The Forum > Article Comments > Is it all about babies? > Comments
Is it all about babies? : Comments
By Mary Smith, published 18/9/2007Is the opposition to abortion simply about saving babies? Or are there other motives behind the graphic images of advanced fetuses?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- Page 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
-
- All
1) Are you opposed to all forms of contraception? Do you agree with their labelling of the pill as an abortifacient? No I am not opposes to all contraception. I think this is a personal choice for people unlike the murder of the innocent where the child has no say.
2) What of the fact that 90 per cent of abortions are in the first trimester? Do you still persist in calling these lumps of cells 'babies'? is a group of eight cells held together by a membrane a child? Renaming babies according to their stages in life does not make the crime any less.
3) What of cases of anencephaly? Would you accept abortion there? What about cases when the mother's life is in danger? At what point is the risk allowable for an abortion? 100 per cent? 99 per cent? This is a dishonest arguement as well over 90% of abortions are for convenience. I am happy to leave it to the mother if her life is at risk.
4) What about Sancho's point? If we found away to save the 25 to 50 per cent of fertilised ova spontaneously aborted? Would women then be forced to save these ova? Sanchos arrogance in the clay questioning the Potter is self explanatory. He/she shows a complete ignorance of God.
5) would you prefer a situation like the Phillipines in Australia? I am not familiar with the Phillipines situation.