Scott wrote:
As of now 83.5% of the people on agree with my statement: "I want it to be legal for a poor teenager who was impregnated from being raped by an immediate family member to abort one-week after conception, if carrying to term is unsafe and a genetic disorder is detected."

That's roughly what I would have expected. But I was shocked to find out that most people disagree with this statement: "I want it to be illegal for a wealthy woman who is 5 days past her due date to get an abortion if doctors are sure that the healthy baby would be delivered safely and relatively easily and adoption is available."

Sorry Scott i wanted to be with peoples like you who are interested in philosophy but because of a my poor English I didn't understood the options given by you at first time in the polling part and get confused because of very lengthy sentence made specialized grammar of separating words between, but now understood the matter fully. The answer is 1) I do not wanted it to be legal for a poor teenager who was impregnated from being raped by an immediate family member to abort one-week after conception, if carrying to term is unsafe and a genetic disorder is detected. 2) I want it to be illegal for a wealthy woman who is 5 days past her due date to gen an abortion if doctors are sure that the healthy baby would be delivered safely and relatively easily and adoption is available.

I think from the above statement you will understand in both cases i didn't wanted the abortion initially as it is illegal. Secondly i wanted to say that law is designed according to the last possible that is the ultimate effect of the deed on the society as a whole. I think in law priority is given to the ultimate effect of the deed on the society. That is why it generally found correct though law is not also free from the emotional desires and motivation because of the involvement of humans in law making. For the first case why i wanted it to be illegal for teenager to abort. The opinion is all the person involved in the case including the teenager who is victim of rape by a family member, are criminals. What is going to happen with them according to the nature is a punishment of breaking the moral law. The abortion which is set to be operated is actually doing the wrong by letting them away from the trap of natural punishment mainly to the family members. It is not good for the society because this law can make people careless for committing this moral and social crime. In my opinion whatever disorder the would be newborn may contain, it is almost out of the matter. The children though not a criminal and may take birth with severe disorders but they have the right to come to the world. I think that because of the hate of disorder one cannot want to end their life and i think that those children cannot want to end their life whatever the disorder may be and whatever crime is committed by their parent. They are not at all responsible for that and they will still enjoy the beautiful world with their disorders. They will not get any inferiority complex instead they will make their parents feel inferior according to the natural law. For the second case i do not want to legalize that the wealthy women to abort even the doctors are saying there would be a healthy and safe delivery. The answer is the same as of first case. firstly it is illegal to abort, secondly it is illegal according to the natural law. why she is wanted to abort, it is not mentioned. When she is going to abort a birth then why she didn't taken care for not to have pregnant, i think so. Thirdly the child wanted and like to come to the world. there is some more reason that she could not have to abort is that those families wanted to adopt a child immediately after birth. Then why she is going to abort a child i didn't got the clue. Also time is very crucial element for the humans and the time had gone over 5 days to permit an abortion whatever the doctor says that there would be a safe and healthy delivery. I think it have to be mentioned earlier that why that wealthy woman is opted for abortion.

I think all the peoples in the society has to judge the matter according to the judicial point of view and not the humanitarian point of view because the people actually could not understand the matter thoroughly. They give opinion according to their emotions and emotions are actually not a perfect base to draw opinions. By the judging the matter according to the legal point of view, I think is the only we can reduce evil in the society. Otherwise we can't reduce social evils. It is my opinion. Please do not judge my psychology. whatever you want to say, say perfectly about the opinion itself or question or topic given, and not about me. I found some people here are actually interested in judging the psychology rather judging the opinion.

I think anybody could do right or wrong by analyzing the opinion, there is no need to analyzing the psychology of the opinion maker under the discussion I think this is foolishness generally exhibited by the psychologists. Psychologist has to understand they can even cross the points of psycho if he is wrong and if they have the ability to give a valid logic. Sir Scott you are from the administration that is why I am saying it to you. You didn’t did anything wrong. I only not bound to follow the rules of the forum. Raising the question about anyone's psychology is abusive, I think.

Sir Scott,

I beg a pardon, because I didn't considered the matter that there's also a risk on the mother's part. Though I will say that I didn't know whether she approached police after being caught in criminal activity or not. If She approached police immediately then pregnancy should be aborted but if she is not then it should not be aborted because in this case she is also be considered as she might agree with those act however she being raped forcibly against her will because she didn't approached the police immediately. If the law let them abort then i think there would be more probability that such reason or argument will be made by the such criminals of future by having a false medical report. It should be remember that the humans whether doctors or officials even lawyers and so on, can be purchased giving a bribe for making a false medical report. Therefore it is actually a green flag shown for having an abortion in such cases whether or not the would-be newborn will get any severe disorders. I think considering all humans at a time, humans cannot be trusted. Actually what happens fully naturally is always correct if there's no human interference between. I think it is right that no such criminal will want such baby will have to take birth. And the law is absolutely correct to not to have an abortion in any case. There's no doubt that this will increase the carelessness in part of criminals to commit such crime. Actually what happens is the Humans actually fear social punishment more than the legal punishment. Any crime actually can brings two types of punishment first is social and second is legal. Many people do not fear legal punishments. But generally people fears social punishment highly that is why i say that regarding any criminal activity people has to think judicially. We have to be very careful in judging about any criminal activity about whether in our decision do we unknowingly forgiving the criminals socially. Society do this thing most of the times unknowingly and emotions motivate them to do this and that's why I think that emotions are invalid and disastrous. Society must bind criminals to have social punishment and should not let them saved by this.

I think even the embryo is nerveless, brainless, non-sentient but it couldn’t be considered as non-humans because if we think so than the abortion will no more a crime. But abortion is a crime because it has a potential to increase the crime rate. And what can increase the crime rate should not be legalize, it’s a fact. Also we must consider embryo as human though it is nerveless brainless and non-sentient. As we like our photo not to be disrespected in front of us though photograph is nerveless, brainless and non-sentient. Anybody cannot hit the statue of justice by shoes whether it is nerveless and brainless and have no sentiments. It will be the contempt of court and anybody will get the punishment. Therefore I cannot consider embryo as non-sentient point of view as it is I think, it is much higher than anybody’s photograph and statue of justice.


John (wooden shoe)

It is very nice to see you very moralistic and compassionate but try this morals be compatible with future consequences also. Not for this case. I may gone wrong conditionally. And natural punishment is better, nobody needs to use weapons or anything, it is automatic.