Welcome to Gaia! ::

I thought that it was about time for an actual discussion thread here in our lovely little guild. So I bring to you, a pro-life vs. pro-choice debate.

I would like to remind everyone to keep it civil -- we are all allowed our own beliefs and stances on a matter, and we should be able to express them in a non-hostile, inoffensive manner.

Do you believe that a woman has the right to have an abortion for any reason, be it for her own health, she is a victim of rape, or simply because she does not want the child? Or should no woman be allowed to have an abortion, for any reason? Perhaps somewhere in between? Should there be an age limit placed on abortions? For instance, in the case of a underage girl (let's say 17 years old) becoming pregnant by her boyfriend, should she be allowed to have an abortion without her parents' consent, or should she be required to get consent first? Should the father of the child be allowed a say in whether the woman can have an abortion or not?
At what point do you believe that the child-to-be to become a 'human'? Are you against or for contraceptives (the pill/other female pregnancy preventatives, condoms, the morning-after pill)?
Please be sure to list your reasoning; a simple 'yes or no' type of answer is really quite boring, no?

To get things started, I will answer my own questions.
I believe that a woman should be allowed to have an abortion, no matter the reasoning behind her choice, so long as she is well informed of the procedure and possible ramifications, as well as possible alternatives, beforehand. My reasoning is that contraceptives are not 100% foolproof -- even if a couple is very careful with wearing condoms and the woman with taking her contraceptive of choice, there is still a chance of pregnancy. And if the couple is going to such lengths to prevent a child, they are obviously not ready -- be it financial difficulties, housing difficulties, emotional readiness, or whatever -- and if they are forced to bring the child to term and birth it, then what? If they are the responsible type, likely with lots of support, perhaps they can scrape together the money or whatever they are lacking, and offer the child a good life. Or they can put the child up for adoption.
On the subject of adoption, I don't believe that this should be relied upon as an alternative. I often hear that "if the woman doesn't want the child, she can just put it up for adoption and some other loving family can take it in." But there's a problem with this. There are already many children in adoption agencies -- at the end of 2009, there were 115,000 children waiting to be adopted, and a grand total of 70,000 were adopted. (Source) That leaves 45,000 children who were not adopted, and get to wait. And that is just in the U.S.
In 2006, the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) reports 846,181 abortions performed in the U.S. Now let's imagine that all of those women had chosen to adopt out their children, rather than abort. There would be that many more children waiting in adoption agencies.
I'm not going to go into victims of rape and those who had an abortion due to medical complications, simply because I feel that these are obvious cases where the mother should be able to abort, and the incidence is low (1% of abortions are due to rape, 12% due to health complications.) Instead, I prefer to focus on those who simply cannot have a child due to not having the money or time to provide a good home, as these are the most common reasons cited (73% and 74% respectively. PDF: Source).
In the case of an underage girl becoming pregnant, I'm somewhat on the fence. On the side of needing consent, I can see this as viable -- some of the more mentally immature youngsters might see this as an easy way out, i.e. "Oh, I'm not worried about getting pregnant, I'll just abort it!", without any thought to the the side affects of their actions. Requiring their parent's consent adds a aspect of deterrent -- to get said abortion, their parent(s) would be made aware that their daughter is pregnant, and thus sexually active. On the other hand, requiring consent opens scared girls to seek alternative -- often harmful -- methods, should they become pregnant. (Such as a punch to the gut preceded by lots of pills -- there was a girl in my high school who tried this and was hospitalized for internal injuries and some sort of side effect from whatever pills she took.)
I also believe that the father has no say in the matter, unless the woman decides to let him. Or, if the woman is for some reason unable to consent/turn down an abortion (i.e. she's in a coma), a husband/life partner should have a say, along with immediate family.
I believe that the child is 'human' once it is outside of the womb, and not earlier. While the being is inside of it's mother, it is still a fetus, in my mind.
As far as contraceptives, I don't believe that abstaining from sex is a reliable contraceptive to depend on; neither are 'pulling out' or douching or limiting to dry humping, oral, or a**l sex (or whatever other wacky combination of two people you'd like to come up with). A woman should be able to access birth control pills, patches, injections, whatever her preferred delivery method is, just as men are able to access condoms. I'm not saying it's impossible to abstain from sex, simply that I don't find it reliable, especially for younger people who have a higher sex drive due to hormones.

All right, I've had enough of my soapbox. It's your turn, and I would love to hear all of your facts, statistics, and opinions.

i have no facts or statistics, but as a woman i dont think anyone has the right to tell me what i can and cannot do with my own body, especially the government. like you said, as long as a woman is well informed and counseled on the procedure/psychological effects/etc. then it should be her choice.

the pill works 100% if you take it properly and are aware of other medications that can possibly interfere with it's effectiveness
if you get pregnant while you're on the pill gurl you aren't doing it right and you should be using another form of birth control~

anyway,
it should be illegal to keep it a secret from the father of the baby
it's his right to be aware of what's going on
and he should be allowed to have a say in what to do with the child
(excluding the case of rape)
but ultimately it is the woman's choice because it affects her life the greatest



also the baby has a heartbeat and fingernails after the 3rd week into the pregnancy so
i personally would feel like i'd be taking away a life
so i couldn't do it

it's only 99% effective because other medications and not taking it around the same general time every day messes with it and no one is that strict about their pills
tons of women get pregnant on the pill because they don't take it correctly or are taking some sort of other medication that will affect it, and it's really an impractical form of birth control because of those things

though when you take it correctly you don't ovulate
so you can't get pregnant unless you mess up blaugh

i tell ya. im pro choice. but...if a woman willingly has consensual sex with a man and chooses not to use birth control and becomes pregnant then the father should have a right to be notified and given the option to keep the child on his own. i know its an f'ed up stance to take. but think about all the guys out there paying child support because the rubber broke, the pill didnt work or they just didnt use protection. and his partner wanted to keep the child. its not fair. and yes i know its totally unfair to force a woman to have a child. people should act more responsibly. or should i say intentionally. if ll your intentions are to just have some good ole sex then you should protect yourself. if youre of age and have carnal knowledge and you get pregnant because you dont use protection its not just your business anymore. how do you know it wasnt his intention to get you preggers. its tricky

That makes sense, but at the same time, should the man choose to say that the child should be kept and the woman doesn't want it, for whatever reason, should the man then obtain custody of the child upon birth? I mean, if he wants the kid and she doesn't, he should really be taking more responsibility than just sending a check.