Ban abortion, whatever the reason. the unborn should be given the rights not to be murdered.

You start off by saying "Someone decides to have sex..", what about rape victims who become pregnant?

Every time i scratch my arm i kill off many cells, how is this different to killing a blastocyst consisting of a few cells?

rape victims are a very very very small minority of those who have abortions. It wouldn't even be covered by "social economic" reasons, but having said that does rape really justify murder?

A few cells on your arm don't live and breath and interact like a human being as a whole.

You do realise that if this happens adoption will go through the roof and there will be an even better reason to have an awful lot more same-sex couples adopting!

Seriously though, what right have you to judge? Women should have the right to choose what happens inside their wombs, and people like you shouldn't dictate to them what's right and wrong.

The unborn are only a bundle of non-descript cells when most abortions take place, and whilst it's not high on my list of "nice things to think about" I greatly respect women who take what can be a very painful decision for the sake of not bringing an unwanted child into the world.

Sex is a ""bad" choice" is it? Why is that? Your attitude seems to suggest that you don't believe that people make genuine mistakes or find that their contraception doesn't work- or that if those terribly unlikely things should happen they should be punished for the rest of their lives for them happening.

I'm sorry to say that I worry more about the living, sentient beings than unfeeling, unthinking bundles of cells.

This idea that "women should have the right to choose what happens inside their wombs" is one of the most pernicious and depressing idees fixes in our society. No-one else is given such an unchallenged, unlimited right to commit mass slaughter of their fellow human beings.

I happen not to think that abortion should be made illegal. It is definitely murder, but murder is sometimes justified. There are situations in which it would be more compassionate to allow a woman to have an abortion than to carry on the pregnancy. The question is one of emphasis, however. The current situation, in which hundreds of thousands of absolutely the most vulnerable people imaginable - unborn babies, entirely dependent on their mothers - are killed on an industrial scale, too often on unsatisfactory pretexts, makes me feel sick. It should make any decent, sane person light-headed with horror and fury. Those unthinking bundles of cells would be people just as much as you (more perhaps) if you didn't murder them before they got the chance.

totally agree with you 'dwilkes'the term "right to life" expressed towards an entity that by technical definition isn't alive seems a bit backwards.

And people make mistakes and shouldn't be forced to bring a child in the world that wouldn't be looked after properly which then raises loads more social issues on the mother/father's POV

Some of you people are insanely 'old-fashioned' - say your grand-daughter is raped but someone of another race (I say this because the child would therefore be a visible daily reminder of their attacker) and you think that she should carry the child that she will leave to regret? There are enough children in the world suffering why add to it. If a girl makes the decision that she can not offer that child a good life - food, shelter, clothes why would she want to inflict that on a child.

Sounds like 'old fashioned religious babble.'

Such an ignorant view. To suggest we return to a society of backstreet abortionists with knitting needles is quite frankly the worst suggestion I have seen on this website.

"rape victims are a very very very small minority of those who have abortions."
[citation needed]

Do not burden society with an unwanted child.
Anyway it is only very late on in the pregnancy that the foetus gets a soul. Read your bible.

The OP has obviously not read any recent medical papers.

The Royal College of Gyn & Ops plus the BMA are far better qualified to comment.

When the technology exists and we can arrange to have unwanted foetuses transplanted into mens stomachs for nine months gestation, followed by full birthing, then men can save as many unwanted foetuses as they like. Bear in mind, many women still die in child birth, so surrogate males should take this into account before volunteering.
Until this time it is not up to them to dragoon others into doing things against their choice nor should they assume to judge the one who does not yet exist as more valuable than one who is already a fully viable human being. Women have been using contraception and abortifacients since the times of ancient Egypt. It was probably due to the witch burnings that the knowledge was suppressed here, many of them were skilled herbalists. Have some compassion for women we are half the world.

life interesting word that too many people here don't seam to think about...
Right to life an interesting concept. But who has the greater right?
So under no circumstance allow abortions so what happens if a pregnancy is found to be life threatening at an early stage doesn't the woman have more right to life?
After all how can a bunch of cells that cannot survive even with help be considered life other wise where do we stop ban contraception and condoms are the sperm and eggs not life just at an earlier stage.
The right of the life that is alive and viable must take precedent over the morals of a few who it never effects.
Or do we go back to the back street abortion clinics with all the horrors they entailed.
Back to life.
Even people who make mistakes should still be allowed their lives and while some may think give the baby up when it is born they seam to ignore that for some mothers that leaves a scare that will haunt them for the rest of their lives should they not have the right to a life themselves.

With the right to chose, must also come responsibility.

For those who have had abortions without counselling, their lives have been hell.

Too easy it is, to have an abortion and it would seem that they are pushed too quickly into that procedure.

We have babies being aborted at such a late stage, that it could live outside the womb and for those who have never seen how a baby is aborted, I suggest you watch a video.
'Hoovering out' out arms, legs etc is not nice: many nurses who have to be present at these procedures, are often left in trauma.

Abortion in such places as China is abhorrent: their social act of one child per family, and only girls being aborted because they are 'second class citizens' means millions of female babies are inhumanely killed.

All we have to do is watch the news to see that there are now less girls available for Chinese men to marry, and so we are seeing the theft of young girls bought and sold, so sons can have a bride and a child of their own.

Right to life means just that.. a right to be born and a right to life... and for those women, who think that they can do what they like to their bodies, may I remind them that they cannot be irresponsible.

It takes two to make a child. You have a duty to your unborn child.

You need counselling and given all the choices available before you make that decision. You need to know how you will feel, after you have gone through this procedure: the guilt and shame you will feel for many years to come, which may prevent you having a full life.

t

This is already illigal in this country - two medical doctors must certify there is a physical or mental risk to the mother or to any children she already has.
Maybe you should make yourself aware of the law before posting on sites like this and looking a bit like a numpty

Worst idea I have as yet seen.
Will you religious zealots stop trying to force your views on the rest of us. Just because you believe something is wrong it does not necessarily follow everyone else does, or indeed should believe the same thing. The bible says you should stone to death a child for cheeking their parents so don't come over all judgemental on women who don't share your beliefs.

I agree with bambara with "stop trying to force your religious views on others". If you believe it is wrong, don't ban it for everyone else.

What about if the woman is raped? What if she isn't healthy enough to keep the baby? etc. etc.

And beside all that, a ban on abortion would cause an even greater population increase. Right now, we need to control human population. There are not enough jobs, not enough homes, etc. And I heard somewhere about current shortages of food. Banning abortion would make these problems even worse with population increase.

If the government are not to reduce the abortion limit then society ought to be educated about what an abortion entails to include video footage and photographs being shown of the abortion procedure and aborted babies. We can't make informed decisions about abortion unless we have seen for ourselves just exactly what it involves. If abortion is so ok then whey are we not shown such footage??? The government ought to pay heed to the wise words of the late Mother Teresa
If we accept that a mother can kill her own child how can we tell other people not to kill one another.

Killing a clump of cells can not be compared to killing a person. Why? Because while a this clump of cells maybe human (or at least made of human cells) it is not a person.

Banning abortion isn't a solution, it'd only make things worse. We'd be back to a time of back alley abortions which are more likely to be dangerous to the mother. Instead focus on sex eduction so that people know what contraception to use.

That said, the moment I saw Right to Life, I began to suspect religious reasoning.

I've always said this, if your dad and or mum were to do something wrong or disagreeable is it ok for you to be murdered because of it? if you have sex then be careful or accept the responcibility involved with the act and if not then there are milions of childless couples who would love to take care of your child.
Stop saying that killing is ok just because you give it a different name. War, termination, murder = same thing!
Doctors are meant to only terminate pregnancy if there is serious risk of harm to the parent, let this be the case then, instead of a couple of docs getting together to sign forms for women they know nothing of. It used to be against the law and as a baby who's farther set up a termination for her I can tell you straight, given the choice I'd rather be alive!!

It amazes me just how callous some people can be. Just reading some of the comments above make you want to weep.

I've seen two abortions now, and believe me, when you see a little body being ripped piece by tiny piece from the woman's womb (let's not dignify her with the term mother!) To see tiny feet with a leg bone sticking out is heart rending, assuming you have a heart.

Abortion is murder.

I couldn't disagree more with everything you've said. Women should have the right to choose full stop.

Look at the bigger picture: how good a parent would that woman be to an unwanted child?

I would hope that the decision to have an abortion is one that no woman would take lightly, but accidents or unwanted pregnancies do happen and people are not always happy to continue with that pregnancy for many reasons from the very tragic to the practical. That really isn't your business.

I completely disagree with you. I think it's enormously important that we retain sovereignty over our own bodies. Should we be forced to donate our organs? Forced birth is no different.

You only need one kidney. Why are you condemning innocent people to death? What about their right to life?

Oh and to the person who suggested we should watch footage of an abortion. That is a really sick idea.

When a pregnancy occurs that was unplanned, it might be safe to say that the partners involved have not given sufficient thought to being parents. Therefore, there is a high probability of them not being capable to raise a child as well as that child deserves. Abortion is the only way people, intelligent enough to realise they're in this position, have to avoid committing the unforgivable offence of failing to provide adequate support for a child.

To JRoss - a woman has the choice to give the child up for adoption- she does not have to raise the child. Why is the idea of watching footage of an abortion sick? I agree that it would not make pleasant viewing however it is realistic and enables society to be informed about abortion. Society is kept informed about the dangers of smoking with pictures of damaged lungs etc being put on cigarette packets so why should the same not apply to abortion. We really cannot make an informed decision about abortion until society is shown the full picture - If the idea of watching abortion footage is sick then what does this say about the act of abortion?

To the anti-abortionists who want to force people to watch footage of abortions. Do you also want everyone to watch footage from abatoirs to see the process that cows, pigs, sheep, chickens etc... go through to produce your lunch?
Both processes are necessary, (to those who eat meat or choose to have an abortion) but I wouldn't want to use them as light entertainment.

"Someone decides to have sex, they should live with the concequences. " So children should be born as a punishment for their wicked mothers? Wicked mothers, because they had sex?

This suggestion should be removed for its immoral treatment of children.

I believe that TV has in the past aired footage of animals being slaughtered for our lunch and thus educating the public on this matter which is why the same should be afforded for abortion. The former is necessary as a part of a healthy diet and thus to promote healthy lives where as an informed in sight on how an abortion is performed is necessary to educated the public on the value of life

i don't think this site is supposed to be a platform for medival minded zealots whose role in life seems to be sticking thier nose into others lives and trying to impose a warped morality,get a life!

Now thats quite prophetic "get a life"

Foetus != A human being with a life and experiences.

You become human by being brought up in society, I'd go as far as saying your only genetically human when born.

What seperates us from other animals are our culture, language etc - you don't have any of that for a few years, let alone as a foetus... this is just wishful thinking lacking any rigor.

(This kind of thining is on the exact same level as new agers believing that a crystal can tell them what to do, or homeopathy, only more damaging as it proscribes to tell others they need to bring more human beings into the world when they may not be ready).

But its not about whether the parents are ready its about the child being brought into the world - if the parents are not ready then give the child up for adoption

 "stop trying to force your religious views on others".
So it's ok for you to force your views on unborn children?

"The bible says you should stone to death a child for cheeking their parents"
really, where?

"I couldn't disagree more with everything you've said. Women should have the right to choose full stop."

And the vast majority do - they can decide before they have unprotected sex (in the vast maority of cases).
Also what about the choice of the Human being that would have been? Are they just completly irrelivant? Because if they are, all life is irrelevant.

"i don't think this site is supposed to be a platform for medival minded zealots whose role in life seems to be sticking thier nose into others lives and trying to impose a warped morality,get a life!"
How is protecting life, a warped morality?

They have no brain when they are aborted. They are just a mush of random cells. When they develop a brain then abortion is no longer allowed. People who know what they are talking about have already thought about this.

this is largely based on religious "morals". Religion is an outdated idea and the only reason they want more children to be born is so they can perpetuate the system of indoctrinating gullible minds with outdated ideas which cause more pain than good.

The mother has the right to choose. End of story. Voting against this idiotic proposal.

This website is about RESTORING civil liberties, not removing more of them.
It will be a very cold day in hell when a group of pious religious zealots tell me what I can and can't do to my own body.
Also the alternative to legalised abortion isn't abstinence and a return to the 1950s, it is overcrowded orphanages, unwanted babies being dumped in the streets, and women dying as the result of complications in self-induced or back-alley abortions.

If you can't see what a stupid idea this is then I truly feel sorry for you.

A bag of cells is no more a person with feelings hopes desires or rights than are my tonsils, I dont see religious nutters demanding I keep my tonsils. I dont care what high minded religious reasons you may have, if a woman wants an abortion she should get one, without question, under any circumstance. Nobody on earth has any right to force a woman to remain pregnant and more than they have a right to force me to keep my tonsils if they start playing up on me. Frankly it's none of your damned business.

A bag of cells is no more a person with feelings hopes desires or rights than are my tonsils, I dont see religious nutters demanding I keep my tonsils. I dont care what high minded religious reasons you may have, if a woman wants an abortion she should get one, without question, under any circumstance. Nobody on earth has any right to force a woman to remain pregnant and more than they have a right to force me to keep my tonsils if they start playing up on me. Frankly it's none of your damned business.

My computer is a person too, can it have the right to life?
Don't be ridiculous.

Let people make their own minds up. If you don't agree to having a termination, don't have one. You live your life, let everyone else live their own life.

We want less laws, not more.

Abortion is legal in the UK up to the 24th week of pregnancy.

68 per cent of people in this country want to make abortion law tougher and reduce the upper limit from 24 weeks to around 13 weeks.

If you search for a picture of a 24 week foetus, you will see why. Far more than a "bag of cells".

I believe that this is not a religious issue for most people, it is a moral one.

Better a bag of cells is killed than a living breathing baby. Giving birth sends your emotions into overdrive and a sensible decision to have the unwanted baby adopted may go out the window. However several weeks later of no sleep and a constantly crying baby and murder could happen. Result, two lives ruined rather than none.

This law should NEVER be repealed.

I flagged the first comment as "inappropriate" by mistake - I thought it was in support. I do believe that abortion is murder and those little cells are not any old cells - it took what should be a wonderful act of union between people committed to eachother in love and self-sacrifice to produce the new life. As has been said, a new human should not have to pay so dearly for someone's wrong choice of sexual activity.

ridiculous suggestion! in hospital the priority for life saving treatment by law is too the mother not the unborn feotus. doctors are bound by this despite what relatives will demand. therefore life of the mother is priority over the cells/foetus/child she is carrying. the descrepancy comes after 22 - 2 4 weeks where there is debate over whether the feotus has developed nervous systems/brain etc etc and capable of feeling pain. prior to this it will feel nothing. keep preaching the religious twaddle in your churches and keep it out of medical practice/research.

What about the effect on the mother? MOST mothers who have an abortion end up regretting it and it destroys their life...they deeply regret it and live that way for the rest of their lives. Of course there are the few who have an abortion every five minutes and it doesn't bother them in the slightest.

Maybe if abortion wasn't available people would accept the hand they have been given in life. A baby is always a beautiful gift.

In the same way that we look upon slavery as a great evil, future generations will look at us and say how can we as a nation have allowed this slaughter of the innocents, i know an awful lot of women who's lives have been ruined, they remember abortion days as opposed to birthdays and are filled with what if's and how old's, not to mention that they have an increased chance of breast cancer, further miscarriage, depression etc, if anything we should be investigating the so called abortion charities who make millions out of this every year.

I agree.

Just because we can't see the whole of a foetus in the womb, it does not mean it does not exist. Life is an unique opportunity and we need to appreciate and value that, regardless of whether we are religious or not.

"Life is a sacred thing, whether you believe it is from God or not"

Erm... no. If you don't believe in a God then by definition nothing is 'sacred'. Life is a fantastic and wonderful thing, certainly, and preserving life should be a goal for society in general, but sacred it ain't. Humans don't have 'souls', 'life' (which is to say the human experience of life, rather than cell division) does not begin at conception, and aborting a fetus that does not yet have enough neurons for self-supporting consciousness is not murder. You can't kill something that isn't alive yet.

Yes, in theory if you abort a foetus which might otherwise have gone full term you have prevented a 'potential' life. But then men do that every time they ejaculate into a condom, and women do it - involuntarily - every time they have a period. Every sperm, every egg is theoretically viable unless you can prove otherwise. This is why the 'potential life' argument is specious.

Now if you want to believe in God, and thus take the position that everything I've said above is false, then fair enough. That's your right. But you don't have the right to force that conclusion on anyone else. Law made on religious grounds is invariably bad law, and certainly illegitimate law in a society not composed 100% of believers.

The current law is a sensible one. It protects the rights of the mother while balancing them with the rights of the child once it reaches a stage in development where it is viable. Those who don't agree with abortion aren't forced to have one and can turn to adoption or other solutions.

In short, there's no actual case for changing the law other than on religious grounds, and as previously said, law made on solely religious grounds is a bad idea. Indeed, all laws made solely on such grounds should be repealed.

This is a good law and should stay.

If there is no clear line where you can say "before this it is not human, at this point it becomes human" then a life was a human being all along and entitled to all the protections we give to human beings. Between conception and birth, there is no clear dividing line.

You may say that it's a living thing but no man is an island - To be human requires emotional contact.

So the current limit seems OK as although the foetus isn't sentient by this time, it has become a child in the mind of the parents & family.

It scares me that some people have been brought up to think that the only thing about being human is simply being alive and whatever is teaching them this should be banned.

Women have always had, and are always going to have, abortions. If abortion is made illegal, women don't stop having abortions - they just go for illegal abortions, and die horribly from them, leaving behind heartbroken family, friends and possibly existing children. A close family member of mine is a medical professional, and anti-abortion - yet he still performs them. Why? Because he left medical school in the 1950s - he's old enough to remember how things were before abortion was legalised, and he doesn't want to go back.
And logically, if abortion is murder, every miscarriage is manslaughter, and a woman who miscarries twins is a serial killer. Try calling the cops for that and see how far you get.

This all sounds a bit religious to me.

A fertilised egg is a human life and should not be destroyed under any circumstances, this is the same as killing a person. If it is a question of choice then it should be the unborn child who decides!!!

This debate will never go away. Sadly. It's funny - the anti-abortion lobby are full of concern and righteous indignation about the foetus, but after the child is born, their concern lessens dramatically.

Having an abortion is something that is an extremely difficult decision and one that is usually made after a great deal of soul searching and thought. In the rare cases where it isn't, do you really think that person would make a good parent?

Not only do I emphatically believe in a womans right to choose and to have rights over her own body, the consequences of a ban on abortion are far-reaching and grim. Abortions would continue, just in a potentially lethal form, as was the case in the 1950s.

The issue that is often ignored is the impact on society of children being born to parents who are at best ambivalent and resentful towards their child, and at worst abusive. The negative impact on that child and their ability to lead a happy, healthy life, one where they contribute to society and have healthy relationships with others is profound, and that has negative ramifications across the board for all.

Adoption is often suggested as a panacea for this, but the reality is most parents will at least make an attempt at looking after their child, before either social services intervene, or they decide they can't or won't cope. At that point the child in question is no longer a cute newborn baby, and the candidates lining up to adopt them are long gone. There is a dearth of foster parents available, and our care system has an utterly woeful record of outcomes of children growing up within it. Their mental health, their educational outcomes and the odds of them ending up in the prison system make for eyewatering reading.

Abortion is never a good option, but the alternatives are far far worse.

A sperm isn't a sentient being (that we know of). So you presumably want to male spermicides or any other contraceptive illegal too.
A foetus isn't a sentient being, it's a bunch of cells.

I think the right to choose is a very important civil liberty.

I do not believe that embyros and foetuses have personhood or otherwise qualify for the same moral considerations that I allow for children and adults. I believe this due to careful consideration of the scientific evidence.

I respect that some people either (a) interpret the evidence differently or (b) have religious beliefs that lead them to believe differently. That's fine, I respect their right to choose to not have an abortion.

However, if I am to support the state passing a law removing the right for the individual pregnant person to choose then I would want to see some very, very solid evidence to prove the anti-abortion position as correct.

Given that it's clearly an issue of debate, with the anti-abortion side often relying on spiritual and religious beliefs, such a firm proof does not seem likely.

Hence I don't think anyone's moral beliefs on the matter should be imposed on anyone and the issue left entirely to the individual's own beliefs and conscience.

No to tax payers paying for a multitude of children who were not aborted.
The last government and all it's machinations made the word 'right' a dirty word. So no again - no right's for an unborn.

Abortion is Eugenic genocide to get rid of the poor minorities. I don't believe that we should put tax dollars towards an industry of death.

The most dangerous place for a person to be is inside the womb.