Livre d'Or

I mainly agree with you. My stance is that killing anything is negative, better avoided when possible. But you have to kill things. When I have an infection, I'll take antibiotics. The small negative of killing bacteria is outweighed by the positive of me living and being healthier. I'm biased toward sentients, and the more sentience, the more I care. I think it's wrong to kill or torture a cat. But if there were a fire and I could only save one, I'd grab the human baby before the cat. I'd feel horrible, but well, I'd feel horrible either way.

So, I believe that sometimes abortions are the right decision. And I strongly and fiercely want to defend the right for women to have them. But I would love more to be done to reduce the need for them. I think even in a great social system, there would still be a need for abortions now and then, but far, far fewer.

On a side note, it really bothers me that the system made it such that the smartest thing I could do, if I were an asshole, would be to have as late-stage an abortion as possible. You see, I was severely disabled, and I couldn't afford medical treatment. There was a possibility that delaying medical care would kill me. It actually did lead to significant permanent vision loss that probably would have been treatable at the time. But you don't get health care with recognized disability until 2.5 years after the official recognized start date of your disability.

But you can get free medical care if you're a pregnant woman.

I obviously wouldn't have a baby under such conditions. Especially one I didn't want at all. Buy getting pregnant might have saved my life. And then I could get medical care for a while, up until the point where I went for an abortion to get rid of the unwanted, but useful pregnancy. Afterall, I was broke and disabled, there was no way I was going to be raising a child. And having a child with my body so damaged... I would worry too much about what would come out.

Thanks US healthcare system. Good work there.