The destruction of the planet from over population is morally objectionable.

Abortion is a medical proceduer that ends a pregnancy. Anything you add to that is your own anf not the other people. If the idea of abortion bothers you go to the clinic and offer to pay the medical cost associated with a pregnancy and then adopt the child. If you can't or won't then you have no say in what goes on between a woman and her doctor.

Abortion is the deliberate taking of a human life, so there is my moral, non-religious argument.

However it is much more complicated than that. The whole equation has so many factors and arguments and counter arguments. A woman certainly has the right to choose what she does with her own body. I do not advocate making abortion illegal or harder to obtain. No woman should be required to carry a pregnancy to term. No woman should be castigated for her decision to abort or to keep the baby.

I do think abortion is a necessary evil.

Women have the legal right to decide if they want to become parents. Men do not. Not exactly fair to the man, but very fair for the child, who hopefully will recieve financial and emotional support.

It is so complicated that we seek to equivocate when discussing the issue. We say it's okay at this many weeks and not okay after that many weeks. Is the fetus any less human at 4 weeks than at 39? No. But we make that distinction. Yes, an fertile egg is not a chicken, unless you wait a little while.

So, cutting to the chase, I believe that abortion is morally objectional. BUT moral decisions should be left to the individual and not the State or others to make for them.

Personally, I am completely for abortions. I don’t believe a fetus is a baby until it can survive (realistically) outside of the womb. And in those cases, most doctors won’t do an abortion. Unless there is a sudden and significant risk to the mother’s life.

Now, I do have an issue with women who use abortion as a form of birth control. But then again, that number is so tiny that it’s not even realistic to include them in the amount of women who do get abortions.

Ultimately, I believe that a woman should be allowed to get an abortion if she wants to. Abortions are going to happen whether they are legal or not.

No objection here. When l watch what comes out of Washington my thought is there have not been enough of them.

Who defines morality?

It certainly isn't to me. No one should ever tell ANY woman how to conduct her life.
Especially whether or not she 'should' gestate any pregnancy.
What IS immoral is forcing any woman to gestate a pregnancy she doesn't want, for ANY reason.
People need to mind their own damned business and stay the hell out of women's uteri.

Women have abortions every month naturally so what's morals got to do with it ? Not only that anyone with a penis should have no say in the subject at all

Absence of context.... yes. It is morally objectionable.

I am pro-choice.

for a woman to carry a pregnancy full term is mor erisky to the life of the woman, than it is to have an abortion. Try to to force women to take on that risk to her life for a child she does nto want, is jus twrong, and totally disreards the risk to the woman's life. It is her risk, even if ht erisk is small, so it should be her shoice.

Culturally, the idea of killing unwanted children beign wrong is relatively new. It was a common practice in many cultures worldwide.

They have foudn baby ckeletons in catecombs of old cathedrals, because it was thought that keeping people ignorant that priests and nuns do have sex was more imporant than the life of hte baby, so even "religious morality" allowed for killing unwanted children. (Of course I wonder if the nins really had any choice in the matter of whether or not to keep their babies).

Aboprtion is actuly a more humane way to avoid unwanted children than has been practiced historically, or leaving a baby to die of exposure to the elements and wild animals, tossign babies intothe seas or over a cliff.

That being said, I also think we need to educate children about sex, pregnancy and disease without holdign back. Most teen children will make good decisions if they have the proper information as has been shown in many studies over and over again. I think we shoudl reduce inwanted pregnancies as much as possible. As Thom hartmann said, "Abortions shoudl be safe, legal and very rare. " That is a goal worht working for and one that better deals with human facts and realities,than simply trying to stop al abortions.

I support abortion procedure rights for all women regardless of any personal preference I may have.

Usually, I stay away from this topic due to preconceived definitions. Morality can't really be defined as a thing. It's a judgement. We separate our selves from our fellow animals because we are "self aware" and think we are better. Animals kill their young to preserve the strenght of the group. Only the strong survive in nature. The problem is with morality and lack of conviction. If you don't want a baby then don't get pregnant. Stop using abortion as birth control. If you're against abortion then start taking care of all the unwanted babies. If we don't start thinking about population control soon the subject of abortion will be mute. I am all in for abortion as long as the individual agrees to get fixed to prevent future pregnancies. Yes, yes always exceptions, I'll except rape as a reason to not require sterilization. Consider assisted suicide as the opposite side of the same coin? You got as big a problem with that? The weak are the ones dying. Please, someone, anyone, when the day comes I can't get up, take a dump and wipe my ass, kill me if I can not kill myself.
People "freak out" oh my god they are killing babies. Yet, where are the oh my god's with horrific deaths of babies/children around the world from starvation, disease, poverty and war. That's the true immoral act, being tortured before death. Where are the oh my gods for these babies? I'll tell you. They are on their $800 IPhone which ever number it is now? Driving their $60,000 car. Doing secret things in thier half million dollar home. On Sunday, they stop by the church to alleviate a little guilt.
Death to morality without action in conviction!
Wow, did I rant a little?

Looks like I'm pretty much in the majority here... I'm not a fan of abortion, and I'm not sure what I'd do if faced with an unexpected pregnancy. (Fortunately I've never had one. Well, in the man's case, caused one.)

However, I very strongly believe that the decision whether or not to have one should be totally left to the woman. It is not up to me, a politician in Washington, or anyone else whether a woman I will never know, meet, or even come into contact with whether or not she has an abortion.

Personally it's a matter of the lesser bad option and not for me to impose my judgment on anyone else. If an abortion is less bad than bringing a child into the world in a bad situation and being raised by a parent or parents who aren't healthy and able to raise them properly it needs to be an option. Adoption isn't a great option especially if the mother has substance abuses or any number of problems.

At the core it's about availability of choice and freedom to make the best choice for everyone. Pro-life is anti-choice and dumping one set of values on everyone.

Is it more moral to force a person to go through an unwanted change they can stop? Is it more moral to put a life through being unwanted? Is it more moral knowing how these children feel for being abandoned at birth and how they are often treated for it?

Life doesn't begin until a body's organs can physically function on their own. If a woman isn't ready for such a responsibilty and this world is piss poor in treating people with any sort of compassion or support no matter what the woman chooses, which is more moral?

As devils advocate I will take a stab... strictly secular pro-life arguement:
We have a rapidly aging society and we need to increase the natural born population to support military needs and the general economy.

I believe abortion should be legal. While I do not personally believe in it for convenience I also don't believe most women seek an abortion for that reason. There are many valid reasons to seek one, rape and incest and when it is a very young girl the two are often the same; there have been cases of girls as young as ten being forced to carry a pregnancy to term and in a case or two both mother and child perish. No woman should be forced to bear a child that is the result of rape and/or incest. Genetic issues and birth defects. Many times the disease or defect is worse than death. In other words forcing a child to live with certain issues is cruel compared to aborting the fetus before they become aware as an infant. These are just a few issues, as a livestock farmer we abort animals that have issues and cull the dams. Females that tend to birth defective offspring are not allowed to breed and this goes for the crazy ones too.

If you believe that human life begins at conception - and I don't think it's irrational to believe that - then it logically follows that abortion is murder and is morally objectionable.
Personally, I think that an embryo is not a person, and a fetus isn't a person until it can survive outside the womb, so I think the law is at least close to right.
Furthermore, I do have a moral objection to society forcing women to have children against their will, and to the natural consequence that women will seek out so-called "back alley" abortions.

Abortion is a morally questionable option people pick after they've failed to use birth control and aren't willing to deal with the consequences of their actions. It kills the fetus and often leaves the woman with guilt and regret that can cause psychological issues like depression.

As bad as abortion is, it's a distant second to outlawing it, which causes dangerous back alley abortions, abandoned infants, guilt and depression in unfit mother's that never should have had to give unwanted birth, and neglected children (the large majority fatherless) most likely left to a lifetime of neglect and/or abuse.

If the falsely-pious pro-lifers actually cared about the sanctity of life, they'd support funding birth control, sex education, Planned Parenthood, funding for WIC, and school lunch programs. But they're really just interested in punishing the poor. Which is why they really oppose abortion and everything else to help post-birth kids. So it's tough to take anything they say seriously.

At what point did men decide they got any say at all in a choice only women have to make and live with the consequences of?
If anyone finds anything 'morally objectionable' then they should stop or refrain from doing it. What other people do is none of their damn business unless and until it actually impacts on them.
Personally, I find taking a calf from its mother, stealing her milk and killing and eating her child is pretty morally questionable. So I don't eat meat. I don't go around saying how terrible people are who do.

WELL, IN MY OTHER COUNTRY THE DEBATE ON ABORTION IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW. I WISH i WAS THERE TO TELL SOME LEGISLATORS HOW IS THE LIFE OF A KID WHOSE "MOTHER" WANTED TO ABORT HIM /HER BUT WAS CONVINCED TO HAVE THE CHILD.

What is morally objectionable is to try to impose one's way of thinking on another person. In the case of abortion it could lead to the most horrible neglect a child could endure

Abortion is a right. unwanted children can suffer

No

It depends, because not every abortion is really a bad thing. It's for this reason that it's best left to medical science to determine if a birth is valid, or if the child is going to grow up to be a demon.

Is it? This is an important question, but because we’ve drawn sides without thinking about the ONE person involved… the one who would be born.