[Hoosier-Daddy]

I keep hearing how a woman has a right to decide what to do with her own body, and frankly, I agree. If a woman needs a wart removed, or liposuction, that's fine. But the argument that the fetus is a woman's body is specious: a child is a unique dna combination of the mother and father. It is not, on any level, a part of her body. To the body, the fetus is a foreign invader and only thru some remarkable gyrations of nature is the body able to accept the fetus growing inside. It is a astonishing and beautiful act of creation, not a wart, or mere tissue to be sucked from a woman's body.

[cherry]

I am against abortion because it to me is killing and mutilating a child...

however, in no way should anybody but the mom have a say over her body and what is going on in her body...

imagine Nazi germany....or more recently...in Romania...forcing women to carry children,,,forcing pregancy on women....

I am as much against forcing birth from a woman as I am in forcing an ABORTION on a woman....it all smacks of Nazi Germany or China....the state telling women what will go on in their bodies..,,we know in China women are forced to abort..and are compelled to kill their dtrs at birth ...statism ..

we will end abortion through religious and cultural changes...not by some judge declaring a ruling...

and besides....this is not a ruling for the baby...this is just a ruling for another adult....this ruling does not establish any rights for the baby....now, declaring a baby has a right to be born would make more sense...

[ODDITHER]

I absolutely agree that a woman has a right to choose.
She can choose when she wants to get pregnant
she can choose if she wants to get pregnant
she can choose who she wants to father her child
she can choose why she wants to have a child
she can choose where she wants to have her child

IF SHE DOESN'T WANT TO GET PREGNANT SHE CAN CHOOSE NOT TO ENGAGE IN SEX OR TAKE MULTIPLE PRECAUTIONS.


Her choices no longer just effect her, Once that new life is formed. A father should have just as much say in whether the baby lives as the woman has. After all, what are the baby killers worried about, as long as the mother's life is not jeapordy?

It stands to reason that if there is no emotional attachment to a "fetus" and abortions are just another method of birth control, then having a baby and giving it to the father to raise shouldn't be a problem either.

[FITZ]

Even sperm aren't part of her body but the new baby certainly isn't.

[glory]

Absolutely! Personally that bears out. A woman's immune system is "lowered" during pg so it does not attack the growing baby. Because of this, I have had my psoriasis completely clear up because my usually overactive immune system is quieted down. It really is quite an amazing process to see in action when you have something like I do that is affected by this process. The baby is not part of the mother in much the same way a breastfeeding infant who relies on it's mother for it's nutrition is not part of the mother. If there was not an alternative(just like thier are no synthetic wombs--thank God!) and a woman decided after a baby was born not to breastfeed, would we allow her to starve the infant to death? After all it's a woman's body right?