Abortion

[Spookypig]

Is anyone here British and against abortion for religious reasons? I’m just asking out of interest if I’m honest - I live abroad and many people are against abortion because of their religion, but I never encountered anyone with this view in the UK (although the majority of my friends at home are atheists). It seems like most countries have a more even divide re: abortion, but in the UK I’ve only ever met people who are very pro abortion (without limits).

Sorry you asked what a last resort looked like now.

I think if a person is capable of caring for a baby and they find themselves pregnant, they should prioritise having the baby.

@arctica

Im not saying there is not a place for abortion and of course if somebody is unable to take care of a baby due to mental health then abortion is probably the right decision.

In my personal life experience however, I have never come across anybody (close enough to tell me) who made the decision to abort based on such extreme circumstances. It was more that a pregnancy was inconvenient to their plans and where they were in life.

I don't understand what's wrong with having an abortion when having a baby wouldn't be convenient? Why is that worse than a woman being made to have a baby they don't want?

I doubt many people would discuss their reasons for having an abortion with you, especially with your judgemental attitude.

What do you determine as capable? Financial security/ sufficient income? Stable mental health? Own accomodation? Or just not abusive? Having a baby won't kill them?

@User15432 so basically you favour reproductive slavery I.e. the moment a woman is pregnant, the foetus is prioritised above her, any other children she may have and her entire life. Awful.

Yep but I bet @User15432 won't like it put that way.
Religion has absolutely no place in body autonomy. The priority and choice must always remain with the woman carrying the pregnancy. If an individual doesn't like abortion, that's fine, for them. Keep your opinions out of anyone else's body.

It's her opinion which she is entitled to offer didn't sound like she's trying to impose her views on anyone else

I'm a British Christian. I'm pro choice.

I wish abortions weren't necessary, I wish babies weren't born with conditions that are incompatible with life. I wish men didn't rape women and get them pregnant. Then less abortions would be needed.

They'd still be needed, but less.

However those do exist, and therefore safe abortion is necessary.

Having a baby that you don't want is not "inconvenient'. Having a baby makes you incredibly vulnerable, has significant health risks, and is grindingly hard work. Having a baby that you aren't ready for can leave you in lifelong poverty, and destroy your dreams. It's a lot more than inconvenient .

Abortion is not infanticide. Some people at some point in history abandoning infants because they did not want to care for them has nothing to do with modern abortion. I'm pretty appalled that you think that the two things are the same.

How has it been "normalised" when there is so much shame and judgement around it?

The thing that annoys me about the discussion around abortion is that when people refer to abortions as ‘murdering a baby’ or ‘killing a baby’, they’re often scolded for using emotive language, especially on MN. Yet it’s okay for people who are very pro abortion to refer to having an unwanted pregnancy as ‘reproductive slavery’ which is not only emotive but also inaccurate, bizarre and also kind of offensive!

I also disagree that this person is ‘forcing their beliefs’ on anyone - at least it certainly doesn’t seem that they are. This is another very unfair and one-way thing: some opinions can be shouted from the rooftops, but others can’t even be discussed without the person being accused of ‘forcing their opinions on others’. When people are very actively pro-choice nobody would ever accuse them of ‘forcing their opinions on others’, even when they’re very passionate and vocal about it. Yet someone who thinks there should be some limits placed on abortions mentions their opinion and they’re accused of forcing their opinions on others - even though I quite literally asked and this is the topic of the thread! Threads like this always go the same way.

I find the practical side of this debate more interesting, probably because I did the semantic side to death in my student years.

As a society we already have families that have more children than they can cope with and social services is spread very thin. What sort of initiatives do people who want to restrict abortion hope will spring up to support families through this situation? Is there hope that it could spark a change in our values that would make us more likely to help struggling mother's?

I just can't imagine the banning of abortion actually working practically in today's society. We have really high expectations for the lives of children compared to the more free range experiences most would have had back when it was illegal.

Depends on your faith abortion is forbidden. But there are circumstances when even your faith allows it as a last option. Mother life at risk, babies health, etc

Perhaps I’m cynical but there seem to be an awful lot of these threads appearing. An apparently innocent philosophical discussion which leads to discussion about restricting abortion. I think this is part of a long game to restrict abortion in Great Britain as the forced birthers have managed with some success in the U.S.

If someone wants limits on abortion then they want to force their opinion on others - the want other people to have their rights restricted.

I (perhaps controversially) don't understand people who think that abortion is wrong, but think it's ok for other people to have one.

I was raised and taught by nuns and think abortion would be wrong for me on a personal level partly due to my upbringing (thankfully I've never had to put it to the test). On the other hand, when a family member asked to borrow money for an abortion years ago I had no hesitation in writing a cheque. At that time another child would have been too much for her and I thought her 2 very young dc's could have suffered (she was already struggling with them, they were both under 3yrs). I would have lent her the money regardless of her circumstances though as I know it was a really difficult decision for her to make (same upbringing as me).

I know people who say they don't agree with abortion, they also claim to practice no sex before marriage - however I know the latter isn't true and pretty sure the former isn't either (a secret abortion is a lot less embarrassing than teenage pregnancies in certain religious communities).

Personally I think it's personal choice within scientifically guided boundaries, I'm a Christian

If someone wants limits on abortion then they want to force their opinion on others - the want other people to have their rights restricted.

Does that mean if someone supports the 24 weeks for non-medical reasons (and later for medical) they're also forcing they're opinion on others? People on here will call you anti-choice for this. Anything other than complete freedom is a restriction to some degree

Most people support some restriction, amd think abortion should be avoided as much as possible (not denied, prevented from being needed). OP asked, so this is exactly the place for people to air their opinions.

But that’s true of any issue which is affected by law/the availability of services.

Also, abortion doesn’t only affect the mother - there is another person involved too; the baby. I understand that some people disagree that the baby is a person, at least up to a certain point. But abortions are allowed past the point when we can call the baby ‘a clump of cells’ and well into the period of it being an actual baby. So it’s not ‘forcing opinions on others’ as much as it is an attempt to defend someone who can’t defend themselves.

The problem I think is that people who want abortions to be available with no limits think only of the mother and give no thought to the baby. The people who are very pro-life think only of the baby and give no though to the mother.

I think that there’s got to be some sort of middle ground, where both the mother and unborn baby are considered - like by making abortion available but not after the point when the ‘clump of cells’ can not be called that any more as it is now a baby that could survive outside of the womb.

‘Anything other than complete freedom is a restriction to some degree.’

This is what I was trying to say! Well put.

Another reminder that ALL unwanted pregnancies are as a result of irresponsibly placed ejaculations. Which are 100% caused by men
Well yes, but if it landed in a teacup there wouldn't be a baby, would there. So it is 50/50 thing.

And some people who think smacking a child is wrong want to stop others from doing it.

Both are acceptable views in a society, and campaigning against smacking children or against abortion being legal are acceptable too.

Are you suggesting that free speech should only apply to some people and that discussing topics that you are uncomfortable with should not be allowed?

Are you reading the same post as I am? Where did the poster say discussion should not be allowed?