Abortion - Free Will and Responsibility of Women, NOT Mankind

It is sad to see that abortion had became the second next issue that would be critical to the presidential election, and see how such an issue had been MISUSED by both religions and politicians to divide the nation of the ignorant and the faithful to achieve their personal glory and agendas.

Mankind had been given the gift of free will by our common Creator. When a woman is pregnant, it is her free will and responsibility over the life of the child inside her.

If mankind were to create laws that take that decision and free will from her, then it will become mankind's responsibility over what happens next.

There are a variety of reasons why a female would get pregnant. We should not just simply base the reason that she was a 'loose' woman and thus resulted in such situations, for there is empirical evidence to suggest NOT so, only is the most convenient one to fool others to accept the anti abortion stance.

If a female is forced against her will, resulting in a live birth, then is mankind prepared to take FULL responsibility for the child should the mother not be able to when it imposes its will to ban abortions?

Truth is, very very seldom does mankind accepts such responsibilities, but instead DEMAND the mother to take care of her child. Worse, at times resulting in the loss of both mother and child in tragedies of life and modern living such as poverty, lack of emotional support, discrimination, etc.

Then will mankind equally be held accountable for such losses in life when it imposes its will to ban abortions?

I applaud the humans whom stalk abortion clinics and try to sway women away from abortions in lands where abortions are not banned. Such is the manner to fight abortions - peacefully through winning hearts and minds, and NOT by force.

The insignificant nobody me is FULLY, TOTALLY and ABSOLUTELY against abortions, but I will never force anyone against their free will, more so over the issue of abortions., for it takes away precious lives, a murder upon an innocent child human

RATHER, education and family orientated motivations are the way to win hearts and minds for a mother to want her child, and love him/her for life, along with society's support.

Mainstream religions and politicians must comprehend that the best laws are those that a citizen will accept and abide by on their own free will, and not by imposition, for no mortal can look beyond the heart of human, which is capable of deeds well hidden, of both good and bad.

Let the woman take FULL responsibility and free will for the child, the way EVE accepted, not from man but by our common Creator, and we mankind give her the fullest support in terms of education, motivations, goals and material needs where we can, for her to keep and love the child.

When it comes to politics, they will say anything that will get them more votes. If abortion is the hot topic and they know a lot of people are opposed to it, you can bet they are going to capitalize on it.

Religion, well we all know their stand point.

I am of the similar mind as you. Freedom of choice, that is what the US and many other nations are based upon.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


if you ditched all that religious idiocy you might have ended up saying something usefull.

Every mother should doubt themselves a little.. hopefully they take that feeling and use it to raise the best child they can.

Until there is brain activity, it is simply replicating mass.
After there is brain activity, it is a person.

If there is no brain activity, it is simply extracting some mass before it turns into something
If there is brain activity, it is killing a person.

This is actually a very simple subject matter to resolve once people get their heads out of their erm...thing and use a bit of science for clarification.

So, when is the earliest possible timeframe a fetus can show signs of brain activity? which week/month? Don't guess it though, the hard facts are indeed out there.

Funny, your title seems to suggest that once a woman is pregnant she is solely responsible for that child.

It still does take two people to make a baby the old fashion way right? Or are women setting up IVF labs in their basement to self-impregnate?

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

I have put forward this view many times...

Unless you are a women carrying the fetus it is none of your business.

Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

 

I have put forward this view many times...

Unless you are a women carrying the fetus it is none of your business.

How did that fetus come to be? Did she do it herself? If someone else was involved, I'd say it was the father's "business" too.

reply to post by Blueracer


True but look at OP's title. Purposeful wording of women and mankind and where the emphasis is placed.

Face it, in the whole pregnancy equation, us men have been reduced to simple sperm donors. Man wants a kid, woman don't, well tough luck. Vice versa, same story. We have zero say in the matter, and no I don't agree with it.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


Ofcourse.

Because if I'm a man, and I impregnate a woman, thank I should have NO say in whether or not she aborts the baby right?

Madness.

Both people contributed to the conception, they should have equal weight in the decision process so long as everything was consentual.

~Tenth

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

Mankind had been given the gift of free will by our common Creator. When a woman is pregnant, it is her free will and responsibility over the life of the child inside her.

Great!
No more child support.
It's all on you!

reply to post by badgerprints


Maybe if we get our wallets inplanted in our leg or something. Then it will be my body, my money!

reply to post by TKDRL

Trying to support the OP
Just going along with the program.
If the father gets no say then the mother assumes all responsibility.
Her free will. His freedom.

reply to post by badgerprints


In the UK(pretty sure it's the UK), there are even lesbians going after paternal child support from the sperm donor, and actually winning.... Dude is gay, decided to help his lesbian buddies have two kids, then they pull that on him. People make me sick sometimes......

source

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by badgerprints

 

In the UK(pretty sure it's the UK), there are even lesbians going after paternal child support from the sperm donor, and actually winning.... Dude is gay, decided to help his lesbian buddies have two kids, then they pull that on him. People make me sick sometimes......

source

It's sad.
Remember the good ole days when parents raised their kids and stayed married. Even if they weren't perfect parents back then, they still had it more together than things are nowdays.

I think both same sex parents should have to sign a legal document accepting total financial cause and clearing the donor of all responsibility BEFORE they are allowed to adopt or get sperm/egg donation.

reply to post by SaturnFX

You're right, the hard numbers are out there.

At the average time when a woman is aware that she is pregnant (the fifth to sixth week after conception), the preborn human being living inside her is metabolizing nutrition, excreting waste, moving, sucking his or her thumb, growing, and doing many other things that non-living things just do not do. As early as 21 days after conception, the baby's heart has begun to beat his or her own unique blood-type, often different than the mother's. (Moore & Persaud, The Developing Human, p.310; Nilsson & Hamberger, A Child is Born, p.86; Rugh & Shettles, From Conception to Birth, p.217.) At 40 days after conception, brain waves can be read on an EEG, or an electroencephalogram. (Dr. H. Hamlin, Life or Death by EEG, JAMA, Oct.12, 1964, p.113.)

www.prolifephysicians.org...

I'll accept a change to 40 days, will you?

Originally posted by Blueracer

Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101

 

I have put forward this view many times...

Unless you are a women carrying the fetus it is none of your business.

How did that fetus come to be? Did she do it herself? If someone else was involved, I'd say it was the father's "business" too.

Once it is there in the physical domain of the women it is for the women alone to decide who else can be involved.

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

You're right, the hard numbers are out there.

At the average time when a woman is aware that she is pregnant (the fifth to sixth week after conception), the preborn human being living inside her is metabolizing nutrition, excreting waste, moving, sucking his or her thumb, growing, and doing many other things that non-living things just do not do. As early as 21 days after conception, the baby's heart has begun to beat his or her own unique blood-type, often different than the mother's. (Moore & Persaud, The Developing Human, p.310; Nilsson & Hamberger, A Child is Born, p.86; Rugh & Shettles, From Conception to Birth, p.217.) At 40 days after conception, brain waves can be read on an EEG, or an electroencephalogram. (Dr. H. Hamlin, Life or Death by EEG, JAMA, Oct.12, 1964, p.113.)

www.prolifephysicians.org...

I'll accept a change to 40 days, will you?

edit on 2-11-2012 by charles1952 because: bracket error

edit on 2-11-2012 by charles1952 because: another one

Reactionary muscle functions is not brain functions. you can remove a heart and put in a fake one and the person is alive. You can remove muscles, arms, legs, etc and still have a living person.
You cannot replace a brain.
The brain...synaptic activity..learning..experiencing..being alive. That is the only real qualification of being a person..the rest, you can do in a lab by hitting nerve endings.

Although some argue that the brain starts activity at 5 months, I disagree. there is a fully functioning central nervous system at the end of 3 months, and to me, that is enough to be considered a cut off date..not because a central nervous system alone dictates potential for experience, but after that point, your guessing.

40 days or less would be optimal for decisions mind you. I am of the opinion that the moment you realize your knocked up, you choose right then and there..give it a day or two max to contemplate, and then once you make your decision, commit to it. 2 months or less for reasonable decisionmaking..after that, frankly, they already made up their mind.

So...your number plus a few more weeks and we are more or less in agreement..and the world can finally put this issue to bed.

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

You're right, the hard numbers are out there.

At the average time when a woman is aware that she is pregnant (the fifth to sixth week after conception), the preborn human being living inside her is metabolizing nutrition, excreting waste, moving, sucking his or her thumb, growing, and doing many other things that non-living things just do not do. As early as 21 days after conception, the baby's heart has begun to beat his or her own unique blood-type, often different than the mother's. (Moore & Persaud, The Developing Human, p.310; Nilsson & Hamberger, A Child is Born, p.86; Rugh & Shettles, From Conception to Birth, p.217.) At 40 days after conception, brain waves can be read on an EEG, or an electroencephalogram. (Dr. H. Hamlin, Life or Death by EEG, JAMA, Oct.12, 1964, p.113.)

www.prolifephysicians.org...

I'll accept a change to 40 days, will you?

edit on 2-11-2012 by charles1952 because: bracket error

edit on 2-11-2012 by charles1952 because: another one

Reactionary muscle functions is not brain functions. you can remove a heart and put in a fake one and the person is alive. You can remove muscles, arms, legs, etc and still have a living person.
You cannot replace a brain.
The brain...synaptic activity..learning..experiencing..being alive. That is the only real qualification of being a person..the rest, you can do in a lab by hitting nerve endings.

Although some argue that the brain starts activity at 5 months, I disagree. there is a fully functioning central nervous system at the end of 3 months, and to me, that is enough to be considered a cut off date..not because a central nervous system alone dictates potential for experience, but after that point, your guessing.

40 days or less would be optimal for decisions mind you. I am of the opinion that the moment you realize your knocked up, you choose right then and there..give it a day or two max to contemplate, and then once you make your decision, commit to it. 2 months or less for reasonable decisionmaking..after that, frankly, they already made up their mind.

So...your number plus a few more weeks and we are more or less in agreement..and the world can finally put this issue to bed.

I have been saying this for a while. I think the key is getting the pro-life and pro-choice people to compromise on this.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Because if I'm a man, and I impregnate a woman, thank I should have NO say in whether or not she aborts the baby right?

You already have no say in how she chooses to manage her body during pregnancy, so the question of whether or not you have a say has already been answered without the need to bring up the abortion topic. You simply don't, naturally.

It's not as if once you impregnate a woman, you're magically given half control over her body, it's still naturally her body. What she chooses to eat, drink, or do with her body, is still within her full control, as mother nature has for some mysterious reason given.

As for men, they have a choice of getting involved in the childs life or not, you can't force them, I can't force you. The state may try to remedy or enforce men to take responsibility financially if a pregnancy was to go forward, but then again how many men slip threw those cracks and evade responsibility? And what's financial assistance when the father himself doesn't choose to take care of kid either, or even acknowledge?

It's a two way street, this debate. You can't have your cake and eat to too.