Is there ever a circumstance when you would support forced abortions?

[Josie]

Here are a few scenarios to consider:

1. Single mother - no family to help her - no job, no money, no support at all.

2. Mentally challenged mother.

3. Physically challenged mother.

4. Tween or teen mother.

5. Baby is going to have mental or physical issues.

 

[winston53660]

No

...................

 

[1069]

Never. A woman has the right to sovereignty over her own body.
If she's old enough to conceive, she's old enough to make her own decision about whether to gestate or terminate.
I would support abortions for the severely mentally impaired, however the wording in this thread- "forced abortion"- leads me to believe that you're referring to mentally impaired women who are nevertheless capable of expressing an opinion on the matter.
Therefore, regardless of their level of impairment, their preference must be honored.
If they were vegetative or brain dead and incapable of expressing any opinion, I'd vote for abortion.
That is the only circumstance I can think of where I would, and then only if they conceived while in this state and so expressed no opinion prior to becoming incapacitated.

For example: a pregnant woman gets in a car accident on the way home from her own baby shower and ends up in a vegetative state. Her husband and family all claim she was thrilled about her pregnancy and eager to give birth, although of course she's no longer sentient and cannot register an opinion.
In that case, let her complete the pregnancy and deliver the baby.

Example number two: a woman is in an identical state to the woman in example one. She has been in it all her life. She was born without a functioning brain, and has always lived in institutions.
She turns up pregnant. She was probably impregnated by a staff member.
She is unable to register any preference about what should be done, since she has no brain function.
Although her condition is identical to the woman in the above scenario- brain dead and pregnant- I'd say terminate the pregnancy in this second case.
We can only assume that if she could register an opinion, she'd choose the option that involved a lesser amount of pain and risk.
That would not, however, be a "forced" abortion.
It would be mercifully ending the pregnancy of a woman without brain function, who never consented to the pregnancy in the first place.

 

[rivrrat]

Never. It's not the govt's job to decide if or when a woman has a child.

 

[spud_meister]

No, for the same reasons as ^^^

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

There are circumstances under which the decision whether or not to abort does not rest properly with the expectant mother-- primarily when she is mentally or legally incapable of making decisions for herself. Even then, the decision should rest with her family.

 

[mac]

Absolutely not.

 

[digsbe]

I don't believe there is ever a circumstance where I could support a forced abortion.

 

[molten_dragon]

There are circumstances under which the decision whether or not to abort does not rest properly with the expectant mother-- primarily when she is mentally or legally incapable of making decisions for herself. Even then, the decision should rest with her family.

I agree with Korimyr. Under any circumstance in which the woman would be incapable of making medical decisions for herself, then it's not her decision. It is the decision of whoever has the power to make those decisions (hopefully her family).

 

[ashley.hunt60]

Nope, I can't think of a case where I would accept a forced abortion to be morally correct, or even have moral high-ground. After the baby is born is another subject, and abortion commendations can be done, but no forced abortions.

 

[Panache]

Sure, if the fate of the universe hung in the balance. That was easy.

 

[mac]

Sure, if the fate of the universe hung in the balance. That was easy.

Why would impact on the universe be a consideration?

 

[Orion]

For those who call pro-choice people "pro-abortion", see this thread.

Pro-choice means that the woman decides and no one else. It's her body.

 

[mac]

For those who call pro-choice people "pro-abortion", see this thread.

Pro-choice means that the woman decides and no one else. It's her body.

Pro-life means human life doesn't exist on the whim of another human being.

 

[Orion]

Pro-life means human life doesn't exist on the whim of another human being.

I know that.

But calling me pro-abortion is wrong because I'm not.

 

[mac]

I know that.

But calling me pro-abortion is wrong because I'm not.

Considering yourself not "pro-abortion" is an example of cognitive dissonance, a problem many Americans deal with on the issue. Most Americans feel that abortion is murder on a human level but on a intellectual level are unwilling to oppose it due to the confusion interjected by the right of self-sovereignty.

 

[Orion]

Considering yourself not "pro-abortion" is an example of cognitive dissonance, a problem many Americans deal with on the issue. Most Americans feel that abortion is murder on a human level but on a intellectual level are unwilling to oppose it due to the confusion interjected by the right of self-sovereignty.

I don't feel conflicted.

It's possible to not want abortion for oneself but respect the choices of others to to want it or not want it. The reason why pro-choice people get slammed as being pro-abortion is because they usually end up defending the reasoning of people who do decide to have an abortion, since that is the position currently under attack. It's like how moderates are fairly central but can be driven to either side when faced with extremes.

If you take a step back and look at the pro-choice stance, I think it makes sense in a pluralistic system like the U.S. You can't prove without a doubt that abortion is murder. It's simply a moral argument that would take a majority position to achieve power on.

If you don't want an abortion then simply don't get one.

 

[MaggieD]

Under no circumstances could I ever support forced abortion.

Now ask me about forced sterilization. Oh, wait, that's another thread.

 

[Chuz Life]

If you don't want an abortion then simply don't get one.

As an abortion is a form of molestation,... please tell me how the senitment that you just expressed could not be used to protect other molestations.

"If you don't like child molestation,... don't molest any,.... but don't tell others what they can and can't do with their bodies"

Molestation;
1 : to annoy, disturb, or persecute esp. with hostile intent or injurious effect

--Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law,

 

[mac]

I don't feel conflicted.

It's possible to not want abortion for oneself but respect the choices of others to to want it or not want it. The reason why pro-choice people get slammed as being pro-abortion is because they usually end up defending the reasoning of people who do decide to have an abortion, since that is the position currently under attack. It's like how moderates are fairly central but can be driven to either side when faced with extremes.

If you take a step back and look at the pro-choice stance, I think it makes sense in a pluralistic system like the U.S. You can't prove without a doubt that abortion is murder. It's simply a moral argument that would take a majority position to achieve power on.

If you don't want an abortion then simply don't get one.

Yes, but you can't prove it is not murder. Tacit approval is still approval.

 

[mac]

Under no circumstances could I ever support forced abortion.

Now ask me about forced sterilization. Oh, wait, that's another thread.

That, I think, would be an enjoyable discussion.