I wonder how many of you have been in the position to have to choose between having an abortion or giving a child up for adoption.

Just how many of you, out of curiosity, have truly been stuck between that rock and that hard place? I bet I could count the number of you on one hand that have been in this position.

This is a very hard decision to make. It is also a very personal decision to make. The government should not be able to make this decision for us. If it does, then we resort to back alley abortions again, like the one that disabled my brother-in-law, and killed many women due to less than safe practices.

I'm neutrαl with the situαtion- yes I think αbortion is not α very good option, αnd to those who think αbortion is like αnother method of birth control αnd treαt it like some gαrbαge dispenser I definαtely think it's wrong!!

rαpe victims, unplαnned pregnαncy... etc. bottom line it's your decision αnd α big one- your killing α bαby 1 week- 30weeks whαtever it's still tαking the life out of someone αnd your going to hαve to deαl with it for the rest of your life.

Like I sαid I'm not PRO life or with αbortions I'm neutrαl.. Get your tubes tied or your wαnkies snipped if you don't wαnt αny goddαmn children!!

embryos, fetuses, bαbies whαtever you mαy cαll it αre still humαns they're living.. just becαuse α tαdpole doesn't look like α frog does it meαn it is not α frog?? -- think αbout it-- your mαking α big choice here..

in my opinion: αbortion should be legαl [if your doing it illegαlly chαnces αre you cαn't sue if you fαll under α mαl-prαctice, being legαl meαns α more sαfer "surgery"] but before getting one they should hαve councilors/therαpists consulting you before the αbortion.. αnd like the one stαte did you should αlso get αn ultrαsound!-- big decisions people..big!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

I wonder how many of you have been in the position to have to choose between having an abortion or giving a child up for adoption.

Just how many of you, out of curiosity, have truly been stuck between that rock and that hard place? I bet I could count the number of you on one hand that have been in this position.

This is a very hard decision to make. It is also a very personal decision to make. The government should not be able to make this decision for us. If it does, then we resort to back alley abortions again, like the one that disabled my brother-in-law, and killed many women due to less than safe practices.

---

Exactly why I don't judge. I can't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saraispiel19

i'm neutrαl with the situαtion- yes i think αbortion is not α very good option, αnd to those who think αbortion is like αnother method of birth control αnd treαt it like some gαrbαge dispenser i definαtely think it's wrong!!!

rαpe victims, unplαnned pregnαncy...etc. bottom line it's your decision αnd α big one- your killing α bαby 1 week- 30weeks whαtever it's still tαking the life out of someone αnd your going to hαve to deαl with it for the rest of your life.

like i sαid i'm not PRO life or with αbortions i'm neutrαl.. get your tubes tied or your wαnkies snipped if you don't wαnt αny goddαmn children!!!

embryos, fetuses, bαbies whαtever you mαy cαll it αre still humαns they're living.. just becαuse α tαdpole doesn't look like α frog does it meαn it is not α frog?? -- think αbout it-- your mαking α big choice here..

in my opinion: αbortion should be legαl [if your doing it illegαlly chαnces αre you cαn't sue if you fαll under α mαl-prαctice, being legαl meαns α more sαfer "surgery"] but before getting one they should hαve councilors/therαpists consulting you before the αbortion.. αnd like the one stαte did you should αlso get αn ultrαsound!-- big decisions people..big!

---

Guess you didn't read the link did you Sarai? Let's say that you are pregnant and you find out that your child has multiple chromosomal abnormalities, probably, most likely will not live past the age of 1 hour, what would you do?

What would you do if you found out that due to a rare anomaly that the fetus inside you is slowly eating away at you and you may live through the 9 months of pregnancy? What would you do?

Like I sαid I'm not αgαinst it J_9 or for it--

I would still keep the bαby though.. I wouldn't be αble to mαke thαt sort of decision

My cousin is actually pressuring me to get one. She made this whole fancy speech about how I would go through life and how I wouldn't get any me time. Even after so many people pressuring me and everything, I find that I can do this. I'm not financially set and I don't really have a job but I just have faith that I can do it. And I see where all of you are coming from, but put yourself in the fetus' position. Imagine if none of you were ever born. Imagine what the lives of the people you care about and have affected for the betters lives would be like.... that's the way I see it anyways.

Ok I'm new to this and I know there is probable a way of how your meant to answer these questions however looking through most answer I see most people are against abortions. Fair enough that for you to decide but have you ever thought of it this way. The baby in the womb not knowing of the outside world of the hurt the pain and the dangers. He may think there is nothing outside his world that he will be created and die in that same world. How do we know that we're not in a "womb" of some sort waiting to be born. People come and go all the time. Do we know we're they go no. Hw do you knoqw that your not going to be aborted tomorrow. Abortion is the choice ogf the mother. The baby doesn't know of the outside world and in all honesty I think never should. It's a horrible place out here I envy them in there all nice and cosy just waiting either for birth or for death it doesn't know and in all honesty it probably doesn't care. I'm not ebign harsh I'm telling the truth the most that's going through that baby's mind is "whats that thing down there strange long tube like thing."

But shouldn't it have a chance at a future? What if martin luther King had been aborted? Or Ghandi? We never think of it that way, but the fetus in a mothers womb could be the person to cure cancer or find a cure for AIDS or something.

Sarai, I know you said that you are neither for nor against it, I was just making a statement, that UNTIL we are in that position we really cannot say what we would do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canada_Sweety

But shouldn't it have a chance at a future? What if martin luther King had been aborted? Or Ghandi? We never think of it that way, but the fetus in a mothers womb could be the person to cure cancer or find a cure for AIDS or something.

---

There are many what-ifs in this world, too many to let that make a difference. What-if the woman who dies from a RH-pregnancy could have cured cancer... there are too many ways to do what-if to even bother with it... we'd end up going in circles...

This is a very hard decision for the women who are actually in this spot where they have to chose, it's a life long decision that will affect the women either way she goes she will have to live with herself and the decision she made, there for with that said I think it's the women's decision. I myself was in this same spot a few months ago, I have two young kids and found out that I was going to have another despite that I was on birth control and tyring to prevent this from happening.
I was going through a lot and the decision came down to was I mentally and physically able to do this again.
It was the hardest decision I ever had to make but after a lot of thinking and praying I did what I thought was best for me and what I knew I could live with.
This needs to be the women's decision unless it comes down to a women living or dying.
I would much rather see a baby be aborted at a few weeks rather then turning on the news and seeing it in the trashcan (dead or alive).
If the baby is known to have a birth defect and a women has the chose to abort the baby because of medical reasons or carry it to term only to take a chance at the baby living or dying then that should be the decision of the parents.
They should decide what they believe to be best if they don't want to take any chances of either having a child with problems or one dying within hours of being born then they should abort but then again not everything is 100%
They could decide to carry the baby to term and end up having a baby that has normal life.

Be that is it may.... it's still something I'm hopeful of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canada_Sweety

But shouldn't it have a chance at a future? What if martin luther King had been aborted? Or Ghandi? We never think of it that way, but the fetus in a mothers womb could be the person to cure cancer or find a cure for AIDS or something.

---

What if HITLER had been aborted, or Lenin? What if Ted Bundy had been aborted, instead of placed for adoption?

You can play the "what if" game all you want. Don't you think that every woman who has made that choice, REGARDLESS what her choice WAS, doesn't play that game with herself, every single day?

I think that men should not have a say if it is illegal or not.
Because it does not affect them in any way.
And I think it should be illegal except for special cases.
Like rape.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emilykatherine

i think that men should not have a say if it is illegal or not.
because it does not affect them in any way.
and i think it should be illegal except for special cases.
like rape.

---

It wouldn't affect a man if a woman went and aborted a baby that was his and that he wanted?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emilykatherine

i think that men should not have a say if it is illegal or not.
because it does not affect them in any way.
and i think it should be illegal except for special cases.
like rape.

---

HOW does it not affect the father? My best friend, his ex gf got an abortion without his concent. Wanna know something, IT DOES affect the men when they want that child and already are in love with that child! Maybe you would think differently if your shirt was soaked in your your best friends tears but NEVER say that it does not affect them and that they should have no say in it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emilykatherine

i think that men should not have a say if it is illegal or not.
because it does not affect them in any way.

---

So, paying child support for 18 years does not affect men? Hmmmm, I'll have to ask some men about that.

Yes, the decision to have a child or not does affect the men. Just ask any man who is paying child support to a woman whom he is not married to. Whole other issue though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emilykatherine

and i think it should be illegal except for special cases.
like rape.

---

So you are in favor of back alley abortions like we had in the 60s?

2. Planned Parenthood Funding
Started when: 1970

By whom: President Nixon and a Democratic Congress.

Why: To subsidize domestic birth control and pregnancy testing, but supposedly not abortion.

What it does: Health and Human Services funds nearly 5,000 family planning clinics around the country, some of which are operated by Planned Parenthood. It also funds Planned Parenthood through Medicaid grants and Social Services block grants. The Washington Times reported in 1997 that of the approximately five million women who visit HHS clinics each year, more than 1.2 million are adolescent girls. Because money is fungible, HHS in effect not only subsidizes the distribution of birth control to teenage girls but also abortions. In addition to running HHS family planning clinics, Planned Parenthood is the nation's leading abortion provider. ----------------------
----------------------------------------------

Cost: In 2001, according to the General Accounting Office, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates received $162 million in federal funding.


From

Ten Worst Government Programs Human Events - Find Articles



Why should anti abortion taxpayors fund this?

Those who don't want the government to tell them that killing the unborn is illegal - aka those that are "pro-choice" should pay for their own abortions.





Grace and Peace

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

2. Planned Parenthood Funding
Started when: 1970

By whom: President Nixon and a Democratic Congress.

Why: To subsidize domestic birth control and pregnancy testing, but supposedly not abortion.

What it does: Health and Human Services funds nearly 5,000 family planning clinics around the country, some of which are operated by Planned Parenthood. It also funds Planned Parenthood through Medicaid grants and Social Services block grants. The Washington Times reported in 1997 that of the approximately five million women who visit HHS clinics each year, more than 1.2 million are adolescent girls. Because money is fungible, HHS in effect not only subsidizes the distribution of birth control to teenage girls but also abortions. In addition to running HHS family planning clinics, Planned Parenthood is the nation's leading abortion provider. ----------------------
----------------------------------------------

Cost: In 2001, according to the General Accounting Office, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates received $162 million in federal funding.


from

Ten Worst Government Programs Human Events - Find Articles



Why should anti abortion taxpayors fund this?

Those who don't want the government to tell them that killing the unborn is illegal - aka those that are "pro-choice" should pay for their own abortions.





Grace and Peace

---

But on the other hand if we didn't have planned parenthood the number of unwanted kids would rise excessively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

Why should anti abortion taxpayors fund this?

---

Why should criminals pay police, district attorneys, etc with their taxes?

Why should anti-war taxpayers fund wars?

Why should atheist taxpayers fund faith based initiatives?


You don't get a direct say in where your tax money goes (with the exception of that little box on your return that authorizes your money to go into the election fund to be used as federal matching dollars) on ANY issue. Why would your pet issue be any different from anybody else's?

inthebox:

Because we (taxpayers) pay for things we don't like/approve of/support/condone/agree with all the time. What makes this different?

Why are people with no kids funding education?

Why are people who aren't old and may never grow old funding Medicare?

Why are people who have no kids, have jobs, and have contributed to society funding Welfare?

Why do non-drug addicts pay for clinics that help rehabilitate drug users?

Why do we pay for homes for women who have been battered, when it was THEIR choice to have a relationship with an abusive person?

Because it's for the greater good of society.

Seriously... you're barking up the wrong tree with the whole Planned Parenthood thing. Planned Parenthood has also done more to PREVENT abortions (by providing counseling and contraceptives, as well as gynecological exams) than any other agency.

I am absolutely pro choice. It's between a woman and her conscience to make that decision.

Sorry got to spread the love Synn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nosnosna

Why should criminals pay police, district attorneys, etc with their taxes?

Why should anti-war taxpayers fund wars?

Why should atheist taxpayers fund faith based initiatives?


You don't get a direct say in where your tax money goes (with the exception of that little box on your return that authorizes your money to go into the election fund to be used as federal matching dollars) on ANY issue. Why would your pet issue be any different from anybody else's?

---

1] Compared to law abiding citizens , what % of "Criminals' actually pay taxes?

2] War? - The military ensures your freedom.



Those who are pro choice/death don't want the government to make it illegal because "its my body" then want that same government to pay for or fund abortions?


The there are others who say that if a child is not going to be '"healthy" then its understandable or justifiable to kill them. Are you implying that children with Down's syndrome or cystic fibrosis or a family history of huntingtons don't deserve a chance to live ?




Grace and Peace

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

1] Compared to law abiding citizens , what % of "Criminals' actually pay taxes?

2] War? - The military ensures your freedom.



Those who are pro choice/death don't want the government to make it illegal because "its my body" then want that same government to pay for or fund abortions?


The there are others who say that if a child is not going to be '"healthy" then its understandable or justifiable to kill them. Are you implying that children with Down's syndrome or cystic fibrosis or a family history of huntingtons don't deserve a chance to live ?




Grace and Peace

---

Could you go through 9 months of pregnancy, labor, and delivery (that is, if you are a female) knowing that your child has something wrong with him and may not even live an hour outside the womb? Could you get so attatched to that child only for him to possibly die having little time to spend with him?

Like J_9 said, if you were in the shoes of someone who has gone through this, you would change your tune.

Biologically no, I'm male.

To paraphrase excon, public forum, public opinion.

My wife had 2 children at 18 and was divorced and poor when she found out she was pregnant.
She stuck it out, and he is now 8 and 1/2 yo boy that brings such joy into our lives.



I will back off on this topic - it is a very tough issue.

I mean no disrespect to those who have a different opinion. My apologies.





Grace and Peace

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

Biologically no, I'm male.

To paraphrase excon, public forum, public opinion.

My wife had 2 children at 18 and was divorced and poor when she found out she was pregnant.
She stuck it out, and he is now 8 and 1/2 yo boy that brings such joy into our lives.



I will back off on this topic - it is a very tough issue.

I mean no disrespect to those who have a different opinion. My apologies.





Grace and Peace

---

Opinions are always welcome here. That is a lot of what is on this site.

But, not being able to take care of a child financially, and having a child that is unhealthy and could die, are two different things.

You don't get to pick and say that the things *YOU* don't like shouldn't get funded, and then turn around and say that the things *I* don't like should. If you get to choose where your taxes go, then I get to choose where mine go. That's a double standard, and is at the heart of every argument you've put forth here. You get offended that we don't follow your beliefs and outlaw abortion, but simply by putting forth that argument, you're telling me that my beliefs are wrong. And frankly, I find that offensive. You are offending me by saying that I have to follow your beliefs. Every single time you make the argument, you offend me. And yet you'll whine and cry saying that it's unfair that others aren't following yours.

Nosnosna:

I'm not offended. You don't have to follow my beliefs.
I' m just posing some questions.
Sorry if I offended you.



Grace and Peace

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

I'm not offended. You don't have to follow my beliefs.

---

But some of us may be offended by your beliefs. Have you ever read up on anencephaly? Do you know what it is? Do you care?

Well if not, here you go...

Infants born with anencephaly are usually blind, deaf, unconscious, and unable to feel pain. Although some individuals with anencephaly may be born with a rudimentary brainstem, which controls autonomic and regulatory function, the lack of a functioning cerebrum permanently rules out the possibility of ever gaining consciousness. Reflex actions such as breathing and responses to sound or touch may occur. The disorder is one of the most common disorders of the fetal central nervous system.

There is no cure or standard treatment for anencephaly and the prognosis for affected individuals is poor. Most anencephalic babies do not survive birth, accounting for 55% of non-aborted cases. If the infant is not stillborn, then he or she will usually die within a few hours or days after birth from cardiorespiratory arrest.

In almost all cases anencephalic infants are not aggressively resuscitated since there is no chance of the infant ever achieving a conscious existence. Instead, the usual clinical practice is to offer hydration, nutrition and comfort measures and to "let nature take its course". Artificial ventilation, surgery (to fix any co-existing congenital defects), and drug therapy (such as antibiotics) are usually regarded as futile efforts. Some clinicians and medical ethicists even view the provision of nutrition and hydration as medically futile, arguing that euthanasia is morally and clinically appropriate in such cases.

So, Inthebox, this ever happened to you?

I ask again. What would you do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

But some of us may be offended by your beliefs. Have you ever read up on anencephaly? Do you know what it is? Do you care?

Well if not, here ya go...

Infants born with anencephaly are usually blind, deaf, unconscious, and unable to feel pain. Although some individuals with anencephaly may be born with a rudimentary brainstem, which controls autonomic and regulatory function, the lack of a functioning cerebrum permanently rules out the possibility of ever gaining consciousness. Reflex actions such as breathing and responses to sound or touch may occur. The disorder is one of the most common disorders of the fetal central nervous system.

There is no cure or standard treatment for anencephaly and the prognosis for affected individuals is poor. Most anencephalic babies do not survive birth, accounting for 55% of non-aborted cases. If the infant is not stillborn, then he or she will usually die within a few hours or days after birth from cardiorespiratory arrest.

In almost all cases anencephalic infants are not aggressively resuscitated since there is no chance of the infant ever achieving a conscious existence. Instead, the usual clinical practice is to offer hydration, nutrition and comfort measures and to "let nature take its course". Artificial ventilation, surgery (to fix any co-existing congenital defects), and drug therapy (such as antibiotics) are usually regarded as futile efforts. Some clinicians and medical ethicists even view the provision of nutrition and hydration as medically futile, arguing that euthanasia is morally and clinically appropriate in such cases.

So, Inthebox, this ever happened to you?

I ask again. What would you do?

---

Wow. You just gave me chills. That is so scary, and so terrible.

Quote:

---

inthebox agrees: using the argument that back alley abortions will cause death ? What is abortion but death?

---

Death to the mother, due to infection. Did you read my post about my brother-in-law who was supposed to be a back alley abortion? I didn't think so.

You have never been in this position, you have no right to judge what decisions those of us who may have been there.

Back alley abortions killed more than regulated medically induced abortions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nauticalstar420

Wow. You just gave me chills. That is so scary, and so terrible.

---

And so real. It does happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J_9

And so real. It does happen.

---

I might have skipped over it in your description, but is there a cause? Something the mother does that could cause this?

The cause of anencephaly is unknown. Neural tube defects do not follow direct patterns of heredity. Studies show that a woman who has had one child with a neural tube defect such as anencephaly, has about a 3% risk to have another child with a neural tube defect. This risk can be reduced to about 1% if the woman takes high dose (4mg/day) of folic acid before and during pregnancy.

It is known that women taking certain medication for epilepsy and women with insulin dependent diabetes have a higher chance of having a child with a neural tube defect. Genetic counseling is usually offered to women at a higher risk of having a child with a neural tube defect to discuss available testing.

Recent studies have shown that the addition of folic acid to the diet of women of child-bearing age may significantly reduce, although not eliminate, the incidence of neural tube defects. Therefore, it is recommended that all women of child-bearing age consume 0.4 mg of folic acid daily, especially those attempting to conceive or who may possibly conceive. It is not advisable to wait until pregnancy has begun, since by the time a woman knows she is pregnant, the critical time for the formation of a neural tube defect has usually already passed. A physician may prescribe even higher dosages of folic acid (4 mg/day) for women who have had a previous pregnancy with a neural tube defect.

I have a 4 year old daughter whose father raped me.. she looks just like him too. And once someone asked me if I think of him when I look at her. And the answer was no. I see her as MY daughter, my angel... and I see her as herself no matter who she looks like. To me rape isn't an excuse for abortion. But I don't judge people who have had abortions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

Yes abortion is murder, and a growing industry with millions of dollars of backing. I do beleive over time we will see futher restrictions in its use.

I will agree with J9, as to your issues of posting

---

Fr_Chuck. I always thought abortion was murder. But then lately I've been thinking differently. You say that abortion is murder and a growing industry with millions of dollars of backing.

Well then I guess going to War is murder, with millions of dollars backing it? Actually wait, much more than millions!

What I'm trying to get at here is that... is it fair to say that abortion is murder? If it is, then I guess it's fair to say that our soldiers who are fighting the War on Terror are muderers? NOWAY! NO NO! They aren't murderers. So... your choice of "wording" is very politically interesting here.

Our soldiers do not have the intention to cold-bloodingly murder people... this is playing with words! An interesting choice in words! So to say "murder" is very unfair. I don't think these moms who are getting abortions are thinking of cold-blooded murder. You never know... similar to that soldier who is ending another's life to protect Americans (and many times soldiers kill innocent people), a mother could be preventing the life of her child (yes innocent child) because of various reasons JUST like the soldier (like for example... the mom could be a twelve year old rape victim who really can't go through having a child... and it's unfair to ask her to do this... and it's unfair to tell her she is a murderer in this case).

I totally agree with you. Abortion should be illegal and if someone conceived a child, they should at least let someone adopt it instead of killing it. People should at least think whose life their destroying. Their life or the child's? Anyway, if people can't look after a child... THEN HAVE SAFE SEX! OR EVEN BETTER, DON'T HAVE SEX AT ALL!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FrOsT_bItE

i totally agree with you. Abortion should be illegal and if someone conceived a child, they should at least let someone adopt it instead of killing it. People should at least think whose life their destroying. Their life or the child's? Anyway, if people can't look after a child...... THEN HAVE SAFE SEX! OR EVEN BETTER, DON'T HAVE SEX AT ALL!

---

Did you miss those couple of posts about unhealthy children? The ones that are projected to live maybe an hour after being born? What should women do in those situations? Have the baby, get attatched to it for maybe an hour, and watch it die?