Pro Life versus Pro Choice Debate

[Worthy5]

Fix and CWBetts aren’t doing this for their own ego. I am sure they they could find better ways to do that if they were. They think abortion is wrong and they are trying to do something about it.

I am sure they do think it is wrong, so does this poster. But not recognizing that there are other reasonable means to address this problem and attempting to demonize the “Pro-choice” term is not helping.

 

[fix]

You do not have to buy the a strand of the pro-choice position but what you cannot accept that there is a reasonable pro-choice position to take, given the need to limit govt power, use other means to address the problem and put emphasis on the women’s duty. That is why it looks like you are grandstanding.

Why would I accept that? You devalue a person simply based on their stage of development. All types of ways are used and should be used, but to claim the law should not protect an innocent person is beyond belief. If you see that as grandstanding than I must respectfully suggest you need to evaluate what exactly abortion is.

We have covered this. Because the early fetus is not a two year old–how is that. The govt makes classifications all the time to carry out the numerous policy goals society has.

And that is acceptable? Which class, other than unborn persons, gets to be killed without any civil penalty?

So does that mean you " care " more than I do—that sounds like political liberal feel good stuff. You assume outlawing all abortions under all circumstances, I presume, as the best way to " disallow" them from occuring----that is not necessarily the case, Govt can select a variety of means to address the problem esp given that limits on govtr power is an important goal as well.

It means the objective seriousness of the matter is available for all to see who choose to see. Legal protection is not the sole answer, but it is fundamental to the issue. Did slaves get a vote to be slaves? Do the babies get a vote not to be aborted? Does your understanding of limited governemnt include no legal protection for innocent life?

If we outlaw all abortions and lock women and doctors up for such acts are you going to volunteer at the local prosecutor or jail facility to help process all these new criminals? Every new law, has its real costs to it.

How is that relevant? Do you support not proscecuting single fathers who rob banks and accept you must adopt his children while he is in jail?

I do not mean to be flip but the costs of govt action is a part of this discussion given that the posts started to malign the term “pro-choice” and veered away from when life begins.

The so-called costs of protecting innocent persons from being killed is a non issue. It is an issue for you I assume because you are not such a person who is unprotected.

 

[fix]

I am sure they do think it is wrong, so does this poster. But not recognizing that there are other reasonable means to address this problem and attempting to demonize the “Pro-choice” term is not helping.

The term demonizes itself by its very nature.

 

[SteveGC]

I am sure they do think it is wrong, so does this poster. But not recognizing that there are other reasonable means to address this problem and attempting to demonize the “Pro-choice” term is not helping.

Worthy, I’ll ask you this again (because I don’t think you’ve addressed it yet)…

You recognize abortion as wrong, you say. Is that because you recognize that it is murder of a human being?

If so, why is it unreasonable to attempt to go primarily after laws which currently make it legal to murder? I would wager that you would not object to the “reasonable-ness” of protecting say, disabled people, from murder, if in fact it were currently legal to murder them. So why is it unreasonable to specifically target legalized abortion? Are we really jeopardizing our nation’s limited gov’t control issue by lobbying to make federal laws prohibiting abortion (murder)?

My only guess is that, while you somehow believe abortion is wrong, you don’t actually think it is because it is murder. Or, somehow you equate it with murder, but not to a significant enough degree to equate it with adult murder?

 

[Caramel]

Its a dark day when animals get treated better then developing babies…of course that movement is PC and thus explains it!Consider out of those 50million abortions ,that most would have been good decent people…a few even at genius level…in fact ,who knows one of those aborted might have curred Rock Hudsons disease…ie : aids…as well as other diseases…or maybe hit a grandslam homer in a world series game,or wrote a lovely love song,or painted on a piece of canvas a work of art that will live forever…but no,we must never think of that…just twist and turn,react with a smirk when a teevee host takes advantage of some female workers or a president in the oval office does the same…boys will be boys wont they? The tomb of the unknown soldier fits in here…Pas

However, and I state this with the utmost seriousness and sincerity, one or more of those aborted children (and of course I agree with the fact that they are human beings; that they are persons) could also become a mass-murderer, a child molester, a rapist, a person who flies a jet into a skyscraper…

They are all human beings and all should be protected as human beings but I doubt that aborting persons stops only the good that they might do as adults anymore than it stops only the bad that they might do.

 

[Caramel]

If we outlaw all abortions and lock women and doctors up for such acts are you going to volunteer at the local prosecutor or jail facility to help process all these new criminals? Every new law, has its real costs to it.

Well, uh, actually I would volunteer although I obviously can’t volunteer for everything that people and organiziations want me to volunteer for (and most just want my money anyway - but that is off topic.)

And if a woman wanted me to adopt her unwanted (by her) child I would be more than happy to do it. Seriously. I will do it if I have the opportunity.

I’m not trying to boast here or hold myself up as the “poster child” of the prolife movement. I’m just telling you the truth.

 

[Worthy5]

QUOTE=fix;5879194]Why would I accept that?

Because that is how a civil society works, people respect different approaches to solve a problem.

You devalue a person simply based on their stage of development.

That is your characterization—one which this poster does not agree. You claim you support an individual right but your position supporting massive govt intervention is actually the type of power that threatens the individual liberty you so want to protect esp given there are arguable better ways to address the abortion problem for the early fetus.

All types of ways are used and should be used, but to claim the law should not protect an innocent person is beyond belief. If you see that as grandstanding than I must respectfully suggest you need to evaluate what exactly abortion is.

This poster is not advocating " no protection" for the early fetus. In fact, the govt should heavily regulate all abortions—but there is a better way to work with women then making criminal all abortions under all circumstances and then throwing them in jail.

What is beyond belief is your inability to recognize, even if you do not agree, that this govt is not founded on the idea that it should use its police power to solve all problems.

And that is acceptable? Which class, other than unborn persons, gets to be killed without any civil penalty?

There you go again with those analogies and ignoring the unique role of the women’s duty in the case of the early fetus.

It means the objective seriousness of the matter is available for all to see who choose to see. Legal protection is not the sole answer, but it is fundamental to the issue. Did slaves get a vote to be slaves? Do the babies get a vote not to be aborted?

" objective seriousness" what does that mean? You can have the view that criminal protection is fundamental but it is also reasonable that govt’s police power should be limited in certain early terms cases and other means can be used by govt to address the problem. And once again another analogy. I do not know, can an early fetus walk to a poll booth and vote? Once again, is this society’s complete duty (completely responsible) at this point to use its police power or is it on the women in regards to early term cases?

We all want to help protect the early fetus but the means to do so are in debate.

Does your understanding of limited governemnt include no legal protection for innocent life?

No, the opposite, many pro-choice views support heavy regulation of all abortions including methods to convince women to make the bettter decision.

How is that relevant? Do you support not proscecuting single fathers who rob banks and accept you must adopt his children while he is in jail?

You are the one wanting to now have the police power of the govt spend resources to prosecute this rather large class of criminals. Who is more of a danger to society? Violent robber or a women ending an early pregnancy. They both are morally repugnant but given society’s limited resources it can select which one is more of a threat to law and order.

The so-called costs of protecting innocent persons from being killed is a non issue. It is an issue for you I assume because you are not such a person who is unprotected.

Costs are always an issue with anything because society has a limited amount of resources. No one is completely protected from harm with govt power and again the govt can take different approaches to protect the unborn. But it is not completely society’s responsibility as the women has a duty here.

If a women violates God law in this area, then God can arrest her. This country is planted thick with laws, man’s laws, not God’s. The govt does not have to completely take over this responsibility of the abortion problem but it should use extraordinary efforts to attack the problem.

 

[Worthy5]

Worthy, I’ll ask you this again (because I don’t think you’ve addressed it yet)…

You recognize abortion as wrong, you say. Is that because you recognize that it is murder of a human being?

My friend it is a reasonable postition to take the pro-life position that you have. What my posts attempt to show is that it is also reasonable to have particular pro-choice position by being wary of govt power and whether there are better means to attack the abortion problem. To have such a position does not deserve scorn and contempt by those in the pro-life movement. Such scorn and contempt is exactly why govt power should be limited.

The strongest argument the pro-life postion has is its assertion of equal protection argument, comparing the early fetus (no debate here on late term abortions) to a born person. Okay–that is strong, but the early fetus is connected to the women in a way that a born person is not. That is the difference and with that comes the notion that it is the women’s duty. Society does not have to take complete responsibility on early terms cases, but yet still should heavily regulate it and attempt to convince women not to abort.

The govt makes classification all the time to promote multiple policy goals—one of which is limited govt which is not only about limiting power (which protects liberty) but also the recognition that govt does not get to make all decisions in this society----individuals get to make some and get to do so even if they screw it up. But realistically, the govt has plenty of social pressures to influence how that individual makes that decision---- and hopefully the best decision.

At its core, a strand of the pro-choice position is the idea that the women, entrusted with the fetus, has to step up to the plate herself. Govt job is to help her meet that moral obligation.

 

[remjsmom76]

It was really all of it. Really the trying to seperate the early stages of life as not being human. I mean, the way i see it is If i believed that my daughter, Rebekah, wasnt human during my first 4 weeks when I found out, she wouldnt be here. It was that little cluster of cells that made her, no other cluster of cells would be her, they were different, the other 3 cluster of cells resulted in Erykah-Marie, Monika, and Jesykah. We all start that way every single one of us. If we all just close our eyes and just really try to think, “What if my mom or yet both my mom and dad just didnt want or couldnt afford to have me. Lets say it was during the first 3 months of preganancy…if they terminated me…I wouldnt be here” We all have to just sit back and think about that. Its so easy to just say “Oh its a cluster of cells nothing imporatant” But those cluster of cells are not just like “cancer” as someone else said it was, those cluster of cells GROW TO FORM A HUMAN. It is not something that will hurt us, it is not something that will take our lives. For some, like myself, being pregant can cause other things to hurt me. I get gest diabetes…that does not mean that its the babies fault…its my own body.

Its like I said before…abortion is a strong nerve picker for me. My husband own family wanted me to get an abortion because it was “easier”. And another thing, my brother didnt fight for his daughter. His girlfriend started the process of aboriton…they gave her a suppository that causes the cervix to soften and the memberanes to loosen. Well she eneded up with and infection due to that. My brothers girlfriend nearly lost her life for attempting to abort…she did have my niece. My niece lived for 32 days…painful Im sure…she had an emergency csection and for ever she will live with what she did to her own daughter. My brother suffers everyday with that. He is depressed, does drugs and drinks. Of course he blames himself…and the bad part of it is that my 3rd daughter Monikah, is the same age Shelby (my niece) would be if she would have been given the chance of life. So he sees my daughter and there are times he goes out and cries. He knows what he did was wrong.

You are very very welcome!! I am curious - is it the entire thread, part of the thread, or an individual post that you are happy with?? If it’s a single post, could you please give me the number?? It would help me so much!!

Thanks!!

 

[Caramel]

I’m glad I caught your attention. I apologize if I don’t use the proper words as English is not my first language.

Let me explain:
If you think that coercion means to take a woman against her will to the abortion clinic, that does happen EVERY DAY. Abusive men do that to abused women, well meaning parents (including Christians) do that to teenage girls. Please go to your local abortion clinic and take a look at some of the patients and their “escort”.

There is also indirect coercion, when the father gave up on the mother and the child and friends and family members don’t want to help her financially or support her emotionally.

Being pregnant in itself is a scary and overwhelming situation and the woman is feeling pressured to “fix a problem”. So she doesn’t freely choose abortion but she reluctantly chooses it as a last resort. Our culture is telling us that women shouldn’t have kids if they can’t support themselves and their child. Since we don’t want to be bothered with their pregnancy, we are quick to advise abortion to our sisters or our friends. And it is degrading to a woman to make them feel that her child is not welcome.

Your English is very, very good!! I have problems expressing what I mean, sometimes. It’s like it is in my brain and I know what it is but I just can’t find the words to say exactly what I mean, in a clear and coherent way. I guess everybody has the same problem to a certain extent.

I just wanted to throw that in…sorry I know it’s off topic, but here it is anyway…

 

[CWBetts]

I’m not doubting the sense of loss involved and I do feel for those who have experienced a miscarrage, especially late in there pregnancy. It is the loss of there potential child and a feeling of empathy for the sorrow of the parents I feel. I do not morn the loss of life, rather what potential life has been lost.

However, I disagree that there is very rarely any remains, albiet not visually pleasent there are remains unless its VERY early in the pregnancy. Perhaps the hospital wont release the remains as in most cases I believe they cremate stillborn fetus’ in the hospital incinerator.

I don’t think we are going to agree on the purposes of sex in our species. Its not soley about procreation. If that were the case then even catholic methods of “birth control” or family planning would be immoral as well.

The existance of a catholic model of family planning represents an admission by the catholic church of the need or desire for sex within marrage without procreation. The intent through timing to prevent children is just that an attempt to prevent children. The fact that it is not 100% successful or reliable means that your playing a game of roulette, but does not change your intentions. Saying “well if god wants me to have a child she will get pregnant despite my efforts” is a cop out, much like saying “well if god wants me to have a child the condom will break”

Sex is meant as an expression of intense emotion and a means for connection between two people, married or otherwise and is rarely a self centered activity outside of masterbation. The fact that one chooses to engage in sex with contraception does not reduce the love one feels for there partner, nor does it change the sexual experience.

Barrier methods, such as condoms and diaphragms, by their very nature withhold part of yourself from the partner. They destroy the unity. Unity with openness to life are the twin purposes…pleasure is an added benefit. By using contraception ot becomes solely about your own pleasure

 

[remjsmom76]

Well I have a story, it came out in the bulletin of our church and it is a true story.

A woman in went to her doc. She was aggitated and worried. The doc asked what was wrong. She said “I just found out I am pregnant” He said “Well congratulations” She said “I dont want to be pregnant. I already have a baby who isnt 1 yet. This isnt how I planned it. I want more children but not yet, I wanted to wait for my child to be 2 or 3 before i tried again. I cant raise 2 toddlers, its hard enough already with one. We are also financialy struggling.” the doc says “So what do you want to do” She says “I want an abortion”. He smiles and says. “I have the perfect solution for this, yes, I can help you” She smiles and he continues " Well because you say you can handle 2 kids at once and that your current living child is hard already, we can kill him instead. That way you have a chance to rest in peace for the rest of your pregnancy and when this baby is born you are fresh and revived." “NO DOCTOR YOU CANT KILL A BABY!” doc says…“but thats what your asking me to do. Whats the difference from your current child and the one you are carrying? The only difference is that this one is outside your body and your other child is inside your body, but they are the same.” She looked at him and smiled…and she had her baby.

 

[antunesaa]

A side note here. I believe in evolution and I believe in God. The two are not mutually exclusive. IMHO God works His will in ways that may be confusing to some but of course they make perfect sense to Him. Many, many Catholics who are prolife are firm believers in evolution.

I am a firm believer in evolution. The details may be wrong, but the general idea is appealing. As always, I keep my mind open for alternative scientific theories.

 

[beafedor]

To all the “women’s right to choose” aficionados, please **educate yourself **about what you are supporting. Log on to the Silent No More Awareness Campaign website, watch the video “I had an abortion because…” and read the testimonies of real women who have made the choice that you are supporting. Over 7500 people wish to break their silence and the shame of their abortion. See how our abortions have helped us as well as our families. silentnomoreawareness.org/

Abortion creates physical and emotional issues that lead to substance abuse and suicide to cite a few. Listen to us! There is no such a thing as the “freedom to choose”! We choose abortion because we are desperate and that everybody has given up on us, not because we are free!

If you want to help women, start to volunteer in a crisis pregnancy center to provide a non violent option when they are facing a pregnancy on their own.
I will keep posting similar posts so that you “I’m Pro-choice and I know it’s wrong but I think I’m helping women” people understand what it is that you are supporting and why you picked the wrong battle.

 

[JaneGrey]

Wrong. Most oral contraceptives (the Pill) do induce abortions. In the past most forms of the Pill contained large amounts of estrogen (an average of 150 mg), but this amount was shown to be correlated with serious adverse effects. So the amount of estrogen was decreased (20-35 mg.)

Now, only low-estrogen contraceptives are available in the U.S.

These new pills prevent implantation and therefore cause abortions.

I will be happy to provide you with cites; however, I have to go now. I’ll reply again later when I’m able to.

Hi, thanks for your reply. Having known people on the Pill and initially concerned for their health, I have indeed read the research on it. I would not make a statement like the one I made on something i do not know about. I also did say that yes, when a woman is already pregnant, it can harm the zygote/fetus. However this is not the intention of people who take it a nd doctors who prescribe it. No one is performing an abortion here. I agree that if someone is paranoid(for lack of a better word) about having an accidental abortion take place they should not have sex or use other forms of birth control(before i get angry replies about this i know all birth control is against church teaching, however this is a hypothetical situation).
The pill is not the same as the abortion pill. Many many other prescription drugs can potentially harm fetuses. Yet they are not labeled baby killing weapons. About the low-estrogen pills in the US, im from Europe and we dont seem to have that ruling here.

God bless

 

[Caramel]

Well, uh, actually I would volunteer although I obviously can’t volunteer for everything that people and organiziations want me to volunteer for (and most just want my money anyway - but that is off topic.)

And if a woman wanted me to adopt her unwanted (by her) child I would be more than happy to do it. Seriously. I will do it if I have the opportunity.

I’m not trying to boast here or hold myself up as the “poster child” of the prolife movement. I’m just telling you the truth.

I didn’t quite state my position correctly here. And although it may sound weird I don’t think that jailing women who have abortions is a viable option; and yes, this is off-topic but this thread seems to be spreading “out there” so fast that I can’t keep up. From personal communication (via a class that I took in sexual assault crisis intervention) teens that put their babies (born alive) in dumpsters are not prosecuted in the USA. I don’t know if this is true or not and it rips my heart out to even try to understand why someone would even do such a thing. I do understand the fear and terror that these teens have. But isn’t the baby a person now? He is born!! Yet somehow we allow the intentional killing of born babies because they were born to teenagers who were old enough to get pregnant but not old enough to know they could have left the baby at a hospital or fire station and just leave??

I can feel for a teen who is terrified when she finds out she is pregnant. But that doesn’t take away the fact that the child is obviously a person. I don’t think that anyone posting or reading in this thread would deny the “personhood” of a born baby. Would they??

I guess we hold teens to a lower level of responsibility. But what about a 32-year-old woman who has a PBA because of inconvenience?? Should she be incarcerated?? What about the physician who performed the abortion?? I have no doubts about the physician. He should be thrown into jail for murder. He should also lose his license to practice medicine.

We are discussing the “personhood” of an unborn child at any gestational age. Yet, at least in the USA even born children are not protected. We still allow people to throw them away like garbage.

 

[JaneGrey]

To all the “women’s right to choose” aficionados, please **educate yourself **about what you are supporting. Log on to the Silent No More Awareness Campaign website, watch the video “I had an abortion because…” and read the testimonies of real women who have made the choice that you are supporting. Over 7500 people wish to break their silence and the shame of their abortion. See how our abortions have helped us as well as our families. silentnomoreawareness.org/

Abortion creates physical and emotional issues that lead to substance abuse and suicide to cite a few. Listen to us! There is no such a thing as the “freedom to choose”! We choose abortion because we are desperate and that everybody has given up on us, not because we are free!

If you want to help women, start to volunteer in a crisis pregnancy center to provide a non violent option when they are facing a pregnancy on their own.
I will keep posting similar posts so that you “I’m Pro-choice and I know it’s wrong but I think I’m helping women” people understand what it is that you are supporting and why you picked the wrong battle.

Im reluctant to take any side on this so this isnt necessarily a pro-choice reply.What I think would help in this debate is for either side to stop thinking of the other as the ‘enemy’. Good people make bad decisions, think of it that way if you want. Also, women are perfectly capable of knowing fully what they are getting into when they have an abortion. Therefore reaching out to women will help those who who would abort out of desperation and necessity. This would be great.
However there are many others who are not quite so unfortunate. What about not so poor women who do not regret their abortions? I think it would help to acknowledge that they exist. I dont think it helpful to label them as ‘selfish’ and murderers. My point is everyone has a story and while a complicated situation does not justify murder, it is progress when you can bond with someone from the other side and understand where they come from. Maybe this can help change someone’s position, but even not, is’nt it less emotionally exhausting not to think the other side are baby-haters or women-haters?
Sorry if my post sounds odd it is about 4 am here!

 

[Caramel]

Im reluctant to take any side on this so this isnt necessarily a pro-choice reply.What I think would help in this debate is for either side to stop thinking of the other as the ‘enemy’. Good people make bad decisions, think of it that way if you want. Also, women are perfectly capable of knowing fully what they are getting into when they have an abortion. Therefore reaching out to women will help those who who would abort out of desperation and necessity. This would be great.
However there are many others who are not quite so unfortunate. What about not so poor women who do not regret their abortions? I think it would help to acknowledge that they exist. I dont think it helpful to label them as ‘selfish’ and murderers. My point is everyone has a story and while a complicated situation does not justify murder, it is progress when you can bond with someone from the other side and understand where they come from. Maybe this can help change someone’s position, but even not, is’nt it less emotionally exhausting not to think the other side are baby-haters or women-haters?
Sorry if my post sounds odd it is about 4 am here!

I know that some people posting here refer to the “other side” as the enemy. I agree that it is inappropriate. We are all people and people do make mistakes. None of us is perfect. It bothers me to see the term “enemy” when really I think almost everyone is trying to discover what is true and is making difficult moral decisions. It doesn’t help that the law of man says one thing while there may be a universal law that says the complete opposite.

It definitely is conducive to good communication and a good discussion if we all agree to try not to reply to a post in anger (although emotions do run hot when the topic of abortion is brought up.) I think that everyone here is sincerely trying to do their best to get their views across.

I’m sick so I don’t know when I’ll be able to post again…I hope in a few days…

 

[JaneGrey]

I know that some people posting here refer to the “other side” as the enemy. I agree that it is inappropriate. We are all people and people do make mistakes. None of us is perfect. It bothers me to see the term “enemy” when really I think almost everyone is trying to discover what is true and is making difficult moral decisions. It doesn’t help that the law of man says one thing while there may be a universal law that says the complete opposite.

It definitely is conducive to good communication and a good discussion if we all agree to try not to reply to a post in anger (although emotions do run hot when the topic of abortion is brought up.) I think that everyone here is sincerely trying to do their best to get their views across.

I’m sick so I don’t know when I’ll be able to post again…I hope in a few days…

Thank you for your understanding. Yes it is very easy to get emotional about this. I hope you get better soon!

God bless

 

[fix]

Because that is how a civil society works, people respect different approaches to solve a problem.

Sure, but that is not issue here. We are talking about having no legal protection for one class of human beings. That is no right to life. Which other class of persons do you claim the same notion that they deserve no legal protection?

That is your characterization—one which this poster does not agree. You claim you support an individual right but your position supporting massive govt intervention is actually the type of power that threatens the individual liberty you so want to protect esp given there are arguable better ways to address the abortion problem for the early fetus.

Again, this one class of persons gets no right to life. Why?

This poster is not advocating " no protection" for the early fetus. In fact, the govt should heavily regulate all abortions—but there is a better way to work with women then making criminal all abortions under all circumstances and then throwing them in jail.

It is not either/or. Why does the unborn child deserve no legal protection?

What is beyond belief is your inability to recognize, even if you do not agree, that this govt is not founded on the idea that it should use its police power to solve all problems.

Protecting innocent is the basic function of the governemnt. Without the right to life nothing else matters.

There you go again with those analogies and ignoring the unique role of the women’s duty in the case of the early fetus.

The unique role does not mean the baby should have no legal right not to be killed. It does seem you devalue the life of the baby.

" objective seriousness" what does that mean? You can have the view that criminal protection is fundamental but it is also reasonable that govt’s police power should be limited in certain early terms cases and other means can be used by govt to address the problem. And once again another analogy. I do not know, can an early fetus walk to a poll booth and vote? Once again, is this society’s complete duty (completely responsible) at this point to use its police power or is it on the women in regards to early term cases?

Can an impaired elderly person confined to a hospital room in a coma vote? Do they get to be terminated too?

We all want to help protect the early fetus but the means to do so are in debate.

No, the pro life folks work on all fronts. The so-called “pro-choice” position refuses legal protection.

No, the opposite, many pro-choice views support heavy regulation of all abortions including methods to convince women to make the bettter decision.

By definition pro choice want it legal. That alone says the endorse no legal proection. That is why the term pro choice is so very wrong.

You are the one wanting to now have the police power of the govt spend resources to prosecute this rather large class of criminals. Who is more of a danger to society? Violent robber or a women ending an early pregnancy. They both are morally repugnant but given society’s limited resources it can select which one is more of a threat to law and order.

This tells it all right here. You do not understand abortion is a violent act of killing.

Costs are always an issue with anything because society has a limited amount of resources. No one is completely protected from harm with govt power and again the govt can take different approaches to protect the unborn. But it is not completely society’s responsibility as the women has a duty here.

Would the child about to be aborted hold this view?

If a women violates God law in this area, then God can arrest her. This country is planted thick with laws, man’s laws, not God’s. The govt does not have to completely take over this responsibility of the abortion problem but it should use extraordinary efforts to attack the problem.

Obviously, you do not view abortion for what it is.