Birth or not

[Umbagar]

So a couple in Minnesota is trying to decide whether to have an abortion or not, and they have put it up to a vote. According to this article they have had three recent miscarriages and are unsure whether to try to have another baby. They put up a poll here: http://www.birthornot.com/ where the internet community can vote on whether they should have an abortion or give birth. I am extremely interested to hear what NSG has to say since this is not just an issue of pro-life vs. pro-choice but also on whether it is moral to let the denizens of the net decide whether a baby should live or die. (currently most of the votes support giving birth) I personally voted for them to have the child because I do not want an abortion on my conscience. Please share your opinions, but be civil.

[Dyakovo]

I'm not about to vote on their poll, but quite frankly if they aren't sure they are prepared to have a kid then they shouldn't...
So, I guess I'm saying I think they should get an abortion.

[Nulono]

I'm leaning towards it being a hoax. There's no reason for them to get a 3D ultrasound or go into so much detail over the development of a child they may abort. The language they use is clearly acknowledging "Wiggles" as a member of the family.

I voted for birth just to be safe, though.

Also, the 4chan raid was inevitable.

[Fartsniffage]

If you'd just asked me this in a hypothetical sense I'd have answered straight away that they should abort. Anyone not 100% sure whether they want to have a child shouldn't.

But then I went to vote in the poll and found it very difficult.

Interesting...

[Norstal]

They had 3 miscarriages and now they're not sure whether to have a kid or not.

This is the part I don't get. They should have known from their first or second miscarriage not to have a baby or to have one.

[Umbagar]

I'm leaning towards it being a hoax. There's no reason for them to get a 3D ultrasound or go into so much detail over the development of a child they may abort. The language they use is clearly acknowledging "Wiggles" as a member of the family.

I voted for birth just to be safe, though.

Also, the 4chan raid was inevitable.

This was on CNN and several other networks, so if it is a hoax it's a pretty good one.

[Arilando]

If they want to, let them have an abortion

[This Mother]

I'm not about to vote on their poll, but quite frankly if they aren't sure they are prepared to have a kid then they shouldn't...
So, I guess I'm saying I think they should get an abortion.

Agree.
If they're going to let the people online(of all people) decide what they should do with their baby, they cant be too serious about having one. The stress of going through three miscarriages, possibly four, would be tough but so would having an abortion. They should just stop trying to have kids.

[Rambhutan]

I would suggest they start using contraception, take the pill not post a poll.

[Norstal]

I'm leaning towards it being a hoax. There's no reason for them to get a 3D ultrasound or go into so much detail over the development of a child they may abort. The language they use is clearly acknowledging "Wiggles" as a member of the family.

I voted for birth just to be safe, though.

Also, the 4chan raid was inevitable.

This was on CNN and several other networks, so if it is a hoax it's a pretty good one.

Meh, the Balloon Boy hoax was on several news network. This story doesn't make sense, its an obvious hoax.

[Risottia]

I think it's one of the most stupid, antiethical, hypocritical things I've ever seen on the web. Hence, I didn't vote - but it's better for the potential baby NEVER to be born to such idiotic parents who trust their pregnancy into the hands of Anon.

[Arilando]

I personally voted for them to have the child because I do not want an abortion on my conscience.

Why not? And why would it be a bad thing?

[Barringtonia]

I'm for them going again, it would seem they want a child but having gone through 3 miscarriages they want to consider whether they should keep trying - i imagine it's a tough decision and making an online poll an influencer seems no bad thing overall - give it a go.

[Umbagar]

I personally voted for them to have the child because I do not want an abortion on my conscience.

Why not? And why would it be a bad thing?

I only believe in abortion in cases where the mother's life is at stake, she was raped, and perhaps if the child was to be born into a broken, poor family. In this case the parents are fairly succesful computer programmers and the health of the child is being carefully monitored.

[Nulono]

I personally voted for them to have the child because I do not want an abortion on my conscience.

Why not? And why would it be a bad thing?

'Cause some of us don't like to be responsible for the death of another human being.

Why not? And why would it be a bad thing?

I only believe in abortion in cases where the mother's life is at stake, she was raped, and perhaps if the child was to be born into a broken, poor family. In this case the parents are fairly succesful computer programmers and the health of the child is being carefully monitored.

If the child's right to life is small enough that it's okay to violate it based on the circumstances of the child's conception or the child's family, why is abortion ever wrong?

[Umbagar]

Why not? And why would it be a bad thing?

'Cause some of us don't like to be responsible for the death of another human being.

I only believe in abortion in cases where the mother's life is at stake, she was raped, and perhaps if the child was to be born into a broken, poor family. In this case the parents are fairly succesful computer programmers and the health of the child is being carefully monitored.

If the child's right to life is small enough that it's okay to violate it based on the circumstances of the child's conception or the child's family, why is abortion ever wrong?

Because using abortion as birth control is pretentious and superficial. I'm unsure however about whether it is justifiable in a broken, poor family. Obama came from a poor single mother and look what he turned out to be.

[Nulono]

'Cause some of us don't like to be responsible for the death of another human being.


If the child's right to life is small enough that it's okay to violate it based on the circumstances of the child's conception or the child's family, why is abortion ever wrong?

Because using abortion as birth control is pretentious and superficial. I'm unsure however about whether it is justifiable in a broken, poor family. Obama came from a poor single mother and look what he turned out to be.

Even if he didn't turn out to be okay, would that justify killing him?

[Arilando]

Why not? And why would it be a bad thing?

I only believe in abortion in cases where the mother's life is at stake, she was raped, and perhaps if the child was to be born into a broken, poor family. In this case the parents are fairly succesful computer programmers and the health of the child is being carefully monitored.

But why? Please explain why you think abortion is wrong except when the mother's life is at stake, or that she was raped.

[Umbagar]

Because using abortion as birth control is pretentious and superficial. I'm unsure however about whether it is justifiable in a broken, poor family. Obama came from a poor single mother and look what he turned out to be.

Even if he didn't turn out to be okay, would that justify killing him?

That's the question isn't it? is it better to let a child be born into, say, a genocidal ethnic grotto where he will suffer, be starved, attacked, and a multitude of other things that will almost invariably kill him before the age of 5 or abort him to save suffering? It's a question of whether a horrible life or death is better. And if you decide that abortion is better, then the question comes up of when a life becomes worth living. it's a slippery slope.

[Nulono]

Even if he didn't turn out to be okay, would that justify killing him?

That's the question isn't it? is it better to let a child be born into, say, a genocidal ethnic grotto where he will suffer, be starved, attacked, and a multitude of other things that will almost invariably kill him before the age of 5 or abort him to save suffering? It's a question of whether a horrible life or death is better. And if you decide that abortion is better, then the question comes up of when a life becomes worth living. it's a slippery slope.

If a newborn is born into a family that then falls on hard times, is it okay to kill the newborn? What about a toddler?

[Dyakovo]

Even if he didn't turn out to be okay, would that justify killing him?

That's the question isn't it? is it better to let a child be born into, say, a genocidal ethnic grotto where he will suffer, be starved, attacked, and a multitude of other things that will almost invariably kill him before the age of 5 or abort him to save suffering? It's a question of whether a horrible life or death is better. And if you decide that abortion is better, then the question comes up of when a life becomes worth living. it's a slippery slope.

It's more a question of whether the mother feels that she is prepared to be a parent. If she isn't it is better for her to get an abortion rather than risking her life to have a child she doesn't want.

[Arilando]

Why not? And why would it be a bad thing?

'Cause some of us don't like to be responsible for the death of another human being.

Why does it matter if the human being cannot feel pain? And when are we a human being, are we a human being when we are just a collection of cells? Or are we a human being when we can feel pain, or reason? what is your criteria for a human being?

[Dyakovo]

That's the question isn't it? is it better to let a child be born into, say, a genocidal ethnic grotto where he will suffer, be starved, attacked, and a multitude of other things that will almost invariably kill him before the age of 5 or abort him to save suffering? It's a question of whether a horrible life or death is better. And if you decide that abortion is better, then the question comes up of when a life becomes worth living. it's a slippery slope.

If a newborn is born into a family that then falls on hard times, is it okay to kill the newborn? What about a toddler?

No, because at that point the child is legally a person.

[Umbagar]

I only believe in abortion in cases where the mother's life is at stake, she was raped, and perhaps if the child was to be born into a broken, poor family. In this case the parents are fairly succesful computer programmers and the health of the child is being carefully monitored.

But why? Please explain why you think abortion is wrong except when the mother's life is at stake, or that she was raped.

If something is forced upon a person, such as a baby that could cause death during birth or if they were raped then they should have a choice in whether to try to have the baby. I feel it is wrong to force them to risk their lives for the baby or to carry a baby that they had no choice in.

[Arilando]

But why? Please explain why you think abortion is wrong except when the mother's life is at stake, or that she was raped.

If something is forced upon a person, such as a baby that could cause death during birth or if they were raped then they should have a choice in whether to try to have the baby. I feel it is wrong to force them to risk their lives for the baby or to carry a baby that they had no choice in.

A fetus is not advanced enough to understand what choice is.