56% of all Americans and 58% of those 18-29 yrs old say abortion immoral

[DEDixon 39]

Everyone talking about epidurals, pain-free labor, and men going to work the next day really needs to stfu, you have no idea what you're talking about.

was kidding and was an attempt to make Cleo huff and puff a little at me. don't take it seriously.

and about pain-free labor... of course not pain free, but "RELATIVE" to the alternative (no drugs), an epidural makes it a lot less painful.

[Jenn! 918]

was kidding and was an attempt to make Cleo huff and puff a little at me. don't take it seriously.

and about pain-free labor... of course not pain free, but "RELATIVE" to the alternative (no drugs), an epidural makes it a lot less painful.

Generally and relatively speaking, yes it makes it less painful. But experiences really vary - everyone responds very differently to an epidural. Plus, most women labor for many hours before getting one.

So, how about I don't talk about prostate exams or how much it hurts to get kicked in the balls and the men don't pretend to know about giving birth? It's pretty far removed from the topic anyhow. I would hope that no one would get an abortion just because they didn't to experience the pain of child birth!

[jundp 191]

I am absolutely against abortion except in cases of incest or rape or risk of the life of the mother.

You don't want a baby? Don't have sex or use contraception.

MHO.

I'm sorry but I firmly believe it's a child, not a choice.

[Anna C. 4]

My experience is with the UK system. They are dangerous (as are all anesthetics) and are not used for pain management. The fetus heart rate can be seriously affected by them so I would be surprised if this is a condoned medical practice but then again, I am often surprised by the US health care system

Over 90% of all women in the US receive an epidural. You are actively pressured by obgyns and nurses to get one and called bonkers for not having one ("Natural childbirth is like natural dentistry" .. "there are absolutely no side effects to narcotics" ... "You won't get a medal for that you know" were things my ob said to me). Epidurals do have serious side effects. If you have a section, you receive a spinal (short-lasting epidural version), nobody would perform a section without anesthesia. Sections are quite overused in the US.

Back to topic... I'm glad to see that abortion is regarded as morally wrong by so many. I don't understand the American law where you can have such late abortions. A baby that could survive in the NICU should not be aborted no matter what. I sort of can live with the French or German laws (abortion up to 10/12 weeks of pregnancy after extensive counseling only). I would never choose it (I refuse prenatal genetic tests or triple screens for my pregnancies), I can see however how a raped woman chooses it. But that's about the only case. Especially as a mother it's unimaginable to me. I do mourn the sibling my parents decided to abort when I was 3, very sad for me (as you can see, my parents don't think it's bad, yet my mom had severe depression following the whole thing whihc lasted over 5 years with extensive counseling and antidepressants). Just a personal opinion.

[Danno 1,228]

Morals and laws are not the same thing, or should not be. My morals are different than yours, should BOTH our morals be law? Or should I be forced to follow your morals becase 52% of people agree with you?

This is why Republicans (conservatives) are just as revolting to me as liberals (Democrats). Stay the #### out of my business...ALL of my business! stay out of my healthcare and stay out of my uterus. Stay out of my garage and stay out of my bedroom! Just get the #### out! I do not want your religious beliefs in my life any more than I want Obama's government beliefs in my life. I do not need the government to know what is right and wrong.

I am doing just fine here with my family, just GET OUT!!!!!!!!!

Laws also need to fall within constittutional restraint. There is no constitutional ban on abortion (or a constitutional "right" to an abortion), that means it is up to the individual states. If YOUR State's representatives want to outlaw abortion, they should be able to and you should be able to move to another state.

Morals are not laws, on this we agree.

I suggested Laws are derived from a consciences of group morality.

Why else would what defines Rape, underage-sex, divorce, self defense, capital punishment, change from state to state and from country to country.

Even simple things as "theft", while we see it as law, in other cultures the thief is not wrong YOU ARE for not safeguarding or defending your property.

Morals

Definition:

1. involving right and wrong: relating to issues of right and wrong and to how individual people should behave

2. derived from personal conscience: based on what somebody's conscience suggests is right or wrong, rather than on what rules or the law says should be done

3. according to common standard of justice: regarded in terms of what is known to be right or just, as opposed to what is officially or outwardly declared to be right or just

a moral victory.

4. encouraging goodness and decency: giving guidance on how to behave decently and honorably

5. good by accepted standards: good or right, when judged by the standards of the average person or society at large

6. able to tell right from wrong: able to distinguish right from wrong and to make decisions based on that knowledge

7. based on personal conviction: based on an inner conviction, in the absence of physical proof

moral certainty

-------------------------------------

Again we base our laws.... on our "collective" morals.

The simple -Right and Wrong.

If this were not true, all states and countries would have nearly identical laws.

Edited January 23, 2010 by Danno

[Jenn! 918]

I am absolutely against abortion except in cases of incest or rape or risk of the life of the mother.

You don't want a baby? Don't have sex or use contraception.

MHO.

I'm sorry but I firmly believe it's a child, not a choice.

Just curious about this. It's a common exclusion when it comes to the pro-life stance. How come? The circumstances of conception are not the child's "fault". Is it that the mother would be too traumatized to carry the baby to term?

[MrsCat 6]

I am absolutely against abortion except in cases of incest or rape or risk of the life of the mother.

If its a child then, isn't that still murder despite being a risk to the mother, or its just justifiable homicide?

Additionally, does the person who raped the mother have to have been convicted before the abortion is allowed? Or does the mother just have to claim to have been raped?

I find these stances on abortion very curious.

[jundp 191]

Just curious about this. It's a common exclusion when it comes to the pro-life stance. How come? The circumstances of conception are not the child's "fault". Is it that the mother would be too traumatized to carry the baby to term?

I knew a girl who was repeatedly raped by her stepfather in high school. Two pregnancies resulted. One was aborted the other was not (she couldn't do it a second time). But it affected her for life. I think if I hadn't known her maybe I wouldn't even consider it, but I saw what having that baby did to her. She did give the baby up for adoption, btw, but I'm not sure she ever really recovered from it.

But I also know a woman at work whose adopted daughter was the product of rape -- and the joy she has received as a result.

[Peikko 1,575]

You have a very simplistic view of what morality its relationship with the law Danno.

There are not that really that many laws that are based on some notion of morality and most of the ones that are, are actually universally adopted by almost all states and countries. Think murder, rape, assault. There are of course differences in what is considered murder/rape and assault but the general the principal of doing harm to someone else without due cause as being 'wrong' is pretty much universally understood no matter where in the world you happen to live.

Most of what makes up the body of the law are things that have been decided are in the common interest as apposed to being inherently right or wrong, think for example traffic law.

Edited January 23, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[Danno 1,228]

Just curious about this. It's a common exclusion when it comes to the pro-life stance. How come? The circumstances of conception are not the child's "fault". Is it that the mother would be too traumatized to carry the baby to term?

This is a good (and difficult) question.

I am obviously against abortion like many (if not most people).

The reasons why are multiple, when the reasons to oppose an abortion are removed the "weight" to disallow it become weaker and the wrongness of the Abortion can be over weighted by the result of the birth.

(in my judgement)

A woman who is raped is in this condition through no fault of her own, some feel because she bears no blame for her condition she bears less responsibility to bring the child to term.

Others simply and singularly consider the life in the womb and it's "human value", the circumstances of it's origin are secondary or perhaps meaningless to it's value as human life.

Very few people (non that I know of) would say the "life of the mother" is not paramount in this very rare case where child birth would kill the mother without taking the childs life as well.

It's really a choice between the "greater harm".

if the child dies, it is one death, if the mother dies, both her life and the Family will be so impacted as to tip the scales. (if one is purely considering both lives as equal).

I'm not aware of any time that abortions were not allowed under these circumstances. (but I am no expert on these things either).

Abortion laws are seemingly complicated but really not any more so than most laws. We don't shy away from the complicated tax laws with the IRS, or even murder with all it';s degrees and complicated factors

Or

What constitutes child abuse, child neglect? Actually Abortion laws are rather simple (comparatively speaking).

The "rape and incest" point is really the needle in the haystack of Abortions that are performed.

Of the over 1 million carried out each year, (in the wealthiest country in the world) ,,most are simply out of convenience of the mother and even at that could have been prevented in the first place.

[Danno 1,228]

You have a very simplistic view of what morality its relationship with the law Danno.

Most of what makes up the body of the law are things that have been decided are in the common interest as apposed to being inherently right or wrong, think for example traffic law.

It's no more simple or complicated than you vote yes or no on Prop 8.... it becomes law.

You elect one politician (based in part on your moral stances) and he passes one type of law, I get another guy elected and he passes another type law.... all based on "collective morals".

If it works another way people explain.

* You have a point with laws pertaining to Parking Meters.

[Peikko 1,575]

People do not elect politicians based on their own, or the politicians moral stance Danno, not the majority. People elect politicians based on the platform (body of intended legislation, action) that they favour most.

Very few of these platforms are moral platforms. For the most part, our politians deal with very practical, not oesoteric questions.

Most of the body of law is based on collective interest, not right or wrong.

[DEDixon 39]

People do not elect politicians based on their own, or the politicians moral stance Danno, not the majority. People elect politicians based on the platform (body of intended legislation, action) that they favour most.

Very few of these platforms are moral platforms. For the most part, our politians deal with very practical, not oesoteric questions.

Most of the body of law is based on collective interest, not right or wrong.

so the candidate that left his wife for the 22 year old hottie who he got pregnant would not suffer at the polls... good to know!!!!!

[sachinky 465]

I don't think abortion could ever be an easy decision. Not for anyone.

If someone doesn't want/can't afford a child, I don't think they should be forced to carry it to term.

People should have the choice to make their own decisions regarding their futures and bodies.

Fetus and babies--two VERY different things. I'm not going to argue with those that believe life begins at conception. However, scientifically, medically--two very different things.

[jundp 191]

People do not elect politicians based on their own, or the politicians moral stance Danno, not the majority. People elect politicians based on the platform (body of intended legislation, action) that they favour most.

I disagree. Many people elect politicians based on their own or the politicians moral stance, especially when that stance is contrary to the voter's. Even more when that moral stance will influence whether or not a law is passed or upheld.