Quote:
Originally posted by marko_river@Sep 22 2005, 02:51 PM
Who gave the right do deciede that bad life is worse than not living?????
|
And who gave you the right to say that it is better to be born than not to be born?
How often do you come across people saying "I wish I hadn't been born at all", and they MEAN it. How many people commit suicide each day because they don't wanna live a live anymore that they never wanted to live?
Do you REALLY think it is "more responsible" to have a child at all costs? No matter if you can take proper care of it, no matter if you can afford to raise it in proper social conditions? No matter if you can even LOVE this child (because,as shocking as this might come to some: One simply CAN'T be forced to love anybody or anything)? Or wouldn't you think it's more responsible NOT to have this child at all?
All of the above conditions WILL lash back on the child in one way or another, and not in positive ways, that is.
I think the main problem with people like you is that you simply cannot comprehend that somebody could actually not love their own flesh and blood. But sadly that's the case often enough. So why force a child to live a life that will be punishment?
That's also to FPJ: You say people should be forced to face the consequences of their doing (e.g. having sex). What a great humanitarian view on life. So you basically say the baby is the PUNISHMENT for those irresponsible people? If not, why would anyone want to force those people to HAVE the baby, thus not only punishing the parents, but the child as well for reasons given above? You simply CAN'T force someone to love a baby they never wanted. You CAN'T force someone to be "responsible", and if they ain't, it's the child who suffers the most. So you're punishing the child more than the parents, actually.
As for your other points:
1. In most countries, there ARE restrictions and rules on having abortions. And if we're talking about the US specifically: If the state has the right to take life (death penalty, anyone?) in ONE case, why not grant it in another case as well (because the health-system is also department of the state)? In both cases, your analogy doesn't really hold water.
2. Well, if you want to fit into that shoe... all I said is, that most people who talk about "moral values" talk about those of our western society, which derive from christian tradition. That's a simple fact that can hardly be argued with.
3. Nobody "laments". It's just also a simple fact. It's not more hypocritical then people talking about forcing others to have babies they don't wanna have and claiming it's for the child's own good that way...
4. No. That's why the social factors are taken as ONE arguement again and again.
@ Seb: Well, I think those points you raised are also worth discussing... maybe in a seperate topic, but they are worth it. As for your "percentages" (allthough I wonder how one can come up with such clear separrations regarding - in the end - feelings...
): i think the case is clear then. If you can't say you're 100% against it, it should be allowed. Of course there should be restrictions and maybe even penalties (in cases of repeated abortions without the case of "extreme situations" like rape etc. for example), I am ALL for that. But it MUST be allowed. Already to prevent many miserable lifes from becoming even more miserable and spreading more misery.
@ topic again: What about the so-called "pursuit of happiness"? For many people, a baby just does not fit in there. On the contrary. You want to force these people to give up on their right?
And for a personal sidenote: I myself am so ure about not wanting a baby, I was even considering vasectomy. The thing is: You can't have one before the age of 26 (for obvious medical & psychical reasons) and without already HAVING at least one child here. Think about THAT.