Why is it the child's fault?

[illuminatus]

I've heard this arguement so many times before. A woman wants to have an abortion and now the child is getting shanked because he/she does not get to live. Why is it the child's fault that he/she doesn't get to live?

Well after my years of experience in life I want to ask another question. Why is it the child's fault that he/she does get to live? What if that child never wanted to experience the world? What if that child didn't want to be raised in an abusive home and see as his/her world fell apart in front of them and they were helpless? What if that child didn't want to live in a war zone and suffer through the atrocities brought about by the war?

[Vianne]

To Piper Plexed:

Marrying only because the girl is pregnant is not the best way to begin a marriage. If the couple is not ready, let them raise the child unmarried. It would be better for them to break up if they wish and go on to find better, healthier relationships, than to stay in a toxic relationship "for the kids". The kid is going to pick up on the bad vibes. However, I don't understand why pregnancy without marriage will inevitably result in a breakup due to the realization that it is a "fruitless coupling". Can you explain?

To Infinitehonor:

You said: "But, i guess you now see the point God was making in commanding that we don't have relations out-side of marriage. God gives us law for OUR benifit."

Just as a note, the notion of no premarital sex was based on the Hebrews' need to ensure paternity -- the only way they could do so was if they knew the woman was a virgin before the wedding.

Being married doesn't instantly give a couple the ideal circumstances to raise a child any more than being unmarried. The key in both situations is to use good sense and caution.

Vianne, respectfully

[Piper Plexed]

To Piper Plexed:

Marrying only because the girl is pregnant is not the best way to begin a marriage. If the couple is not ready, let them raise the child unmarried. It would be better for them to break up if they wish and go on to find better, healthier relationships, than to stay in a toxic relationship "for the kids". The kid is going to pick up on the bad vibes. However, I don't understand why pregnancy without marriage will inevitably result in a breakup due to the realization that it is a "fruitless coupling". Can you explain?

I don't think I said they had to get married, I proposed one scenario and a thought process the couple may consider as well as reasons why they may not want to continue a pregnancy. So maybe if I replaced marriage with committed parental team. In a nutshell I am talking about a couple that on the onset of a pregnancy may realize that the relationship wasn't all that healthy and that they really aren't right for each other. In this case the couple may feel that it wasn't in the best interests of the child to bring it into the world, for many of the reasons you have listed above.

Fruitless coupling as when faced with the realization that the relationship was troubled, why would they want to stay together? I guess they may love each other enough to keep trying though In this case the couple is not interested in bring children into an unstable family.

on a side note, I don't know why a functioning, loving and committed parental team wouldn't get married as there are many many mutually beneficial legal and financial reasons to do so.

Maybe if you established your feelings in scenario I would have a clearer understanding of what you find acceptable as the basis for a family. I think we could then discuss the differences and why we feel that way.

[Vianne]

Okay, committed parental team. I like that.

Sometimes a couple may choose not to marry to avoid potential legal complications down the road, or because they have current financial problems (i.e., if they're facing bankruptcy, as long as they're unwed they can save one of their credit histories).

"Maybe if you established your feelings in scenario I would have a clearer understanding of what you find acceptable as the basis for a family. I think we could then discuss the differences and why we feel that way."

Sounds good. I think every couple should feel free to do as they feel benefits them without harming others. I'm not particularly pro-abortion, but I wouldn't opt to make it illegal because there are just too many "what-if" scenarios out there. Yes, the child is harmed, but there are cases where the mother would be more greatly harmed if she had the child.

You'll have to forgive me. I get a bit tizzed when people try to enforce morality that's void of practicality, since I believe the two go hand in hand, and that's what I thought you were doing.

Avoiding premarital intimacy was practical in the old days, before the age of paternity tests. Property was passed down from father to son, and the only way to be certain the son was the father's was if the mother had never been with another man. Now we do have paternity tests, and as far as property goes, it can be passed down to our cousin's fourth grade teacher, if we want.

But I digress ... those were my thoughts on family. Please ask if I need to clarify anything.

Vianne

[Piper Plexed]

Okay, committed parental team. I like that.

Sometimes a couple may choose not to marry to avoid potential legal complications down the road, or because they have current financial problems (i.e., if they're facing bankruptcy, as long as they're unwed they can save one of their credit histories).

Gee I guess I could see that, actually I have a dear friend that has been engaged FOREVER because of her defaulted student loans. I think she was engaged when I was pregnant for my 9 yr. old her fiancé is a musician and she is a ex dancer/musician, never any steady money and it is expensive to live in NYC (even in alphabet city) these days.

Sounds good. I think every couple should feel free to do as they feel benefits them without harming others. I'm not particularly pro-abortion, but I wouldn't opt to make it illegal because there are just too many "what-if" scenarios out there. Yes, the child is harmed, but there are cases where the mother would be more greatly harmed if she had the child.

I think we are of like mind

You'll have to forgive me. I get a bit tizzed when people try to enforce morality that's void of practicality, since I believe the two go hand in hand, and that's what I thought you were doing.

Oh no forgiveness necessary actually, please forgive me for being unclear. Upon rereading my post hmm..... it left a great deal to be desired.

It is kinda funny cause my pro-choice stance always hinged on the inappropriateness of forcing a blanket legal solution to a multifaceted personal dilemma and well in a way you just reinforced this belief. Family/life choices must remain in the family life.