1.) rape victems
Whatever happened to rights to your own body? If you can't expect privacy for your own body, then why should you expect any other right to be upheld? A victem of rape is violated, and their personal choice is taken away. As a further burden, you are expecting them to carry to term the product of that rape. In fact, you are condoning the act of rape as a legitimate way of passing on genes. True, that rapist might go to jail, but from a genetic perspective, he has successfully spawned. Many women may well be able to come to terms with the rape and carry the child to term, but for many others, it would seem like additional punishment on top of being violated.
2.) Personal choice: On this regard I do agree to some extent. I think people are not cautious enough about protection. I also thing that sex education needs to stress all alternatives, ie absitince, safe sex practices, realisitc medical advice, etc. That being said, this portion of the pro-choice vs pro-life arguement seems to be were the real crux of the arguement lies.
3.) Health and welfare of the mother.
As a happily married man, I am planning on having children soon. however, if my wife has complications and is hospitilized, or something occurs during birth that threatens my wife's life, and the doctor asks me who to save, its my wife every time. My wife don't see eye to eye on this debate, but she knows full well if I have a choice who it would be. That isn't to say I wouldn't be grieved about the decision, but the choice for me is clear.
In normal circumstances, I would say that I support a pro-choice stance, however I must say that I have problems with an abuse of the practice. Likewise, I think anything after 3-4 months should go to full term, unless it is related to health issue or serious defect in the child (ie lungs don't form, unrepairable congential heart defects ect.) That is only my opinion of course.
™ Version 4.2
