I am actually Asexual (take that as you wish), so I do not really need to worry about that (I think). The point I am trying to make is that I find it severely unfair to kill a person’s baby just because they are not caring it, regardless of stereotypes or risks of abandonment. But I guess talking about it with your partner would prevent such circumstances, unless she is a lier or something.
7 billion and counting, beautiful precious miracles wandering around out there.Many of them sick starving unloved and unwanted, abused mistreated and uncared for.
It is nobodies damn business why a woman would elect to terminate a pregnancy.
If you think you are so capable of angst over the philosophical question, what makes you think a pregnant woman is not equally capable of torturing herself over the decision.
The reasons a woman would chose to terminate a pregnancy are her own.
If you don't think abortion is appropriate, don't have one. If you want to force your "ethics" on someone else, become a priest.
I'd make a parallel with a French saying I very much like:
"A fool who knows he's a fool isn't as quite as foolish as a fool who doesn't."
An irresponsible person who knows they're irresponsible, has an abortion, is less irresponsible than the irresponsible person who doesn't know, and goes ahead and becomes an irresponsible parent. Being "responsible" is not something just one becomes with a simple decision, it is in our character, we're either apt to be parents or we're not, imposing parenthood on an "irresponsible" person is not the solution. Nor is increasing the number of orphans and foster kids.
'An irresponsible person who knows they're irresponsible, has an abortion, is less irresponsible than the irresponsible person who doesn't know, and goes ahead and becomes an irresponsible parent. Being "responsible" is not something just one becomes with a simple decision, it is in our character, we're either apt to be parents or we're not, imposing parenthood on an "irresponsible" person is not the solution. Nor is increasing the number of orphans and foster kids.'
Ok, but not ONLY irresponsible people become pregnant accidentally. All contraceptives have a fialure rate, so even if you are using two forms of birth control, there is no way to completely eliminate the possibility of becoming pregnant.
Condom failure rate: 14% (male condom); 21% (female condom)
Oral contraceptive failure rate: 5%
Cervical Cap failure rate: 20% (before childbirth); 40% (after childbirth)
Diaphragm failure rate: 20%
Fertility awareness (rythm method) failure rate: 25%
Spermicide (only) failure rate: 26%
Sponge failure rate: 20% (before childbirth); 40% (after childbirth)
Withdrawl failure rate: 19%
Okay, the methods below are better, but they still have a failure rate and are still going to produce unwanted pregnancies...
Depo-Provera injection failure rate: 0.3%
Intrauterine device (IUD), copper, failure rate: 0.8%
Intrauterine device (IUD), progesterone, failure rate: 2%
Lunelle injection failure rate: 0.1% - 1%
Ortho-Evra patch failure rate: 0.1% - 1%
EVEN STERILIZTION CARRIES A 0.5% FAILURE RATE IN FEMALES AND A 0.2% FAILURE RATE IN MALES!!!
The only method of birth control that 100% guarantees that you will not become pregnant is abstinence. In a perfect world, people would not have intercourse before they are ready to become parents, but this is not a perfect world and, let's face it, even if it were, do you actually think that everyone would go for this? It denys our very nature. Look what happens to catholic priests after years of denying themselves the 'sins of the flesh' (yes, I am thinking of the Rocky Horror Picture Show right now - LOL). And, then, even abstinence does not guarantee your safety - that you are not going to get raped one night in some dark alley and become pregnant as a result; especially if you are practicing abstinence, because you are most likely not using any kind of birth control, like an oral contraceptive or IUD, if you are not having sex.
I got may data here, if you would like more info:
There is also the adoption option. The problem with this is that a lot of people will make the decision to place their child for adoption and then revoke their decision at the last minute. I know what I am talking about here as I, myself, placed a child for adoption 16 years ago and let me tell you that it is a VERY HARD thing to do. A lot of people just cannot do it, no matter how unfit they (or their current situation) may be. Their kids may even get taken away from them at some later point because they are so unfit to be parents, thus creating more foster kids/orphans, but you are in a very emotional state directly after childbirth and it is very hard to hand your baby to another person and 'walk away', for lack of a better term. And, until you go to court - sometimes WEEKS OR MONTHS after the birth of the child, you still have the option to take that child back. This gives the birth parents even more opportunity to change their minds.
But let me just say, for anyone who may be out ther reading this facing an unwanted pregnancy, it is very fulfilling to have an open adoption. You get to choose the family by hand (you get to look at photo albums and then meet and spend time with the family), you get letters and photos. You can send birthday/holiday gifts, cards, letters, photos of yourself. You know where the child lives and who their parents are. While it still wrenches my heart to see the face of the child I gave up, I have never regretted the decision I made because he has a great life and I know that I could not have given him all that he now has and all the opportunities that he now has.
Anyone considering or facing this, please contact me (especially if you live in the sate of Michigan) and I would be happy to talk to you. It is a hard decision, but it is an alternative to an abortion (which I am not against at all, I want to add) and it can be done. Some adoption agencies are better than others, too, so really research your options.
Sorry this is so long, it's just a very hot topic for me.
I disagree with planned passing off our offspring to others. It is something I would never do. Offspring deserve to be with their biological parents, unless death/disease prevents it. I consider the very first right of an infant to be breast milk. Any other rights ensue from there.
An unwanted offspring should not be born.
Some people cannot have children of their own and adoption is their only option, whether they adopt children as babies, at birth or as foster children later in their young lives. Do these people NOT deserve to be parents, even though they are ready and willing to be parents and the biological parents were not ready? The perspective adtoptive parents I inerviewed were way more equipped to be parents than I was. They had the financial resources, they had a large enough house with room to grow, and most importantly they wanted children and could not have any of their own.
Some people cannot produce breast milk and have to look at other options; some babies are born lactose intolerant and have to be fed soy formula. Going by your logic, these babies should be left to starve because their parent cannot produce enough breast milk to adequately feed them, or the babies themselves are not able to digest the breast milk. That does not add up.
Does a child deserve to be in an abusive home environment, simply because they were born to parents who are inept to really be good parents? There are pleanty of would-be child abusers who do not believe in abortion. They are not going to abort thier child, but they are certainly going to abuse them after they are born.
Your black and white picture of the world does not really work, and your insensitiviy towards adoption shocks me.
You missed the point entirely. The difference is between intentional and due to circumstance, it's the intentionality I disagree with. I'm not insensitive towards adoption, as long as the children were not born for that purpose.
Well, I can tell you with 100% certainty that I did not get pregnant just so that I could place my child for adoption. I am not sure what 'intentional adoption' even means. I have, honestly, never met anyone before now who has this strange attitude towards adoption. I think that it is a commendable decision. To admit to yourself that you are not ready to be a parent, but choosing to take responsibility for the life inside you and carry it to term so that you can place it in a loving home is not 'planned passing of our offspring to others' as you call it. You make it sound like everyone who gives up a child for adoption is purposely placing a burden on someone else. Families who are waiting to adopt want children worse than anyone else. There is no such thing as an unwanted adopted child. (OK, Every situation has its extreme cases, so I suppose that somewhere out there exsists a child who has been adopted into a family and is either abused or becomes unwanted for some reason, sure, but that is not the overwhelming norm here).
If a person accidentally becomes pregnant before they are ready and does not want an abortion then adoption is pretty much their only other choice. If everyone went by your logic, abortion would be forced upon those who did not want to be parents, as they would have no other choice, and that is completely unacceptable. I am going to say, again, that I have no problem with abortion or those who choose it. I don't even care why you want an abortion, the reason is irrelevant to me. I think that it would cause a lot more problems to outlaw abortion than it would solve.
To suggest that adoption should not be an alternative to abortion is, quite frankly, asinine.
I am choosing, at this point, to opt out of this conversation. As a person who has given up a child I am just too biased in the other direction to even begin to understand why anyone would disagree with adoption or those who make plans to place their children in loving homes. I am simply too close to the situation, here. Adoption is a very emotional decision and you obviously are not considering anyone's feelings when you post things like 'We're talking abortion here, to be self aware that one should not birth allows one to decide to not birth... the rational solution. While an ignoramus goes around popping them out and giving them away. Within a given cultural context, ignorance is not a valid excuse'... Thanks a lot. You may have not been directing that comment at me, but you insult anyone who has ever given up a child and that includes me.
You don't know me and I don't know you, ok, so let's not make any judgments on my intellegence. I am not 'popping them out and giving them away' as you say. I had one child that I knew I could not afford to raise and I placed him in a loving, financially secure home. There is nothing ignorant about that. There are also thousands of families who have adopted children who would most certainly disagree with you.
So, now you can say whatever you want about us ignoramus's who go around popping out those kids and giving them away because I can't do this thread anymore. Your reasoning is absoutely absurd and quite assuredly naive.
To carry a foetus to term with the intent of giving it up. INTENT.
You do realise the number of parentless children scattered about the planet.
I'll also compare it to getting a dog from a kennel or from the Humane society. Getting dogs from a kennel encourages overpopulation. Let's adopt those already in the world, instead of creating more of them.