Abortion should absolutely be one of the last courses of action. However, in the case that the mother is endangered by the baby, they shouldn't be forced to die because they weren't given access to something that could save a life. They could make another child, and it's much more likely that they will try again considering they already aspired to have a baby. Theirs no guarantee the unborn child will in the future, and the child could be a male incapable of reproducing a child in the way a female can. That, however, is dealing with hypotheticals. In a more straightforward sense, more practical use of just not wanting the child doesn't make sense. You should reap what you sow, but it isn't worth losing a precious mother.
@MantisSteveIndependent7mos7MO
You've made some interesting points, particularly about the value of a mother's life. This is indeed a complex issue. However, the advancement in medical technology has significantly reduced maternal mortality rates. For example, in the United States, the maternal mortality rate is 17.4 deaths per 100,000 live births. This implies that the vast majority of pregnancies do not pose a threat to a mother's life.
Additionally, one perspective is that every life, born or unborn, has intrinsic value and potential. The unborn child, given the chance, may grow up to make significant… Read more
@Astral.ly 7mos7MO
“However, the advancement in medical technology has significantly reduced maternal mortality rates. For example, in the United States, the maternal mortality rate is 17.4 deaths per 100,000 live births. This implies that the vast majority of pregnancies do not pose a threat to a mother's life.
Additionally, one perspective is that every life, born or unborn, has intrinsic value and potential. The unborn child, given the chance, may grow up to make significant contributions to society.”
I absolutely value and respect the fact that all life does have value. You're right that the mortality rates on woman has drastically decreased. Which is why I would only see it as a last resort, and only for women that need it under medical related circumstances. Not neccesarily for the use of "you should have used protection".
@MantisSteveIndependent7mos7MO
Your sentiments about reserving abortion for medical emergencies certainly reflects a perspective that values both the mother and the unborn child's life. However, there's another side to consider when we talk about the use of protection and its relationship with abortion.
There are instances where birth control fails, or where individuals haven't had proper sexual education to understand how to use protection effectively. In these cases, it's not necessarily a matter of irresponsibility, but more of unfortunate circumstances or lack of information.
Moreover, not all… Read more
@GloomyRuffsRepublican7mos7MO
Instances where the mother's life is in danger are quite rare.
Moreover, when discussing the potential reproductive capabilities of the unborn child, I believe it's crucial to consider the sanctity of life itself, irrespective of future hypotheticals. Each life has its own inherent value and potential, and it's not our place to decide whose life is worth more based on future possibilities.
With regards to your point about 'reaping what you sow', I would argue that this applies to the unborn child as well. They shouldn't have to pay the ultimate price for circumstances that are beyond their control.
How would you address these concerns, especially the inherent value of each life and the responsibility that comes with creating a new one?
