning slaves. The fetus is not a part of the women's body, and therefore the women does not have a right to kill the unborn baby because it's simply in her body.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.