This link goes to Reddit, however, we have used a direct video link to avoid giving them ad revenue.

  • BeeOneTwoThree@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hopefully in ghe future the need for abortions is close to zero becuase of better education, birth control and standard of living.

    But today it is better to have abortions than put people into this world when nobody is going to take care of them the way they need.

    I think they will look back at this time and think “how sad that they did not have the tools and care needed to avoid abortions”.

    • BigToe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s completely fair and very possible, but I do disagree morally that it’s better to have an abortion than to bring a baby into the world that isn’t wanted. Want should not dictate the viability of life nor the concept of basic human right to life. Most times the right thing isn’t easy or even what we want, but that should not get in the way of doing what IS right. Should there be better foster care systems and increased funding for both systems and families willing to foster/adopt? Absolutely. But the failure of our government to put spending where it should to assist with fostering/adoption and, as you mentioned, in education and standard of living, does not change the morality of the ending of a baby’s life through abortion.

      • Tavarin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not a baby, it’s a clump of fetal cells that has a 75% chance of failing on its own even without an abortion.

      • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Adoption doesn’t change what pregnancy does to a woman’s body. Comments like these focus solely on the fetus and ignore the woman who can have life long consequences of simply carrying the fetus to term.