Site News Christian Links Christian Stories Sponsor a Child Opinion Articles Inspirational Stories Funny Stories Funny Pictures Funny Chat Logs Poems Fiction Stories Music Spreadsheets Last Days of Socrates The Powerpuff Girls Comics Variety Site Forum Other Fun Links My Email: [email protected] |
|
---|
Given my way, I would outlaw most abortions. I think life should be valued enough that we don't even bother debating how long after conception it is okay to have an abortion. Females who were raped should have the babies. Just because someone stole my car doesn't mean it's okay for me to steal a candy bar from Wal-Mart. Besides, you never know who might be in there (the womb, not Wal-Mart). The case that I'd allow abortion in is if the pregnant female's life would be in danger if she gave birth. To be more specific, experts should determine the baby's and the female's chance of living, and the way with the best total results should be chosen. Basically, the female is a coward if she'd want an abortion when the baby's chance of living is 100% and hers is greater than 0%. If the baby's chance of living is 20% and the female's chance of living is 20% if she gives birth and the female's chance of living is 100% if an abortion is performed, to not have the abortion would be rash, but possibly admirable anyway. I'd expect, at the very least, an attitude of choosing the way in which the most people have the most chance of living. Since a strict following of that attitude is rare, I would admire it anyway. I don't think good people should ever *want* abortions. Pro-Choice Advocate M: So if a woman wants to live she is a coward? Try telling that to her face. Could you die to save a life? Don't judge people by there actions, until you have walked in their shoes. Nathan: Wanting to live is understandable. Cowardice is common. I ask only that two lives be valued the same. Pro-Choice Advocate M: If you are so willing to save this baby from abortion, then are you willing to make its life worth living, are you willing to help it's mother pay for it, or does the value of life simply end with birth? Nathan: I am willing. Pro-Choice Advocate D: Then go adopt. There are LOTS of kids waiting for you. Nathan: I am currently unable, and there are more ways to improve the lives of children than adopting them. Pro-Choice Advocate D: AhHAH. "I'm willing... but I can't, and there are ways to do it without making any REAL effort on my part!" Basically you're backing away from THAT idea. How, pray-tell, do you plan to improve children's lives then? Give money to charities? Finance orphanages? Come on you're backing out of your owns statement and you know it. It's easy to give money to someone who says they'll help the children but it's NOT easy to actually go out and take it upon yourself to give a child a good life. Nathan: What's REAL effort to you? How much of one's resources should one devote to helping now and how much should one devote to improving his or her ability to help? Pro-Choice Advocate D: See, that's your problem. Raising children isn't about resources. It's about parental teaching and responsibility. All the money in the world means squat to a child if they don't have a mentor. If they don't have someone to build their personality around and someone to teach them about life, it means ZILCH. Teachers can't do this, caregivers in an orphanage can't do this, and volunteers in the Red Cross can't do this. PARENTS do this, whether they're natural or adopted. Parents are there 24/7, answering questions, teaching, imparting wisdom, guiding, helping, they don't send money every now and then, at least they don't if they give a damn. If you TRULY want to make a parentless child's life better, taking them under your wing and being a parent is the only way to do it with any sort of permanence. Money runs out, words from teachers fly out of their heads, food gets eaten and leaves. Nathan: I include those things when I say resources. Pro-Choice Advocate D: So "How much?" A LIFETIME, everything you have goes toward that child. Everything you do will affect it in one way or another. That's what children REQUIRE. You can't give a little effort, and then pass them off to someone else for a while. Take them back when you want to. You can't do that. Raising a child requires a lifetime of effort, some say twenty years, but you never know. And you can't just tell even a 21 year old "Okay go away I don't want you in my life anymore", no, you can't do that. You'll be a parent FOREVER. That's what's required. Nathan: Okay, my answer has been misdirected and my question has been lost. I am not interested in parenting. I do not believe that the only way to help improve the lives of children is to become their parents. Pro-Choice Advocate D: Good luck in your endeavors, but unless you actually take responsibility in a child's life, you won't have any permanent impact on any child. Parents are the single most important factor in a child's life; don't say you intend to "make those child's lives worth living" unless you're willing to do EVERYTHING in you power to do so. You're only making yourself feel better about yourself. (To make a child's life worth living, a parent needs to be both willing and able. I intend to make myself able. There are parents who are willing but not able. They can receive assistance from me. Pro-Choice advocate M challenged people to make a child's life worth living and help the mother to pay for the child's care. I indicated that I was willing to make a child's life worth living by helping a mother pay for her child's care.) |
|
More on Abortion |
|
|