Eure meinung zu abtreibung?
Habe das Thema in Religion. Ivh brauche so viele Meinungen wie möglich um sehr viele Standpunkte zu nennen.
(1 votes)
Loading...
(1 votes)Loading...
(1 votes)Loading...Similar Posts
Schwanger?
Hallo also bin seit 8 Tagen überfällig habe heute einen test gemacht der wurde direkt positiv also denke ich weil die 2 Linien sind nicht komplett ausgefüllt was meint ihr
Muttermilch verkaufen oder spenden?
Huhu mal eine Frage in die Runde was machen die Mütter die zu viel Milch haben ? Gibt es es moglich keiten zu spenden oder die sogar zu verkaufen? Habe vorhin ein video gesehen von einer jungen frau aus amerika die damit anscheinend sogar richtig geld verdient😅😅
Ich würde mich sehr freuen und viel besser fühlen mit euren Erfahrungen?
Ich werde bald Vater das erste mal so Gott es möchte wird es hoffentlich gesund auf die Welt kommen meine Frage ist gibt es unter euch Mütter oder väter die wie ich sehr gereizt und aufgeregt waren genau so wie glücklich und gespannt natürlich ich möchte einfach Erfahrungen sammeln von Vätern und Müttern was ein…
Übungswehen?
ByNamalama
Hallo zusammen , ich bin in der 26 ssw und bin vor einer Stunde aufgewacht und habe seit dem schmerzen in der linken bauchhälfte. Ab dem Bauchnabel abwärts. Die Stelle ist auch ziemlich warm. Die Schmerzen sind aushaltbar , aber langsam echt unangenehm. Es zieht und dann hört es auf. Dann zieht es wieder und…
Ist der Tag der Fehlgeburt direkt der erste Tag des neuen Zyklus?
Hallo, ich hatte leider vor kurzem eine Fehlgeburt in der SSW5. Meine Frage ist nun wie das mit den Zyklus abläuft. Ist der Tag der Fehlgeburt der 1. Zyklustag wie bei der Periode oder ist das irgendwie anders? Im Internet finde ich zum Beispiel dass das bei einer Abtreibung so ist dass man nach 2-3…
darf ich schwanger operiert werden?
hallo , ich bin grad in der 6 ssw schwanger und hab eine zyste die so groß wie meine kokosnus ist die tut ziehmlich weh beim laufen oder liegennaja die drückt auch gegen dem bauch fell. darf ich die zyste endfehrenen lassen wen es notwendig ist ? lg und danke schon mal im vorraus#
For me only and only the decision of the pregnant woman.
“The dignity of man is inviolable,” according to the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court, already intervenes with the idation of the egg for just those.
https://www.bmfsfj.de/bmfsfj/themes/family/pregnantity-and-children’s request/pregnantity termination/pregnancies termination-by-218-strafgesetzbuch-81020
https://www.familieplanung.de/pregnantial conflict/pregnancies abort/pregnant-law-indications-and-terms/#c5918
Basically, I find it good that there is the option in the background danger for the mother. Here the person who lives and is able to decide must also decide whether to risk their own life. I am indecisive about the aspect of mental health of the mother.
I also find it good that the option of pregnancy consists of violent crimes. There, pregnancy is potentially an emotional burden that cannot bear everyone and could not have the possibility of abortions lead to despair.
I think it is good and important that, in other cases, it should be consulted. the consequences must be due to talks with people who are not directly affected (in contrast to the becoming father, parents or parents of the father) and who, if necessary, want to push into one direction or another.
In principle, without the option of legal abortion, I would see a higher risk of abortion tourism or home attempts with possibly corresponding consequences for mother’s health without added value.
It’s been allowed for a few days. So I’m voting against the law that’s been returned a few years ago. It’s just my permission.
?
Abortion is not permitted in any country of Europe.
Why should something within a body (Fötus) have more rights than something (child) outside?
A child cannot ask his mother to donate a kidney. Or ask for a stem cell donation from her. It may have its own body free: even if the child dies in a refusal.
The Bible does not mention abortion.
Practices for the abortion of the fetus were widespread in the Greek-Roman antiquity. Nevertheless, abortion in the Bible is not mentioned:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12178933/
In Exodus 21,22 a man only has to pay a fine if he unintentionally triggers a miscarriage:
https://www.bibleserver.com/LUT/2.Mose21.22
It’s just damages.
This also describes “Jewish agings” by Flavius Josephus:
https://humanjourney.org.uk/articles/exodus-21-and-abortion/#3-rtn
There is never talk of “more rights”.
Yes.
A child cannot force the mother to donate a kidney (no rights). Mother must have her body.
Fötus can force mother to discharge (has rights). Mother must not have her body.
If a death occurs, even the child, the man should be brought to death. But if the woman can no longer bear, then the contravene had to make damages.
Why? more Right? Child death is not allowed even after birth.
Can a child ask for a renal donation from his mother?
If no: then the fetus has more rights, because it can determine the body of the mother
Do not do it, the mother carries her child under her heart, and usually she does this Love. It’s about Love!
Nope.
The child is human life and even legally a person: and still cannot have the body of the mother.
If Not applicable we need to redefine human life!
and if the fetus demands the body of the woman: not harmless?
If the kidney demand, he is definitely not ashamed.
But no matter what:
Is the fetus a child of his mother, or only after birth?
Yes, Paul says so.
Is the child the woman’s opponent?
Is someone who wants a kidney, the opponent?
When Paul says that…
Do you see the woman’s opponent in the fetus?
the law of nature that, according to Paul, forbids men long hair?
It’s natural law.
No, other construction site. Look at the above basic legal articles, that’ll find it.
🙄
Then a child should ask the mother to donate stem cells. I can’t.
And bye.
And yet it can’t be prevented. That’s how it is often in nature.
Really? I’m new.
You realize that even you have no arguments for the “more rights” affirmation, because it is simply wrong. In order to enforce a ban on abortion, it would already be sufficient for a fetus to the to grant rights.
This fits perfectly with the keyword of forced vaccination, because the current impunity of abortion and forced vaccination can rely on the same right: GG Article 2(2) sentence 3.
The “more rights” affirmation simply remains a false, hollow phrase.
die is also a natural process. Nonetheless, not everyone wants it.
Oh, yes.
Forced vaccination is already problematic.
He has her body? A pregnant woman is not a zombie controlled by the fetus.
Exactly, a very natural process and therefore not comparable to a donor.
So where does a fetus have more rights?
he has her body. He can force her to discharge.
But the fetus is in the mother. In the body of the mother. And without mother not viable.
You don’t mean either. But here my answer: No, you can’t, neither a fetus. So where does a fetus have more rights?
So not the mother over the body of the fetus. So where does the fetus have more rights?
you don’t answer my question.
Can you force someone to a stem cell donation?
If no: then you cannot have the body of another.
In the case of a ban on abortion, however, exactly that happens: the fetus has the body of the mother (against its will).
Where is this more right anchored?
can you force someone to a kidney donation?
Where do I find that? Where is this more right anchored? And how does a fetus want to decide?
may decide on the body of the woman.
Where exactly does the fetus have more rights?
The problem is that there are two important rights: the right to Self-determinationand the right to Life. And while I find self-determination totally important and necessary for women, the right to the life of the unborn person is outweighed here.
You should always be mindful and involve violent crimes or danger to the mother. You can’t make anything about a comb
There should also be enough support for mothers or parents, so that a child’s pregnancy and broadening is not a risk.
I’m not “for” abortion. I’m for enlightenment and prevention, so it doesn’t have to be done.
Nevertheless, I can accept that sometimes a woman becomes unintentionally pregnant and, for reasons I have not to judge, wants abortion and then it is also “ok”.
In principle, I do not consider a ban on abortion to be a target.
Just because abortions are forbidden, that doesn’t mean there is no one. They then exist abroad or under medical, or hygienic, questionable circumstances. When the star published his famous “we have driven off” title story in 1971, 374 women have admitted publicly to have driven away even though it was completely illegal in Germany. (Yes, okay, 373 – Alice Schwarzer doesn’t count, she lied, I know).
There are women who just don’t want a child. And sterilization is even more difficult to get for childless women of a childless age than a affordable crib space in the aeration room. Then there is also not even a small number of women who simply cannot afford reliable contraceptives such as pill or spiral. What are they doing? Sustainability, clear. But if they are in a relationship and the partner “requires his right”?
It’s like this: you have a conflict of rights in this issue.
On the one hand, the woman and her rights and on the other is the unborn. In any case where there is a collision of different rights, it is necessary to consider which right weighs harder. A compromise is not possible in abortion.
I personally have a problem with the view that the unborn should be more important than the woman in which it grows. How far are you going? Can pregnant women not drive anymore because this could be dangerous for the unborn? Can pregnant women no longer enter a pub to be protected from passive smoke? How many rights of pregnant women can one limit to protect the unborn maximum?
The often heard argument of abortion opponents “I am against abortion, only when rape is okay” I think it is inconsistent. For if one is against abortion, because life is holy in itself and must in any case be protected, what makes the life of a child born in rape less protective?
To carry out an unwanted pregnancy is probably always quite difficult, even though the woman might have fun during the procreation. The fact that the trauma might potentiate if the procreation has already taken place unintentionally is certainly correct, but does an unwanted pregnancy in itself not more easily attainable.
Either one accepts that women can determine their own body – whether and when they want to have sex with someone just like the fact that they want to carry out an unwanted pregnancy or not – or one does not accept this right of self-determination for women.
I look forward to any unnecessary abortion. But sometimes, for reasons that I do not want to judge, it is the only way for those concerned. And this way should be available legally and under reasonable conditions.
There are countless questions for this – just look over there and look out for the numerous opinions that come out.
Deportation should be legal everywhere, but only in the early stage and any woman should be able to decide for herself.
I think the regulation of the so-called time limit solution in Germany is good. In principle, I believe that abortions should not be necessary due to the present possibilities of contraception.
Tell that to a raped woman.
Apparently you didn’t understand my answer. Or you don’t want to understand it. I’m very sorry.
I’m a bit split. If the prevention fails, the woman should be allowed to decide whether or not to keep the child. Of course, this also applies to rapes – no woman must be forced to carry a child against her will.
But there are women who get pregnant at the running meter often do not know who, and so repeatedly let abortions take place. Here I would talk about a deadbeat or worse. There are many unintentional childless couples who would let a child grow up in security with much love.
Note what the Bible in 2. Moses 21:22, 23 on the life of an unborn child says: “If men should go up with each other and they really hurt a pregnant woman and their children really go away, but there is no fatal accident, so shall he be put on … damages … But if a fatal accident arises [what affects the mother or the unborn child], then you shall give soul to the soul.” Yeah, killing an unborn child was considered murder.
Although some doctors consider an unborn child merely as a fetus or tissue lump and not as a person, God thinks differently about it. He considers an embryo as an individual, as a living person (Psalm 139:16). Could one discard unborn life and still remain in the favor of God, who gives life to all persons? (Acts 17:25).
Awakened in 1990. 8 May. p. 26-27
I agree with you, and even without God’s opinion, a fetus is a stage of development of a human being and no object
Note that not all people believe in your God.
I liberated myself after a strictly religious Catholic education and some harassment from the church about 20 years ago. I really don’t care what this God thinks.
There are not so many. The number of adopted couples has fallen by 40% over the last ten years, because modern reproduction medicine allows many childless couples a physical baby.
That’s true, there are some couples than 30 years ago. That’s why the “waiting list” on a newborn is shorter than at that time. Which means the demand is there. The meaninglessly driven children could lead a happy life.
You mix numbers with your grds. Opinion on adoption.
I answered the FS, which I would have done with this issue.
Yes, much less couples. As I said, demand is falling steadily. And it will continue to fall if, for example, the egg donation is legalized in Germany.
Certainly, in individual cases the release for adoption can be a solution.
But the problem is a quantitative one.
Around 100,000 abortions per year (tent rather falling) come about 1300 foreign ad options. Even if you calculate that there are still 3-5 adoption-willing couples on each adopted child, I don’t have to be a computational genius to realize that the adoption cannot be a general solution.
Auto correction 😡
That’s true, it’s Less Couples give…
Amen
Firstly, Christians are asked and secondly, that is my opinion.
You are not freed, but by your rejection to please God, become a slave of sin.
This is a delicate subject. There are enough ways to prevent gravity. If a woman wants an abortion, that’s her thing as it’s her body. The decision is made by the woman. I personally agree with abortion, especially when there are medical or criminal reasons.https://www.bmfsfj.de/bmfsfj/themes/family/pregnantity-and-children’s request/pregnantity termination/pregnancies termination-by-218-strafgesetzbuch-81020