RE: abortion

If abortion is always wrong and immoral, why do we not (and have never, even when abortions were illegal.) arrest, convict, and imprison the women who have them?

A woman should not be FORCED to have a child unless she wants to have one. It is each woman's individual choice. Not a group choice.

I had to study many different philosophers views on abortion for Ethics class this summer. So happy the class just ended. From the far right, to to the middle, and those far to the left, had to study, write a paper, debate, and give a class presentation on those views. The famous philosopher who came up with the FLO(future like ours) came to your school and listened to him as well last year. He was very interesting. I loved the fact that he was a religious, but refused to use a religious argument to make his case.

I guess my point is I am always curious on others views on abortion and if they can present a valid non-religious argument against it. I personally was the person who was the extreme far left one in my class. Nobody would agree with me that a 12 year old should not have to get parents consent to get an abortion.

My position - SOMEBODY always has to decide whether to carry a pregnancy to term. And that decision is always in the hands of the pregnant woman and her doctor. No exceptions. That stand is not pro-abortion - it is pro-choice. And the woman should be supported in her choice no matter what it is.

I wanted to add a scenario that was directed towards males so they might understand the female perspective. Remember this was written two years before Roe Vs. Wade.

You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.

Thomson takes it that you may now permissibly unplug yourself from the violinist even though this will cause his death: the right to life, Thomson says, does not entail the right to use another person's body, and so by unplugging the violinist you do not violate his right to life but merely deprive him of something—the use of your body—to which he has no right.

I love her scenarios. She has a lot more. I would also like to see a male who is pro-life give up a kidney to save someone. I am also assuming that male has a lot of material toys like a big flat screen TV. 25,000 people die every day from starvation on this planet. How about instead of buying unneeded material items you donate that money to saving someone's life. After you do all that you can come back and call your self pro-life.