Any Atheists Here Opposed to Abortion?

[Ali]

Abortion is a tough one for me.  I do believe that abortion kills a human being even in the very early stages of pregnancy.  I believe that life begins at conception - not because god says so, but because I can't figure out another cut off point that doesn't seem arbitrary to me.  When I look at my son and try to figure out when did he go from being just a ball of cells to himseld, I don't know where to draw that line, so for me, the line is that he was always him.   Because of that, I think that abortion is something that I personally could only choose under the most dire of circumstances (like, if I'm going to die if I continue the pregnancy.)  But I also recognize that this is my own personal philosophy on the matter.  It's funny, because when I was a teenager, I thought that science was going to "discover" when life begins and that would solve the problem.  Silly, right?  I didn't realize that science already probably knows pretty much everything there is to know about prenatal development, and they won't ever be able to answer that question because it's not a science question, it's a philosophy question.  So my own personal philosophy is, abortion is wrong.  Having said that, it's not a hard line answer.  I wouldn't choose to enact my personal philosophy on other women's bodies, nor do I condemn other women for their choices.  One of my very good friends from highschool had an abortion when we were in our early 20's, and the only thing I have ever felt for her is an aching empathy for having been in a bad situation and having to make hard choices.  I don't look to legislate my feelings on the matter, or hold other women to my own "standards."  My feelings only apply to me.

[Ali]

I'm pro-choice, and my opinion is that abortion should be available as early as possible, but as late as necessary.  I don't see why there should be laws restricting abortion, when it is only available from the medical practice anyway.

I'm in the position of being one of the few British women who might be refused an abortion.  I'm 35 and married with two small children.  I don't want any more children, but if I was pregnant it would be highly inconvenient, but because there is not really a health need, I might be refused.  It might be different if I was 10 years older, because pregnancy is more risky or if I wasn't in a stable family.

There will always be a case where a prescriptive rule doesn't help.  I think we need to be able to trust a decision made between a woman and a physician to be better than drawing an arbitrary line in the sand.

Willow.

I don't understand - why would you be refused?  Can British women only have abortions under very specific conditions? 

[Willow]

"two doctors must agree that an abortion would cause less damage to a woman's physical or mental health than continuing with the pregnancy" http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Abortion/Pages/Introduction.aspx
And there would be a strong argument that a third child would not be harmful to me.  My reason for not wanting more children is that there are enough people on earth already and that I'm busy and want to get on with my career now.

Ali:  Would you not use contraception other than barrier methods?  Would you consider contraception which intervenes after fertilisation to be having abortion after abortion?
just curious,
Willow.

[Whitney]

I think the decision should be left to the woman who is pregnant under the guidance of her doctor.  Whomever is involved past that should also be her decision.  

I don't think that statistically there would be enough women seeking late term abortions for non-medical reasons, much less enough doctors willing to perform them for non-medical reasons due to their hypocratic oath, to worry about it.   The line should be drawn at viability since at that point the baby could just be removed alive instead of aborted.

[DeterminedJuliet]

"two doctors must agree that an abortion would cause less damage to a woman's physical or mental health than continuing with the pregnancy" http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Abortion/Pages/Introduction.aspx
And there would be a strong argument that a third child would not be harmful to me.  My reason for not wanting more children is that there are enough people on earth already and that I'm busy and want to get on with my career now.

Wow, I didn't know that! That's kind of scary since, if I lived in the UK, I would likely be refused too (and I, also, don't want any more children).
As far as I know, Canada has no restrictions, which I'm glad for (though I'll hopefully never have to experience first hand)

[Ali]

"two doctors must agree that an abortion would cause less damage to a woman's physical or mental health than continuing with the pregnancy" http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Abortion/Pages/Introduction.aspx
And there would be a strong argument that a third child would not be harmful to me.  My reason for not wanting more children is that there are enough people on earth already and that I'm busy and want to get on with my career now.

Ali:  Would you not use contraception other than barrier methods?  Would you consider contraception which intervenes after fertilisation to be having abortion after abortion?
just curious,
Willow.

Never really thought about it to be honest.  We don't use contraception other than barrier methods because I don't react well to bc, but I'm not ethically against it.  Good point.

TA:  Meant to add, that I had no idea that two doctors had to decide that in the UK.  I don't agree with that at all.

[Firebird]

Pro-choice myself. Don't feel it's right to interfere with an intensely personal choice like that. The whole controversy over late-term abortion does make me a bit uneasy, but it's so rare and usually for a valid medical reason, so I don't believe in drawing a line either. Frankly, chipping away at abortion rights is just an attempt by the pro-lifers to do an end-around current laws.

[Siz]

"two doctors must agree that an abortion would cause less damage to a woman's physical or mental health than continuing with the pregnancy" http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Abortion/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Unless you go private for around £500 at Marie Stopes.

Don't ask... but I guess you know my position...

[Sweetdeath]

We have so many forms of bc now. And of course i'm pro-choice. I don't think anyone but the woman going through these events can ever fully understand how emotionally  hard it is.
I could never be a fucking dick to make her feel like she's doing the wrong thing.
I can't believe this is sucha big issue right now in the U.S.

[Sandra Craft]

Abortion is a tough one for me.  I do believe that abortion kills a human being even in the very early stages of pregnancy.  I believe that life begins at conception - not because god says so, but because I can't figure out another cut off point that doesn't seem arbitrary to me.  

I agree with this and I've never had any kids or wanted them.  I also agree that abortion is, and should remain, a completely personal decision since I don't see anyone but the mother understanding her circumstances well enough to be entitled to a say.  The only exception I'd make is for minors -- since their parents are responsible for what they do in every other way I think they should be in on this as well (with obvious exceptions allowed like the girl's father is also the baby's father, the parents might harm the girl if they knew, that sort of thing).

One compromise I'm against is time limits, since those are usually aimed at preventing or delaying late term abortions and from what I've read those are the ones that are either necessary or strongly advised by the doctor and undertaken by parents who very much wanted the baby.  No point in making their loss any harder than it already is.

[Ali]

Abortion is a tough one for me.  I do believe that abortion kills a human being even in the very early stages of pregnancy.  I believe that life begins at conception - not because god says so, but because I can't figure out another cut off point that doesn't seem arbitrary to me.  

I agree with this and I've never had any kids or wanted them.  I also agree that abortion is, and should remain, a completely personal decision since I don't see anyone but the mother understanding her circumstances well enough to be entitled to a say.  The only exception I'd make is for minors -- since their parents are responsible for what they do in every other way I think they should be in on this as well (with obvious exceptions allowed like the girl's father is also the baby's father, the parents might harm the girl if they knew, that sort of thing).

One compromise I'm against is time limits, since those are usually aimed at preventing or delaying late term abortions and from what I've read those are the ones that are either necessary or strongly advised by the doctor and undertaken by parents who very much wanted the baby.  No point in making their loss any harder than it already is.

I agree with this.  I highly doubt that many women are going to carry a baby for 7 months and then just up and decide one day that they don't want it any more and they want an abortion- typically there is a medical reason behind it, and it is a heart wrenching tragedy for the parents most of all.  No need to make that any harder.

[Stevil]

Generally, I have this debate with christian, which i usually win.

I don't think you can win this debate. How do you qualify the win? Does your opponent agree that you are the winner?

Abortion is not an exact science.

I think the decision should be left to the woman who is pregnant under the guidance of her doctor.  Whomever is involved past that should also be her decision.

What about the father, does his opinion matter?

It is a difficult topic. Being a member of a Catholic forum, I can see what their issues are against abortion, they have a fair enough point. It is an act of killing babies, albeit unborn babies.

Taking on my newly discovered amoralist perspective, I am still trying to find my philosophically consistent stance on this topic.
I have made claims that the government ought not make law based on morality or ethics, that this is a dangerous and oppressive route.
I have also stated that laws ought to be focused on the minimum control required to have a functionally stable society.

So how does this impact the act of killing unborn babies?
Many societies lack a law against abortions, well, within some rules. So, abortions are occurring in many societies. These abortions are not resulting in unstable societies. There are pockets of violence, generally by extreme religious people whom take it upon themselves to be violent despite other religious laws against violence. But this is not the norm, society is overwhelmingly tolerant of abortions. A normal person is not inspired to take up arms against abortions or to even snub people whom have opted for abortion. So society either doesn't care about the unborn or feel that it is the parents decision, most likely the former because a great deal of people would risk their lives to protect a pregnant woman from an attacker.

Some dangers to society of abortion is people choosing the gender of their offspring, within some cultures there is an extremely high preference for male children. But with a huge proportion of males in society, no doubt, at some point females will become desirable. Is the problem the abortion or is the problem the cultural preference for a particular gender?

At what point do we start to say parents killing their own babies ought to be against the law?
How many weeks before birth? How many weeks after birth?
Certainly after birth, other people start to become attached to the babies e.g. grandparents, uncles, aunties, siblings, family friends etc. At some point, society will get upset and violent towards parents whom choose to kill their own babies.

[Ali]

I think the decision should be left to the woman who is pregnant under the guidance of her doctor.  Whomever is involved past that should also be her decision.

What about the father, does his opinion matter?

This is harsh because I understand why a father would absolutely have a vested interest in the decision, but I don't think the father's opinion ultimately matters - it's not his body.  He shouldn't be able to force a woman to go through a pregnancy against her will, and he shouldn't be able to force her to undergo a surgical procedure (abortion) against her will either.  Hopefully most couples can come to a consensus together, but in situations where they disagree and cannot come to a meeting of the minds, the woman wins because it's her body. 

[Traveler]

"Keep your laws off my body" sums it up for me. Abortion is and should be a medical decision between a woman and whomever she chooses to consult. As to when the fetus becomes a person? Legally, at birth. For me, personally, its mostly about viability. If it can live without me, and without massive medical intervention, then I'd incubate it until a safe birth time. But if I found out I was pregnant at a few weeks, or a month or two, or even three, and didn't want it, then it's gone.***

Now, speaking emotionally, for me, a fetus becomes a baby the moment the woman decides to keep it. That might be at the moment of conception or before. That might be a few weeks in. That might be when she feels it kicking in her womb. That's not a rational cut off point, but I feel its realistic from an emotional standpoint.

Every baby should be a wanted baby. And if the woman is willing to carry to birth and give it up for adoption, then that is a gift she's given to the new parents, and should be appreciated as such. A gift. Not a requirement. Never, never, never a requirement. Nine months of servitude to an unwanted fetus? That's slavery. I know that sounds harsh, but that's how I feel about it.

*** Note that I'm past childbearing age, have never been pregnant, and never wanted children. I consider myself very fortunate that our birth control never failed.

[Sandra Craft]

Hopefully most couples can come to a consensus together, but in situations where they disagree and cannot come to a meeting of the minds, the woman wins because it's her body. 

Agree with that too.