coemgen said:
So, you’re saying it’s not a decision? She may not go in that day, but it’s a decision she’s making.
No, not at all. I just say it's not a spontaneous decision like "Today I drink tea instead of coffee." It's generally a decision that either comes after a lot of time thinking and rethinking, or out of a state of desperation knowing one is not capable taking the responsiblity that comes with it, or sadly, because they weren't as careful with contraception as they ought to be.
And, as I pointed out, before the actual abortion is undertaking, a lot of counselling is involved.
I don't see why you say I'm implying there is no decision made.
This is great. I’m glad to hear a woman (and the father, I’m assuming) go through these steps before making the decision. However, you were equating the loss of life in a car accident to that of abortion, and by sharing this you’re only further illustrating my point: an accident and a conscious decision are two different things.
The car accident example was rather employed because I thought the "Don't abort, you never know what this child would turn out to be, or do.", is dangerous as people might be starting to blame people for having aborted the potential "Mr/Ms AIDS Cure", saying that the car driver also could be the one who killed that potential child.
It was aimed at the "What might this child once become" argument, and rather indirectly at the abortion.
And, yes, abortion certainly is a conscious decision. If the doctor sees it's not whe mustn't perform the abortion.
I actually agree with you on the first part of this, and I can honestly say I respect the position of keeping abortion legal, but still being against it morally. I see where people are coming from with this perspective, I still disagree with it though. That said, I also don’t think the case against abortion should be made using religion either. I think it can be made without it. First, like I’ve mentioned before, if done 21 days after conception, there’s a beating heart. If you stop a beating heart outside of the womb, it’s murder. Heck, if a pregnant lady is murdered it’s considered two murders. Why the double standard?
Also, I’ve mentioned in other debates on this topic that my wife had an abortion before we met. She got pregnant and felt pressured into it and regrets it terribly. She’s undergone counseling for it and has had to overcome a lot of issues with it. She’s healing, but it’s been a long, difficult road. I’ve heard this from many, many other women. It’s not just a medical procedure being done. It’s not like a day-surgery kind of thing. It’s traumatic for many women. There’s a built-in bond that’s being broken and they often don’t know how hard it’s going to be to recover from breaking that bond — and this includes women who don’t have the religious views of abortion. My wife now shares her story openly to young women at our church and others so they can make a more informed decision should they find themselves in that situation.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not at all about taking abortion lightly. I'm not for it if not necessary at all and think every alternative is better (except for medical reasons) than performing an abortion, especially preventing the pregnancy.
I would strictly oppose anyone who said, "Well, if it happens we will just go abort", of course.
But still I think it is very important for many reasons to keep it legal, and am strongly supporting the way it's done in Europe.
I would have to ask some expert in German/European law, because I don't know if it would be considered double-murder here either.
Nevertheless, abortion and murder are too different things and I don't think it's a double-standard. Again, I would encourage every person to consider every alternative there is over abortion.
I couldn't figure out how to word it properly, but in my post I pointed out that for most women it's not an easy decision beforehand, and is very often a traumatizing event for her, so if it didn't come across, I'm certainly aware of that and with you on that part.
I agree with this except for the debatable part on the translation and interpretations. : )
I took that from the Bible discussions regarding homosexuality and abortion in other threads, where different translations were quoted time and time again (do you say so?) about certain parts of the Bible, and the interpretations of those sometimes were as different as chalk and cheese (German: as day and night
).
And having learned two different languages, there's one thing I've learned for sure: translating texts into another language, you will definitely have variations in those texts, and both would be technically right.
Yes, you’re right – we can’t predict what a child might be capable of once born. That wasn’t my point. My point was just the thought that we may miss out on some really cool people who could add something special to life. It was a general statement using one illustration to make the point. That’s it. That said, I still think the most normal of lives, or most basic of lives, is valuable enough not to abort.
Of course, no one wants to deny a child to experience what life is, be it a basic life, or an outstanding one.
