Decease… Death… Die…

What are the justifications for abortions? I just want to tell some thoughts about against and pro abortions. The thoughts were constructed at the basis of different points of view of my friends, TV programs, newspaper articles…

One of the arguments is why procreating the misery. This means, why do women need to give birth to children when they cannot give them a decent upbringing on the strength of the fact that there are no enough means? So, let’s imagine such situation: a person had a dinner, stood up from the table and somebody says him “let us have a dinner”. If that person by some mechanic way can remove everything from his stomach and eat again, we’ll say that this is a absurdity. Because even when people eat in excess or overeat, but in such a way delighting with food is incongruously. The same with the question of “why procreating the misery?”. Human’s body, women’s or man’s, all organs are specially arranged for carrying out the process of child-bearing. If people are united in marriage, then it is supposed that the children’s birth will be absolutely normal consequence of it. Therefore, if a person doesn’t want to procreate the misery, he must not enter into marriage. Then there will not be any misery. And a person wishes at any rate to realize all physiological sides of marriage and to get a natural joy from this. As, for example, when a person gets a pleasure from food or a warm water when taking the shower. But he doesn’t want to carry the paternal deed which is the consequence of marriage life. If a person doesn’t want to procreate misery – don’t do this. He must stop generic life. Then the action will have the logic.

The other argument is how to feed children nowadays? How should act poor conjoints who have many children? There is an answer. A man needs to work at three works, or a woman can begin to sew, because then it would be cheaper to dress children and so on. With this it is necessary to limit themselves and don’t try to organize everything by the other unnatural way by killing their own children, because they will be unhappy, they will be ill or suffer because of their children whom they kept living, for what children can be born from murderers. How can they bring them up? By killing their own baby, parents transgress the threshold of morality. How is it possible to love your child when you killed your other child? Even if a person doesn’t understand this, this knowledge exists in his subconsciousness. If a person doesn’t agree for voluntary restrictions, he will bear the hardship against his will. He wants to be more financially secured at the expense of killing of his own baby, is this right? But the sum of his happiness will not increase from this. It is impossible to reach happiness by killing own children.

The other argument is if the pregnancy the result of rape? As a rule, the pregnancies don’t come during the rape, these cases are single and unique. But let us assume that there is such situation. First of all, a baby is not guilty in the fact that it was not assumed by anybody. Secondly, very often during the rape a victim is guilty herself because she had immodest clothes, behavior, carelessness, disobedience to seniors. There are many such premises which are pouring out in one tragic situation and there is such result. Then why the innocent baby must suffer for the delinquency of an adult person? If a baby is not wanted, it is possible to give birth to him and then give to orphanage. In future there will be some people who would want to adopt this baby. And nowadays there is a lot of such people, huge lines. Therefore, there is no any reason to kill a baby.

The other argument – a woman is not married and parents are against of the baby. Or the husband says that he’ll leave if a woman keeps a baby. What’s to do? For example, I’m a woman who has two children (actually, I have three lovely children 🙂 ) and one of them drives to despair my mother, his grandmother that she says “You must make a choice, either me or him. Either you throw him from the balcony or you are not my daughter any more”. So, why is it impossible to throw away disobedient child (even if you think that he deserved this), and why is it possible to kill maybe good, smart, future famous scientist on the strength of the fact that he is temporarily in the mother’s womb. Maybe it is better to wait, give a birth to a child and to see what person he’ll become? If he is bad and disobedient – then kill him. And after this, everybody will say that it is impossible to say so, to even think in such a way, and why is it possible to kill “that child” and it is impossible to kill “this” child? And now the statement leads to the absurd again. What does it mean that the parents are “against”? What if somebody is against us, ourselves? So, should we die? You never know who raise objections against something. This is not an argument. A person who declares that he is against other person’s life – a murderer.

What to do, if 10-year-old girl is pregnant? If a girl is so dissolute and behaves in such a way, of course, she must carry her cross as the consequence of her behavior. A girl was naughty, acted imprudently, foolishly. Why should an innocent baby be killed for this? If this girl was raped, this is the one side, but if she is guilty herself and she was doing such actions deliberately, voluntary…she must be responsible for her actions.

If a married woman is ill and it is forbidden for her to give a birth to a baby? If it is forbidden to her to give a birth, then, when she is making love with her husband, she is committing a crime. There is a concept of incapable person. Such person is forbidden to register a marriage. If due to some reasons, not mental, but physiological, it is forbidden for woman to give a birth – this means, that she may not get married because in marriage it is supposed to give a birth to babies. If she cannot give a birth, she must carry her cross. And if she wants a baby – she is welcome to orphanages.

What if a woman knows that she will give a birth to ill child? They say that it is logically to give a birth and then look at the situation. If the baby is ill – then kill him, with her own hands, without resorting to drugs. I this worse than killing of unborn child? And there is no problem at all: ill child. Well, ill people are necessary for community. They arouse our mercy, compassion, they teach us to love. If there are no ill people, old people, waning people, we’ll become considerably crueler. The presence of such people is necessary for us. And what if there is such situation – a healthy child was born and then he fell ill. Should we kill him? No, we’ll rescue him, nurse him, pay money, searching for medicines. And what is the fundamental difference here? Why should we kill an ill child who is in the mother’s womb?

The parents are alcoholics – why give a birth to ill, unnecessary children? And here one idea is substituted for another. Why should not we kill these parents? These parents are alcoholics, socially dangerous people. They bring harm to the society. Why should children suffer for them? It is possible to issue a law, impose fines, it is possible to isolate these people in some way. Though, of course, it would be better for these people to quit drinking and to live a normal life. It would be great. But in practice it is chosen the greatest evil. The state should find some other way than simple baby’s killing.

Unwanted children. There are nowadays many people who want and are ready to adopt a child, even an ill child.

Well, there are so many arguments pro et contra abortions, but the choice is after conscious and reasonable person, anyway.