Abortion

Abortion is a difficult issue to make a decision. Both sides of the arguments have valid points, but the extremists on each side make completely invalid and overdramatic arguments. Because both issues have valid points, it is obvious that the answer is a compromise.

  On the Pro Choice side, the extremists make the point "My Body. My Choice". They try to use this defense to minimize the situation and make it appear to be based purely upon their individual rights. In this way, Pro Life supporters look as if they are taking away the freedom of the Pro Choice supporters. In reality, the argument of "My Body My Choice". is ridiculously selfish; No matter how you try to justify it, you are still taking a life. You need to be able to recognize the fact that you consciencely murdered your child because you were unfit to raise it. Whether or not you should have the right to make that decision does not negate the fact that you still made the highly immoral decision to murder someone.
Besides, the argument is flawed in the first place. The baby is as much the father's as it is yours. The argument should be 'Our Child, Our Choice' in the first place. This just continues to show how selfish these people are.  

On the other hand, the "Abortion is Murder" argument is pointless. Everyone already realizes that abortion is the act of murder; you are not surprising anyone. Showing me a picture of a bloody fetus does not prove your point, it just makes you look mentally imbalanced. Abortion is the act of consciencely murdering a child to spare them a short life of neglect and suffering.  If a potential parent realizes that they are unable to care for a child, it is appropriate for them to murder the child now out of mercy than later out of neglect. If the child were to live there is a high probability that the child would be neglected, physically and mentally. Unless you are willing to raise the child yourself, do not claim that a woman is wrong for aborting her child. The other argument I hear often is that the child could be placed up for adoption. However, there are hundreds of documented situations of abuse, neglect, and worse treatment in adopted homes. Besides the poor treatment they have a high probability of receiving, adopted children grow up having attachment and abandonment issues. For claiming Pro-Life, these extremists seem to be completely content with forcing a child into a tortured existence. 

  After examining both sides of the argument I would agree that it is the right of the potential parents to choose whether or not to murder their child. However, after making the choice a second time, the potential parents should be legally required to have their reproductive organs removed. If they are unable to make the appropriate decision to utilize birth control or any other options to prevent themselves from making the same mistake then the risk needs to be removed for them. 

if you abort the would be child before it is a child, i don't consider it murder, and i think nearly all pro-choice people share that opinion with me. i know it may be a technicality, but it is an important distinction between what is and is not life. i think anyone who does see it as a life, and therefore murder, would than take the more appropriate view of pro-life, being as society doesn't see fit to kill innocent people.

I agree that it is not technically murder, which is why I would not agree with making abortion illegal. You may not be literally murdering another conscience human life, but you are still preventing a life from entering into existence. One conceived, this individual would potentially become a human being, so to have an abortion is a conscience decision to end this life before it begins. My argument is not that abortion is a crime similar to murder, my argument is that when decising to abort a child a potential parent needs to take responsibility for their actions and recognize that they are preventing a human life. It is not just another egg anymore, you have made the concience decision to create another living being and if you decide to kill it then you should have a valid reason. To avoid discomfort or reaponsibility is not an acceptable reason to prevent an individual's existence. You need to recognize that you are unfit to raise the child and decide to kill the child to prevent it from suffering your neglect. Then, it is your responsibility to utilize preventative measures so that you do not find yourself in this situation again. If you do, then at this point you may as well be committing murder because you had mote than enough time amd reason to prevent this situation from occurring again. You have now proven that you are unfit to reproduce due to the fact that through your neglect you have now prevented two lives from ever existing. Our option as a society is to either remove their ability to reproduce now, or imprison them for letting their child suffocate in their backseat later.

i agree with your point about preventative measures being taken, and that if a woman does this repetitively she probably should have to have her "tubes tied". i just think there is or was some contradiction in your position.

I agree that it was poorly organized, I will have to edit it when I get a chance.

i would recommend just clearing it up like this, rather than going back and altering it, then our conversation wouldn't make sense.