Should abortion be banned if the parents simpy don't want the baby?

Asked by: Auragirl360
  • I think it should

    I think that people shouldn't abort just because they don't want the baby. It seems thoughtless to me. Nevermind money, life at home or rape - that's a different debate. If everything's fine and the parents were careless enough not to use a condom, no longer want a baby etc. Then I think it's unfair.

  • Why is crime illegal?

    The primary purpose of government is to protect fundamental rights. That’s why we have laws against rape, murder, and child neglect. How is abortion any different? It takes away from the child's right to choose what they want. If the parent's simply don't want the baby, they should just put him/her into adoption. I would much rather know I was adopted than to be dead.

  • Cannot justify murdering innocence.

    Why do people try to justify killing another human being. I understand if the human being is someone like Hitler, but a baby is innocent not evil. How in the hell can you justify murder with "oh but it's my right." Women suck it up you gave away that right of choice by having sex. Live with your choices. A baby is neither evil nor good you cannot justify murdering one.

  • Stupid stupid stupid

    If you don't want a baby don't have sex. If you're foolish enough to have sex when you don't want a baby, and you get a baby, just put it up for adoption. There are more families wanting to adopt than there are children available for adoption. There is no good reason to kill someone simply because his/her parents are to foolish to not have sex.

  • Right of Life

    All people have the right to life. I think aborting this life is contradictory to that, therefore it should be illegal. I could understand the controversy if the mother's life is in danger of dying to protect her child, but if it's simply a matter of convenience, a baby is a consequence of a sin she committed (adultery), and therefore she should face the consequences of her choice.

  • You made a choice when you got pregnant.

    Once a viable pregnancy starts, the idea that you can just change your mind ... When exactly do parental responsibilities kick in? The whimsy of getting pregnant and then aborting is a terrible precedent to set. What happens when the whimsy kicks back in and she wants the chid back again? Right, you can't undo an abortion.

    There is a period of decision allowed after a birth happens, but there is also a point at which the decision is made. Partial birth abortions, for example, are still legal in much of the world. That is stabbing the baby in the skull as it emerges into the world. Its not technically born yet, but if you sneeze or something and the baby comes out and THEN you conduct the procedure - you commit murder.

    Allowing actions that tangle so closely to clearly ethically wrong actions, to allow life and death decisions to be little more than a whim is a dangerous precedent to set. We have little basis to demand respect for life with such cavalier attitudes in place.

  • Its the parents fault that they got a baby when they are not ready

    Abortion is a touchy subject and i do believe all life deserves a chance but i do support abortion for the reasons of rape, the mother's life in danger, sex related crimes, etc. However when the parents get a baby and they want to abort it because they don't want a baby thats is just PLAIN WRONG. They WILLINGLY HAD SEX WITH EACH OTHER AND MADE THE BABY. Thats different from life being in danger or a victim getting unwillingly pregnant by a rapist.

  • Abortion can be a touchy subject

    I think that abortion should only be used in cases where the mother or baby is in danger of death. You shouldn't use it as a form of birth control that should not be it's intended purpose. If you're not careful enough to take precautions before partaking in the baby making process then you're asking for a possible unwanted pregnancy. Don't be silly people!

  • It isn't pro life, it was your own decision, don't make others pay for your regret

    You are having a kid, you don't want the kid, whose fault was it to get pregnant? Now the government wants to raise taxes for people who chose to have sex, and get pregnant. Now I wouldn't mind if the people who want the abortion pay for it all by themselves, but since you are forcing others to pay taxes for your mistake, then I have a problem with it

  • Because there are other options.

    Although it is impossible to define whether or not a couple WANT a baby, as this term is subjective, I believe that is consensual, unprotected sex was taken place, with the known risk of conceiving a baby, then the parents should accept their full responsibility and nurture the child until birth. If they do not want the child, then their first mistake was to practise unprotected sex, as it has many other risks. Not wanting the baby is not a valid reason. However, in cases of financial interests, or situations where either partner could come to harm, it is understandable that abortion should be allowed. I am pro-choice in every way, but this is silly. You have created the child by risking unsafe sex, your punnishment is a burden for 9 months. However, if the child is still not wanted (many parents who are refused abortion may grow to love their child), then adoption is perfectly acceptable. I am discluding financial and scientific reasons (such as rape or incest) in this, because in those cases, abortion is acceptable. Also, if the physical or mental health of either parent is at risk, then abortion should be acceptable.

  • Violation of privacy

    Regardless of how I feel or how anyone feels, or how anyone's religion feels about abortion it is a women's body and it should be a women's right. Banning anything based on a subjective lack of a need is far too complicated and has a lot of potential to create more problems than it solves. Besides that it should not be the place of the government to regulate anyone's bodies regardless of the circumstance. Roe v wade may have been too early for America to handle well but it was the right decision.

  • Absolutely not. I think your stupid if you think abortion is wrong and bringing a being into this life to suffer is righteous.

    First of all if a parent doesnt want children they probably arent cut out to be parents. I think parents have the right to have sex without bringing children into the world. Its funny how people think that its ok for a god to bring humans here to suffer from slavery and other horrible things but it isnt ok for a human to abort a baby to prevent it from suffering. One is humane and one is indecent and cruel. I dont think the pleasure of those that are happy is worth the misery of those who are miserable. Therefore i think its wrong to have kids anyways. Bringing life into the world is an act of cruelty while aborting a baby is an act of decency and consideration. Your morally incompetent if you feel differently and we have religion to think for your stupidity. Religion has caused slavery genocide and immeasurable cruelty. Gods are never better than the men who made them up. We need better moral teachings than ancient peoples likes and dislikes.

  • Its too complicated

    I personally find the idea of aborting a child to be morally wrong; however I firmly stand in the camp that it should be legal. The reasons why people get abortions are broad and complex. It is rare that there is a single, simple reason as to why someone wants an abortion. It would be far too difficult to create a law against aborting a child under the circumstances listed in the title. While I agree, people shouldn't have abortions for such a reason, it would be a logistical nightmare trying to figure out how to work this belief into law and it would be even more difficult to truly enforce it.

  • Abortion is murder. And it should always be completely legal for everyone.

    There is a fine line not to be crossed and the law is incapable of not crossing it where abortion is concerned. Because "justice is blind", 'justice' is incapable of seeing things on a case by case basis, which is literally the only way any abortion law could function.
    I believe the moral issue is black or white. I believe that to remove a fetus that has implanted and is growing, knowing full well that removal will inevitably lead to it's death, is murder.
    However, in this debate of two lives, there is a moral imperative to protect and serve the life that is already in existence. Is this life worth more? We will never know, but it is the life that has undoubtedly more rights. Serving the existing life (the mother) isn't necessarily good, but it is certainly the lesser of two evils.
    Back on topic, "Should... If the parents SIMPLY don't want the baby". I fail to see what is simple about a mother's decision not to give birth to her child. There is nothing less simple. This decision is reported by BOTH pro-life and pro-choice camps as one of the most difficult decisions a woman might ever be unfortunate enough to make.
    And that's the clincher isn't it? There is no parent that "simply" doesn't want to have their baby. It's complicated. So complicated in fact that we have to allow for later term abortions to give people a chance to work it out in their heads and make the decision at all. Because the decision is so vastly difficult and every individual's experience with it is different, there is no way to write a law that would cover every persons situation. Therefore a law banning abortions for "desire of the mother not to carry to term" could never exist in an effective way that didn't condemn some woman who has a legitimate reason to abort for the sake of a woman who didn't. And any law that was implemented would be terrible because it could not distinguish between a legitimate reason and what others PERCEIVE as a 'simple' desire not to have the child.

  • Isn't this the whole point of abortion in the first place?

    Whenever a woman gets an abortion, practically, it is *always* because a baby is not wanted at that particular time for one reason or another, although some reasons provided are definitely more compelling than others. But at the end of the day, regardless of why a woman does not want to carry on a pregnancy, it is still her body, her uterus, and she has the right to refuse to donate it to the fetus to keep it alive.

  • Actions come with consequences.

    The woman choses if she wants sex, and by choosing that she also choses the chance of a baby. All girls know that birth control won't always work. The woman runs the risk of becoming a mother. Being a mother comes with the responsibility of delivering the baby. If the parents think hard about it and decide they don't want the baby they can give it up for adoption. Then the child is at least alive and has a good family. Everyone has the right to life, including babies. The woman has to accept the fact that her choice influences not only her but her husband, parents, child, possible foster parents, and many others that the child may influence in his/her life. She has the choices but they always come with consequences. You cannot murder someone and say "I didn't want them to die I just wanted to kill them." That's not how life works.

  • It shouldn't be.

    As some of you may know, there is a law that doesn't let the mother abort after a certain amount of time. Before that timeline is overrun the fetus is technically " dead " or not alive ( yet ) better said. Think about this, that mother does not want that child to be born, do you really want that child to live trough a miserable life ? A mother who doesn't want him, and if he's lucky to be in an adoptive foundation , the pain he would go trough when his parents tell him he is a lie. I believe its best to just put them down out of life that will only bring them pain an sorrow. That's my opinion .

  • No. Such a stance would be far to vague.

    How would we make such determinations? There could be a number of reasons why a parent would want to get an abortion. "Simply not wanting it" could encompass multiple factors, such as burden on health, forced pregnancy, unstable financial situations, the list goes on. I am assuming that most abortions happen because the parents don't want the baby. But that's not simple. And making such determinations for each individual on a legal basis would be next to impossible.

  • Not entirely, but...

    Depending on the reason. There are perfectly legit reasons for parents to "just not want the baby," like not being physically or financially ready or having a job they can't viably take maternity/paternity leave from. However, there are reasons for which abortion is not justified, like based on sex. Now before you moralize about "unborn lives," a fetus before a certain point has never thought or known. Sure it can feel pain earlier, but like animals it can't *know* that it's in pain.

  • It should be nobody's choice but the choice of the parents. What right have you to an opinion?

    In my book, ANY reason is a good reason. Nobody has any right to question it. Don't want the baby? That's fine. It's your choice, your body.

    I honestly don't understand what makes these "pro-lifers" *cough* anti-choice *cough* think that they deserve an opinion. What difference does it make if a woman has an abortion? It isn't your baby. How on earth does it affect your life if a woman does or does not have an abortion? It doesn't. That woman could chose to keep the baby and you wouldn't even know the difference.

    Dear anti-choicers, you really need to start respecting other peoples choices, especially when said choice has no impact on you. You play by your rules, we'll play by ours. Morality is subjective. Is that so hard?

    Or are you telling me that you couldn't possibly sleep at night knowing that a thoughtless, emotionless blob of cells was prevented from becoming an all-consuming pooping machine?

    How sad for you.

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