Abortion vs. Religion

[poldsfgrayuimp]

shouldn't be an issue.

Religion is an excellent institution for providing people with a base on which to establish moral, ethical values.
But these values are ideological, not physical. They are not carved in stone, so there are always an exceptions.

Christianity, though it forbids killing, waged entire wars against islam in a quest for control of Jerusalem.

Islam, though it forbids killing ( hmm, seems to be a pettern?), promises large palaces and good, virgin sex eternally if a person kills an "infidel".

These facts prove (to those of us that have a brain) that religion is shaped by what we want, not by what Allah, Christ, or King David wanted. And i urge everbody to deeply question those who say otherwise.

Read my blog on religion( out soon??!) for more on my views of the contemporary state of religion, for they have no further business here.

And now we come to abortion(finally?).

How about we all get over the fact(yes, i said it) that a women is killing her unborn child when she has an abortion. She is not a murderer, but simply a women that has a brain. Perhaps she has already had enough children and wouldn't like any more. Maybe she can't meet the cost of living as it is and would be homeless if she had to support another child. Perhaps she was raped and, without abortion, would be otherwise forced to carry and birth the child of a guy who brutally forced himself into her, scarring her physically and emotionally for life and that hurt being rekindled everytime she looked into her baby's eyes. There are an endless amount of resaons a women may prefer an abortion.

Banning abortions could put an indirect strain on our economy, especially our quickly-draining social securities, medicare and welfare reserves.

Assume a women, in poverty and receiving both welfare and unemployment benefits, becomes pregnant. She is forced by law to carry the pregnancy and to give birth. She now has a baby, greatly increasing her cost of living, allowing her to claim more welfare benefits and rendering her unable to work because she can't afford child care.

Theoretically, when enough of such an instance occurs the government would have a huge problem. In order to get these women into the workforce the government finances a child care program, absorbing taxpayer money and not diminishing the problem entirely.

Hypothetical examples such as this are limitless, and there is no need to cite another one as you should get the point by now.

However, i would like to state that I in no way support a completely free right to unregulated abortion.

The best alternative to an abortion right would be a compromise of sorts. Although in the political realm it shouldn't be called a compromise at all as it should be introduced as a completely new idea not fabricated as a means to make both parties happy.

Here is my plan:

Abortions in the first stage of pregnancy should be completely by choice, though consultation and adequate education should be provided, and a formal recommendation to carry the pregnancy should be issued.

Abortions in the second stage of pregnancy should only be done by the prescription from a qualified doctor and for medical reasons. Abortion in this stage should also be allowed if the pregnancy was the result of a rape.

In the third stage, an abortion should be strictly allowed for madical resons ONLY, the most prominent of which are the threat of death for the mother or baby.

Yes, i know that many americans will disagree with what i have said, but to the few that do agree, please comment on this blog and voice your support. To those that disagree i urge the same, although i can't promise that i will give your retorts any attention as i do not fancy debating with a person who has an empty head.

Don't dump your religion, change it. Fight for what is right.