BNN provides English-language US and world news, analysis and opinion from all over the Internet. We strive for high standards, ethical behavior, and the presentation of multiple responsible points of view.
|
Get More Traffic For Your Blog! Blog Explosion brings hundreds of interested visitors to your blog - without costing you a cent. BNN News Archive Page |
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Outright Ban on Abortion? Mississippi and South Dakota have gone a bit too farWho should decide whether or not a woman can have an abortion? On what criteria should that decision be based?I consider myself "pro-life" although I do support a woman's right to make that choice for herself during the first trimester. I am categorically opposed to abortion anytime after the first trimester except in emergency medical-need situations. In an ideal world, no woman would ever choose to abort unless (a) her life was in mortal danger, (b) the baby was going to be catastrophically ill or deformed with little or no chance of survival, (c) the woman was pregnant as a result of rape or incest. All that said, Mississippi and South Dakota have gone too far. A Mississippi House committee voted Tuesday to ban most abortions in the state.The bill now moves to the full House for consideration; a vote could come by next week. South Dakota lawmakers have passed a bill that would make it a crime for doctors to perform abortions in the state except to save a pregnant woman's life. Gov. Mike Rounds has said he's inclined to sign it.They're both taking it too far. Why should a woman be forced to endure the trauma or carrying a baby to term only to give birth to a dead or dying infant? Can we say "cruel and unusual punishment?" And if a woman was raped or the victim of incest, how can anyone justify forcing her to carry a child that was conceived during such an act? Sure, it's not the baby's fault, but that's a hollow comfort when the woman is carrying God only knows whose baby in her womb. The entire pregnancy, the delivery and for that matter, the very life of the child would be a constant reminder of the crime! Sorry, having been the victim of a violent rape myself (by a non-caucasian, incidentally) I can state categorically that I would *not* have wanted to carry and then give birth to a baby conceived during that ugly, frightening experience. They need to rethink their respective positions. [1] Kate blogs at The Original Musings. Blogger News Network is advertiser-supported, and your visits to our advertisers help BNN to meet its expenses. Help keep us afloat! posted by Kate at 7:14 PM |
Subscribe to BNN and get a daily bulletin of all our news postings. Interested in writing for BNN? Want information on our news service? Contact The Editor Writing for BNN BNN Editorial Policies Previous Posts
|
1 Comments:
The issue around abortion is either a woman has unconditional control over her body or the fetus has a right to life regardless the circumstances.
If the basis of banning any type of abortion is based on the right of the fetus, then the law can't start making exceptions as to which fetuses have the right to live and which ones don't. When does the fetus' right to a chance at life begin? If not from the beginning, when? What are the criteria?
So, is it about the woman or the fetus?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home