How can any country justify the regulation of abortions?

[Franklin]

The title was simple because this question is simple. How can any country justify the regulation of abortions when it should be a woman's birth right to be able to choose what she does or doesn't do to her body?

[AFFA]

I wish to inform you that a country can make laws. In this regard generally the rights of individual are subject to laws of the country. Further country make laws keeping in view population of the country and the situation at large. An individuals decision may take care of ones benefit but may not be suitable for society at large. Keeping in view the interest of society which are superior to individual interest a government may make laws. Further in laws regarding abortion interest affected includes mother father and child which is yet to born and thus this may make it necessary for making laws.

AFF

[Friend In Court]

Originally Posted by Franklin The title was simple because this question is simple. How can any country justify the regulation of abortions when it should be a woman's birth right to be able to choose what she does or doesn't do to her body?

Because it harks back to the time when men controlled women, totally. They dictated what rights women had, did not have, kept them barefoot and pregnant in the home -- could beat them, for they were men's property in the eyes of the law. If she's tied to the home with a busload of children to care for, her options are limited, she cannot be a threat in the business or professional world.

The second reason is people's religious objections and the belief they have a right to impose their beliefs on others. They do not bear (no pun intended) the consequences of denying a woman the choice to become a mother or not, do not pay the medical bills nor 1/4 of a million dollars to support the child to the age of 18, take the medical and health risks of the pregnancy, but instead are the first in the voting booth to vote down social programs for at risk children.

One cannot force a woman to love or want a child -- something every child should be entitled to as their birthright. And those who have made the choice not to go through with a given pregancy, will get an abortion, as women have done since the beginning of time. But at the hands of a back alley amateur instead of by a physician.

Estimates are that in the Western World one in 3 women has had an abortion. For many reasons that are their own.

I once heard a wise woman say to settle the issue: "For those who do not believe in abortion, the answer is simple. Do not have one."

[BOR]

Originally Posted by Franklin The title was simple because this question is simple. How can any country justify the regulation of abortions when it should be a woman's birth right to be able to choose what she does or doesn't do to her body?

Do you relate the "right to choose" with a pregnant woman taking crack then having a baby born addicted crack or any other drug. Or a woman who is pregnant addicted to alchohol and having a baby born with fetal alchohol syndrome!

Ever witness a helpless baby on a withdraw from crack?

Oh, read this case I have in my notes, should a man be able to "disown" a child before it is born and not be liable for child support? The court said no. A violation of Equal Protection?

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-6th-circuit/1467603.html

[Friend In Court]

A woman who uses crack should not bear a child, or addicted to any other substance that can harm a fetus. Nor should a 12-year old child be forced to bear a child. Unfortunately, enough become pregnant so that is a real situation. Nor should any woman or child who does not want or is not capable of raising a child be forced to bear a child.

As to a man being able to 'disown' a child, no. If one sires a child they are responsible for providing for it. Common law. A man always has the choice of using protection so conceiving a child is not possible. It is called "being responsible," "safe sex."



.