Dear NNS,

When I was working in the Netherlands one of my colleagues was a Dutchman named van Klinkken. He was part of a group that opposed abortion. However, if they persuaded a woman not to have an abortion they took it on themselves to provide for the woman and the child until the child became an adult. As far as I know, Graham Preston who wrote the article we are commenting on takes no such responsibility. He wants the right to harass woman going an abortion clinic. If he persuades her to reverse her decision it is her lookout.

There is some evidence that abortion is a solution. About 15 years after Roe vs. Wade which made abortion legal, the US crime went down and has stayed down. Apparently women who wanted an abortion knew what they were doing. In their wisdom they did not give birth to children they could not care for adequately who were likely to become criminals.

In the case of my cousin she made the best solution for her. In the milieu in which she was living she judged life would be not worth living with a continuation of her pregnancy. I think she was right. An abortion, if it had been available, would have been a solution for her. It would have been better than suicide.

Certainly, every time there is a protest against abortion it is not harassment. In the case of Graham Preston it was harassment and decided as such by a court of law.

You still have not answered my question. One way to cut down on abortions is to make contraceptives freely available and to instruct people in their use. If there are fewer unwanted pregnancies there will be fewer abortions. Do you favor making contraceptives freely available and instructing people in their use? If not, why not?

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

«The solution given for the sake of the unborn baby is an unthinkable solution to give to the young child with a severe injury.»

Why unthinkable? Here you just thought of it!

The situation is complex with many layers to consider and think over, but think we must and as a case of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", in most likelihood I would have preferred my body to be killed over a life of severe disability and would have thanked my mother if she aborted my body as early as she could.

Not everything is as it seems, not always do we know everything, not always is abortion selfish, not always is life on earth of benefit, sometimes it is a curse and sometimes this curse can be expiated in a matter of days, weeks or months rather than years: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MFtuoNPlIc

It would have been better had I been aborted. My mother and father were an ill-matched pair. My childhood was miserable with the almost constant wrangling of my parents. As my mother often informed me they stayed together because of me. Had I been aborted they could have separated instead of making each other and me miserable. It would have improved their lives, and I would not be here to argue.

Dear David,

I am sad to hear your story.

Just one correction: your parents were never actually able to abort you - all they could have possibly chose to do was to kill your body.

Would you then still be here to argue? who knows, but if your desire to argue was already latent in you at the time of conception (as opposed to being acquired during your current lifetime), then you would not find rest until you obtained another body with an adequate argumentative brain to satisfy this desire. It could have been here on OLO, or somewhere else, perhaps in another country and another language, perhaps at another time, but killing your body could not make such a desire disappear.

The problem with Western thought, regardless of faith in God or the lack thereof, is that it bases its morals on the false assumption as if our life amounts to the life of our current body alone, thus the sanctity of life ridiculously translates into the "sanctity" of a mortal physical body.

To Yuyutsu.

You ask why killing a young child is unthinkable. Death is tragic at any age, but it is especially tragic for children and babies. To choose to kill a baby or a young child is a horrific choice. There is no complications to this. No rationalizations. The rationalization you gave about a hard life due to an injury does not fit the examples that I've seen in my life. Those who had an accident as a child and grew up to be adults found ways to make it work and become an adult. Killing a child is never a solution. There is no rationalization of that solution. It is an evil choice if it is ever acted on.

To David f.

What is the point of your question? As far as I can tell contraception is widely available. I don't think any nation that has legalized abortion has a difficult time with getting contraception at cheep prices (condoms) or more creative products and expensive prices. For example there's a plastic device I've seen advertised a few years ago that says it stops the chances of a pregnancy for those who don't want to settle down yet. Just a small procedure to put it in place, and later when the woman is ready to consider children it can be removed. Later I heard a commercial for a lawsuit if anyone had complications when they received this device, and the lawyers advertising are ready to take on the case. Not a good sign for the product, but the point is that contraceptives are readily available in the world, and even more are creatively bring made.

SteeleRedux,

<<A fetus is a potential child, teenager, grandparent. So is an egg in a test tube which has been fertilised by sperm. That joining of DNA is not a baby nor any of the above>>.

That is false!

You provided ZERO evidence to support your claims. Therefore, they are your opinions and not scientifically verified.

See the biological and medical evidence of human life beginning at conception, provided by medical professionals.

I provided a few details in Posted by OzSpen, Friday, 10 May 2019 10:21:13 PM.