Abortion

Granted, you have made some claims that on the outside sound good, but when put together just don't add up. I would like to rebut all four of these claims, starting with the first one. 1.) Whether abortion is in fact ending a "murder" or not is debatable. Technically, a fetus may be considered a human when the woman is far enough into the pregnancy to where the fetus could be considered viable. Abortion is a complex and hot-button issue. It is an issue that effects the lives of millions of women and families abroad. I would argue that in order to ensure women their basic civil liberties, we must make sure that their right to engage in family planning be protected. Women do not make these decisions lightly, and we as a society must do everything that we can to stand behind women's decisions, whether it be to terminate the pregnancy or to have the child. 2.) Sure, adoption is absolutely an option. While you may personally believe that women should be forced into putting their child up for adoption if they don't want to keep the child, those of us who believe in a woman's right to choose would argue that this is also an issue of privacy, which is why a woman's right to choose was upheld in 1973 in the first place. I am relating the adoption issue to the issue of privacy. What you choose or choose to believe is your business, but what other people choose or choose to believe is their business. You said that "most people feel putting a child up for adoption is much better than going through an abortion. I guess you're forgetting that "most people" isn't everybody, and that other peoples views may be different than yours. Not to mention the fact that you made a baseless claim by suggesting that statement. Neither you nor I know the minds of "most people", because neither you nor I TRULY know "most people". 3.) Of course doctors are there to help save lives. My dad's a doctor, and he's saved a few lives. However, this issue is much more different than what you're making of it. This all boils down, truly, to the main disagreement that you and I have: I believe that a fetus is no more than a fetus until it is considered to be viable by a doctor. At the point where it is considered to be viable, the fetus must be given all basic human rights and civil liberties. You are essentially saying that you believe that life starts at conception, when the fetus is merely a glob of cells. You are also basically saying that you believe that a fetus is viable right at conception, which has to be why you, or some people are arguing that abortion is murder. I don't hold to the argument that a fetus is viable right at conception when the fetus at that current point is hardly a glob of cells. This isn't coming from me, it's coming from science. I am, however, opposed to late-term abortion, because I believe that science tells us at that point that the fetus is now an actual human. 4.) Once again, let your neighbor decide if she wants to endure what you know to be as "mental anguish", not you. This is, of course, if you guys on the "pro-life" side actually believe in civil liberties in the first place. Abortion is an issue of privacy and choice and basic civil liberties. No church, no state, no one, besides the woman, gets to ultimately decide which path is better for her. What may be good for you may be bad for another person, and what may be good for another person may be bad for you. I'm glad that I live in a country where women get to make these tough decisions by the side of trained doctors, professionals, their families, and of course, their consciences. I conclude my opinion regarding this issue, which is based off of scientific facts and the basic human rights that were, and still are, and always will be, guaranteed to us by our founding fathers, and by God. Let freedom and liberty reign forever!