women who seek abortions — Are they just lazy?

God forbid a woman should have to be inconvenienced for a few months out of her entire life.
Just because it might possibly be saving a human life. Not just any human life: her child.

Is giving birth really that much more risky than getting an abortion?

Liberal media and lawmakers have argued for "a woman’s right to her reproductive health". Let’s get one thing straight: women’s health in most cases is not the issue at all for receiving an abortion. More than 90% of abortions are done for the woman's convenience. Even a study from the Guttmacher Institute (organization that supports abortion) admitted that 86% of all abortions were committed for social reasons – in other words they didn’t want the child or felt they couldn't afford a baby. It is actually extremely rare for a pregnancy to pose an imminent threat to the woman's health. In fact, there is only one biological reason why the life of the mother could ever be threatened by a fetus: ectopic pregnancy. And most often it is discovered early, and can be treated.

Only around 1% of abortions are done because of rape or incest.

 

Ugh...your ignorance of this topic is just astounding.

Ever heard of stillborns? Fetuses that are dead in the womb pose a risk of infection to the woman and is a reason she may need to abort too.

Don't forget existing conditions that may make it dangerous for her to carry a pregnancy to term.

http://pregnancy.lovetoknow.com/wiki/Medical_Reasons_for_Abortion

Anyways, yes, social reasons. All right, most women cite social reasons as their reasons for abortion. Did it ever occur to you that if you improve the social conditions of pregnant women, i.e. financial burdens, working conditions and being able to come home to raise the child, they might choose NOT to abort?

If you want to stop abortion for social reasons then you must start by removing the social causes for abortion. But most women are going to keep having abortion for social reasons so long as the people preaching to them to keep it also also continue to expect them to just give birth and raise it and once it's born their SOL.

 

Okay, so I might have missed one. But what percentage of abortions are done because of stillbirths? My guess is an extremely small percentage.

In the USA, only 1 out of 100 pregnancies ends in stillbirth, while 21 out of a 100 pregnancies ends in abortion, 11 of which were induced. So we can immediately see that no more than 9% of abortions could possibly be due to stillborns. Usually a stillborn is aborted from the uterus naturally, so this number must be much less.

or they will be like all the other professional women and want to focus on their careers, making them even more likely to abort.

 

Anders, what are your ideas on how to minimize these reasons? How do you plan to help pregnant women fund the pre-natal care, the birth and the 18+ years of life to raise the baby since most women choose to abort due to socio-economic hardship?

Do you even want to help them or do you just want to see them and their baby suffer in poverty instead? I mean seriously, what do the pro-lifers of this forum intend to do to help reduce or even eliminate this one reason women choose to abort? Most want to make it illegal, but that just isn't enough. Women will still abort regardless of the laws, they always have. The only way to truly stop it is to eliminate the causes. How would you help them?

 

I have a female friend who had an abortion because she said she couldn't afford medical benefits in prenatal stage and couldn't afford to raise it after its birth.

 

So you admit that most abortions are carried out because of money?

 

Probably. But I will not stop citing the fact that she has a right to have one since it is her body that undergoes the changes and she is the one who has to face the risks of pregnancy. Just because her reasons are social does not take away the fact that pregnancy is indeed a medical condition.

Now will you answer my questions since I have answered yours?

 

You do realise there is a thing called adoption?
Some adoption programs will even pay for the pre-natal care if the woman agrees to adopt. In any case, most of the time the pre-natal care is not really necessary.

If she doesn't face the risks of pregnancy, she'll have to face the risks of an abortion. How much less risky is an abortion?

 

It's not a few months. It's 18 years, at the least. That's 18 years of feeding, clothing, do you know it takes around $10,000 to take care of a baby's first year alone?

 

Wow! Big shocker their? I hope you just play at being this stupid. What does socioeconomic mean? Hmmm....

Of course money plays a large roll. The reason a woman gets an abortion is largely moot anyhow, because no one should be allowed to dictate to her what must be done with her body.

There is a silver bullet for poverty and it has worked all over the world, everywhere it has been tried. If you empower women, give them say over their reproductive rights, poverty declines. It is simple really. Take women off of the animal cycle of reproduction and you will have a far healthier society.

But you can't stand not having women "punished" for what you deem immoral behaviour. Sorry chief, we have evolved past your petty ideas of what is right and wrong. We won't be returning to your bronze age way of thinking anytime soon.

 

i think you're missing the point. while we could argue every single point you're trying to make, it's clear that the government has no power to legislate human reproduction or its termination. it would simply be overstepping its boundaries. what's more, a parent has no authority over a person's reproductive functions either. the two entities that have authority over a person's reproductive organs are the person within whom they reside and god whose name you don’t even know.

 

here's what we need to do, we need to make these two things a non issue. the only way that will happen is if we make them untouchable. amendments that cannot be amended before the american government is completely dissolved. the second amendment and abortion rights. propose an amendment that locks them both in as untouchable.

 

Yes - but how many babies have you and other lifers here adopted?

Oh yeah - none.

 

What percentage were due to "laziness"?? Although i might concede laziness on the part of the MALE to a) prevent pregnancy and B) support the woman who is pregnant

 

those that want the government to decide if they should carry a baby to term or not are just lazy

 

Yes, yes. Just like the inconvenience to men to have sex and to then have the inconvenience of... well, nothing...

Fella's can screw like bunnies and walk away.

Ask God to make you a woman and give you a uterus. Because you already speak for women... becoming a woman, just the next step!!

When you're a woman, don't forget to keep those delicate knees shut, dear.

 

only an ignorant person would consider laziness/inconvenience as the reason most women would seek an abortion.

nobody has ever argued that physical health is a major reason for seeking an abortion.

those "social reasons" include some very important considerations.

 

It's becoming clearer and clearer to everybody, with each passing thread, that you women are COMPLETELY IRRESPONSIBLE for yourselves, and your murders. Women should not be in control of abortion, or have a voice on this topic. Women should be silenced regarding this issue and responsibility handed over to men. Women seem incapable of knowing when to spread their legs or not.

If you are not ready for a child then DO NOT HAVE SEX AT ALL, NO MORE SIN, NO MORE SEX FOR PLEASURE ONLY!!!!

All the women are going to respond like this. They're going to throw this ALL BACK ONTO MEN, even though NO MAN has ever had an abortion in history. It's impossible. Women always redirect the blame, and responsibility, onto men. I'm not saying this is wrong necessarily, but watch in the responses. You're going to see something like, "maybe men should keep it in their pants!" This is the redirect. Women use this. But don't let them change the topic, which is WOMEN being responsible for widespread murder of children.

This is a Second Holocaust happening RIGHT NOW. It needs to end. Those accountable need to pay for these crimes.

 

How many babies have you murdered? None? Then why do you support abortion?

 

Ironic how you confessed at one point on this forum to having led a prior sleazy life regarding sex. And here are your projections... a look into your own sleazy mind... having nothing to do with women and everything to do with YOU.

Keep your zipper up, your penis down, matey. There's a good boy.

 

i'm sure this person is proffering this post in satirical form... no one in their right mind especially the people that actually believe this nonsense would actually ever say it. this is garbage straight from the middle east. i wonder if they've noticed that they've been at war for the last ten years with their greatest ideological allies. The only thing that separates them is the fact that one side believes jesus was our sacrificial lamb and that we’ve been sucking his blood for the last 2000 years. people that can be sooooooo closely related in their schools of thought and yet such vigilant and bitter enemies over one insignificant detail, really says a lot. we should just deport these people back to the middle east.

vote. for an amendment to make abortion rights and the second amendment the same amendment and immune from further change. they're both ridiculously annoying issues and no one is going to change either of them without a fight anyway. let’s stop fighting about it.

 

No problems - male pregnancy IS possible - so why not just cut women out of the reproductive cycle save for some egg harvesting and "go it alone" so to speak

 

The issue is not about legislating "reproduction". It's about criminalizing murder, even when the victim in question is not fully developed and is situated within the mother's womb. Women can do whatever they want with their reproduction. Just leave the fetus alone!

You mean like mandatory child support payments?

 

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Women's reproduction creates the fetus, with a little help from the male of course, but the bulk of reproduction occurs within the woman's body. In fact, the woman is the ONLY one who bears any type of direct physical and emotional effects from it. The man is secondary in this respect, because he can only experience the pregnancy through the woman. Abortion is and should be the woman's choice alone because it is her body alone that does 95% of the reproduction.

Which both the man AND the woman are responsible for if they are not together and do not share equal custody. The only part of human reproduction where it is inherently unequal is after intercourse leading up to child birth. There are no situations where a man has to bear a burden of it when the woman does not, generally speaking that is. Each situation will be unique of course, but there are no constants in every pregnancy where the man is the only one bearing a burden like there is for the woman.

 

If you want to stop an abortion, then simply find a woman considering one, and pay her to give birth. It's only just. If you want the woman to do the work of childbirth, then open up your wallet and pay her to do so.

If you won't, we'll understand. It's plain your selfish conveniences are more important to you than the deaths of the poor wee baybees. Basically, you think everyone should be working hard to save lives. Except for yourself, because you're a special snowflake who gets to be lazy. Hard to take you seriously when you have that "everyone but me needs to work to save lives!" attitude.