Abortion

A subject which is irrationally taboo (these are of course my favourites subjects!). Contraception is removing the potential to create a potential baby. Abortion is removing the potential to have a baby. The two differ only in the complexity of their application, their timing and the physiological effects on the girl/woman (and the man if we include sterilisation). However, the use of abortion is an issue of morality. What creates the taboo on this subject is the idea that it is a living being and removing it is comparable to murder in its simplest form. Those who believe everything has a spirit (or whatever alternative name they have for this mythical presence) my also bring this in the argument.

Of course dealing with the unprovable, ideas that rely on the creativity of the human mind in defining its existence through notions requiring faith, makes suggesting the rights and wrong of morality issues an unending battle. But if we are able to remove faith from this argument and replace it with reason, we should be able to think of abortion in a similar way to contraception - removing the potential to have a baby. I use the word potential because its not an individual living being until and umbilical cord is cut. It has extremely limited abilities to perceive the world around it prior to and for a long period after this event. Its ability to reason and retain any information during this time is next to none. So without a consciousness of note, why do we feel bad about terminating its creation. The thought of becoming a parent is a potent one and so I do not take the idea of abortion lightly but when I turn this morality issue on its head to look at why it is wrong to allow the creation of a child, then the issue becomes simple.

Isn't bringing a child into a world whereby the parent will knowingly not be able to provide for it the best they can in that current part of their life, worse than giving it a deprived life? Why go through the physiological strain a woman must endure only to bring a child into a world without the attention or finances it deserves.  Why also allow the birth of a child if you feel you as a parent, will miss out on things you wish to do in your life. The baby isn't going to be sat in some afterlife somewhere feeling pissed with you - it simply ceases to exist.

In the UK we can bring in the element of child benefits which makes it more immoral to have a child if you can't provide for it yourself. Using money the government takes from everyone to pay for yourself and your child is no more than theft. Having a child that you cannot care for as well as you might in a different situation, is unnecessary and a burden but...having a child that means you rely on others (by that I mean un-consenting strangers who are forced to pay taxes) is wrong. Consider this...

 

Chav A and chav B breed chav C - Chav A and B teach chav C (either literally or through example) that its ok to live off benefits and bring more children into the world using the resources from everybody else. Chav C meets chav D and creates chav E, F, G and H - the cycle continues, the scale grows larger - the problem perpetuates itself.



For any international readers these are chavs, to avoid confusion - and no I don't feel bad about describing them as a colletive. Imagine someone who has no regard for anyone but themself, which is fine, but then lives of the grace or taxes of everyone around them, not fine.

Forget the superstitious crap and choose what’s right for you and the life you have the power to create or prevent. The responsibility of parenthood is for those who can nurture a human into their conscious existence understanding their own rights and inherent in that, the rights of everyone else.

Abortion is a blessing of science for those who have accidents, nothing less, nothing more.