Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Do you think abortion should be legal?

  1. Sep 27, 2004 #1
    Do you think abortion should be legal?

    Yes, No
    And what restrictions, in your opinion?

    I searched "abortion" to see if there was already a topic about it and I couldn't find one, but if there is -- tell me and i'll delete this one.
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 27, 2004 #2


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Its been a while since its been debated...

    My opinion:

    Abortions shouldn't be done after the 1st trimester except in special cases and after the 2nd except in extreme cases.

    But, that isn't to say I think abortion should be illegal. Being male, I am uncomfortable making that law. I guess you could say, I'm pro choice, but anti-abortion.
  4. Sep 27, 2004 #3
    I'm kind of the same, Russ. I'm anti-abortion but pro-baby killing...that way, everyone loses! :tongue2:
    KIDDING PEOPLE! jeez...
  5. Sep 27, 2004 #4
    Abortion should not be illegal. Russ' restrictions sound fine to me.

    Having said that, anyone who says "A woman's right to choose" will forever lose any respect I might have had for them.
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2004
  6. Sep 27, 2004 #5
    Let me just apologize in advance for how my response might affect someone, however we'll have to agree to disagree on abortion.

    I am pro-life under any circumstances EXCEPT death of the mother.

    None of the mothers actions is the childs fault, and that is what adoption is for.
    My feeling is that if you allow a penis to enter a vagina, at that point you are fully responsible, and should be prepared to have a child anyway.

    Some people argue that I am a mean person because I think that if a woman is raped, she should still have the child, but what those people are misunderstanding is that, when that child is born - it has a lifetime in front of them and they won't be thinking about their mother being raped every day of it. They'll be sorry, but I am sure he/she(the child) will be much happier it is alive.

    9 months opposed to a lifetime, is nothing.
  7. Sep 27, 2004 #6


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    it may have some justification in being morally wrong, but LOGICALLY, to outlaw abortion is to put women's life in danger as they will seek illegal and unsafe abortions because they know we (as in our society) have the technology and means to perform it...i think this is the main reason abortion does and will stay legal, not because of moral reasons. i think anyone who is pro-choice should forgo their own opportunity to reproduce and be willing to adopt the unwanted children that their mother's chose NOT to abort...
  8. Sep 27, 2004 #7
    I couldn't agree more.
  9. Sep 27, 2004 #8
    Hey, whady'a know, I'm pretty much in agreement with Russ.

    I'm against abortion unless the mother's life is in danger.

    However, there are stupid, irresponsible people who will get pregnant when they don't want to, and having a child born to parents who are A) stupid enough to have a baby they didn't want, and B) not going to love them, is a horrible thing. So what I'm for, is making it so that no one who doesn't want to have a baby will. This includes educating as many people as possible about birth-control mechanisms, and giving out birth control for free in many different locations. It's a horrible situation where someone has to choose between killing an unborn baby and having a baby they don't even want, and I'm for doing anything to make it so that situations arises as infrequently as possible.

    If someone's raped, that's horrible, and they should see their doctor right away and aside from having any injuries to them being checked, be given a "morning after" pill, which (from what I remember from health class) will actually work around 2 full days after.

    Educate people about birth control, give it away, whatever, just make sure people don't get pregnant when they don't want to.

    I'm glad to see that at least on this issue, everyone seems to be in complete agreement about the goal, it's likely just the method people would use to attain this goal that would differ from one another.
  10. Sep 27, 2004 #9


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Can't say I agree with the reasoning. This sounds to me a lot like the old "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" position. I just think it's a bad idea to make something legal just because of what criminals will do if it's illegal. If we legalise homocide, we can egt government controlls in place and make sure the killings get done efficiently and with a minimum of suffering for the victim or risk to innocent bystanders ( a ridiculous example, but I think the principles are the same). It just doesn't make a good reason for taking that action.

    Although I tend to agree with your position, I'm not in total agreement with your reasoning, either. Your entire line of reason depends on the assumption that a fetus is a living person, doesn't it? I don't think anyone can say for certain that it is or it isn't. However, I do think abortion should be outlawed.
  11. Sep 27, 2004 #10
    Go to the Bio forum and ask that question, you'll get all sorts of explanations of exactly what fetuses have the ability to do/what body parts they have at what stages of development. It's amazing how quickly they advance, and how quickly they really are just immature, fully developed humans.
  12. Sep 27, 2004 #11
  13. Sep 27, 2004 #12


    User Avatar

    Too true. Although I believe that (as a woman) I have a right to decide what happens to my body I don't think we do ourselves any justice by fooling ourselves. We women make a choice when choosing to abort. Our life/lifestyle over that of another human beings, it just so happens that it's also somewhat of a temporary appendage which we have a right to remove if we so choose.
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2004
  14. Sep 28, 2004 #13


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Clearly, the crux of the matter should be in defining these "special" and "extreme" cases. What is the problem with putting in the right medical wording that leaves little room for "loopholes" ? I think it's dangerous to refuse to debate the details of the matter, on the basis of one ideology or the other.
  15. Sep 28, 2004 #14


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Like many others here, I would say that abortion in the first trimester is acceptable, I would even extend that into the 4th month of pregnancy. By the 5th and 6th months, it's getting iffy. Then it shouldn't be just because the woman decided she doesn't want to be pregnant anymore or doesn't want a baby, but because something is going wrong...major birth defects detected, health problems for the mother (an example would be she is diagnosed with a rapidly spreading cancer that can't wait until the end of the pregnancy to begin treating to have any chance of surviving...the alternatives of her not living long enough to be a mom or the fetus being harmed by chemotherapy are not any better than aborting and getting treatment).

    In the last trimester, abortion should only be permitted if either the mother or fetus will not survive otherwise. In other words, if the fetus develops such a problem that it's not likely to survive once delivered, even if it will be born alive, then allow the mother to abort and spare those last few traumatic months expecting to deliver a baby that will die within hours of birth. Or, if something is life-threatening to the mother, abortion is an option late in pregnancy.

    The most important component to my opinion on abortion is that everything possible should be done to educate people and make birth control available so that unwanted pregnancies don't happen in the first place. And, I also believe that if someone is anti-abortion, then they should not stigmatize a woman for having that baby...i.e., the case of an unwed and/or teen mother. I also think those are the people who need to step up to the plate and adopt children. Afterall, adoption isn't much of a solution if nobody wants to adopt the children.
  16. Sep 28, 2004 #15


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It is not that silly, in fact. Why is it more "wrong" to kill a newborn baby than to kill an adult dog, except for a species preference ?
  17. Sep 28, 2004 #16
    It's not more wrong at all, it's exactly the same. =) I agree.
  18. Sep 28, 2004 #17


    User Avatar

    Well, I'm not sure I'm quite ready to compare babies to dogs BUT if I were to compare humans to dogs I might point out that when a dog kills it's pups it's not usually allowed to breed again....
  19. Sep 28, 2004 #18


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Anyone compare which economic groups have the most abortions and then compare that to crime rates about 17 years or so after Roe vs. Wade on up to the present?

    Regardless of the above, I'm anti-abortion and debates over trimesters and so on are splitting hairs. The only exceptions should be health of the mother, rape, incest, and detectable disabilities. For the most part, people should take responsibilities for their actions.
  20. Sep 28, 2004 #19
    I hardly consider a clump of cells and a developed baby the same thing, so I disagree that it is "splitting hairs".
  21. Sep 28, 2004 #20
    Because humans just naturally just value humans above other species.
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2004
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook