and infection, cancer or parasite are also alive, but that does not mean a person should be forced to keep them.
It is the woman's womb and it is up to her if she is ready and willing to carry the embryo to term. It is her life, she is the living breathing human in the room making decisions.
Do you speak with me? ... I never would call abortions doctors "infections", "cancer" or "parasites". They are human beings - and no one has any right to kill human beings. The problem is the the duty to help People, who are to weak to be able to defend themselve. The human beings who will be aborted don't have any chance against their abortion excutioners.
They are a growth of cells.
We are multicellular organisms. That's not astonishing for me. We call this multicellular organisation "body". A body starts to grow with a first cell which contains the biological information about 50% of the body of the father and about 50% of the body of the mother.
Breathing? Sure exists an aerobic metabolism of the growing human being during gestation. How to build up a body without oxygen?
thinking independent beings, they are feeding off the nutrients of the woman. If a man presented with the same symptoms as a pregnant woman the doctors would seek to remove the cause.
If a man would be able to get pregnant then he would be a woman.
You want to force a woman to keep it for nine months,
I said very clear what I think in this conetxt. Let me repeat in a very very short way: Sex produces not absortions. Sex produces babies. If a man and a woman havw sex with each oterh then they know the risk. Both made a contract with mother nature to protect their baby. If they don't like to fullfill this contract then I don't see why anyone in the world could have the duty to kill their baby. The only exception why to kill a human being is [extended] selfdefense.
and then possibly raise it for the next twenty.
Lots of people like to adopt babies.
Maybe the woman has her won hopes and dreams for her life that don't include at that time being a mother or responsible for another life.
If her dreams and hopes have nothing to do with motherhood, then I don't understand why she is pregnant.
Maybe she would rather be a lawyer than a waitress or a political leader than a house wife. She might be a scientist or some dangerous career that would be inhibited by a pregnancy.
Our german minister of defense Ursula von der Leyen has for example 9 children. Our chancellor Angela Merkel has no children. Both is completly okay. What has this to do with abortion? Do you really think someone who will become a scientist and decides not to have a baby on whatever reason is not able not to become pregnant?
She might be responsible for hundreds of lives and not have time to carry, give birth and raise an infant at the time.
It is her life and she might not want to put it on hold for a year or more.
I remember in the moment a car driver who nearly killed me because of his impatience. Thanks god and my guardian angel nothing what was evil had happened. Later I calculated he was ready to kill a human being only because of about 4 seconds of his lifetime. We call such people normally "psychopaths" or "sociopaths". Nine month is also not a long time. This justifies not the death of a human being.
That should be her decision, not something she if forced to do because of someone elses view of morality. She is not a slave.
If men want to over populate the world, let them carry the fetus and give birth. Maybe men should be more like Darwin frog and let women have their freedom.
As many times as men have sex, let them be responsible for all the lives they potentially produce. They wouldn't be able to feed themselves let alone their children. Inject men with a male birth control so they can't produce children till they are ready to have the implant removed. Castrate half the men out there.
Abortions are legal in India, russia, canada, australia, china, italy, france, spain, the US, most of africa. Why should you be the dictator of morality or determine what is right for women? Not your business to know or decide what a woman should do with her body or what happens in a doctor's office. Not for you to decide what tea she drinks or pills she takes. Not for you to decide what is medical, mental or physical, necessity for the woman.
Worry about the million of children out there than need homes and loving parents instead of forcing more children into the world. Worry about feeding the global population first. Worry about producing enough job and safe housing and proper schooling for everyone. Worry about world peace, that children born will have a tomorrow and not be so much fodder of war and abuse.
Even Bill Gates can't feed and care for all the children of the world, but you want to force women to keep an unwanted fetus?
Your morality stinks.
I read the last lines very fast. Your arguments here are very strange. Makes for me not a big sense to say anything to this points. Your opinion in this question seems to be more a kind of [anti]religious faith for you than it is an opinion any longer.
PS: What says your own mother to your ideas about abortion? Would you live - or would you not live - if you would had made her decisions?
And I tried to give you a serios answer. But that's somehow okay. The unicorn Elser also never had any chance. If he was not able to kill Hitler then he and Germany had to die - and if he was able to kill Hitler then today would be written in the history books: A criminal murderer killed all hope in those days, when he murdered the great german statesman "Adolf Hitler", who had once spoken the famous words: "Do you like to have the total peace? The peace of the graveyards!".
