Tuesday, October 28, 2008


I am pro-life. But, I am not for a 100% ban on abortion. I think when it comes to a decision on the woman's life or the babies life, the woman (and those she chooses to include) should be able to decide. Now, I know it becomes a gray area as to what is the line to which a pregnancy is hazardous to a woman's life. I am not a doctor, so I can't make that decision completely. But, I think it would be fine to put a rule that two doctors from different practices would have to be consulted. If both agree (or any two agree) that the woman's life was in danger, then an abortion would be allowed. The two doctors wouldn't have to be in the same field. I am not abreast about all of the fields of medicine, but generalists, ob/gyn's, surgeons, etc. should be all on the possible lists of doctors.

What about rape or incest? Well, hopefully the victim would be going to the hospital after the crime to get the rape test, etc. If the victim reports the crime, then there are options before abortion such as the morning after pill. The woman then wouldn't have to carry a baby conceived by force. Why do I not like abortion in these cases? There are women who say that the abortion felt like a second rape. That is was just as much of a violation as the rape itself. I think the best option would be to prevent the pregnancy from actually happening then to put the women into a position to choose.

I believe that life begins at implantation. I believe that that life is special and should be saved if possible. Read the comments on this post about all of the women who consider the children they lost - including early miscarriages, abortions, and stillbirths. Each of these women realize that what they were carrying was a human. As soon as you feel the baby moving, it is obvious that it is a human. Early ultrasound (I had one at about 7 weeks) shows a human - not a bunch of cells.

Now, I know some people think we should have the option to choose. IT is a woman's body, so she should get to choose what happens to it. Well, suicide has often been considered against the law (although normally not enforced). So, what is the difference? If it is illegal (still in some states of the US) to kill yourself, why is it then not illegal to kill something inside of you?

No comments: