Bonus-2391
From Environmental Technology
(Difference between revisions)
Jalcst-2391 (Talk | contribs) |
Jalcst-2391 (Talk | contribs) (→Bonus) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Bonus== | ==Bonus== | ||
| - | + | *Is it morally correct for religious extremists to impose their beliefs against abortion by bombing OB/GYN clinics in the US? After reading the above material, which is more important, anti-abortionism or environmental protection? Explain sides and rationally compare and contrast both sides. | |
| + | |||
| + | *I don't think that the people that are against abortion should go as far as bombing clinics but they could show their beliefs in other ways like pickiting clinics or starting a group that could help people that are pregnant or they could even look at the situations around where they are living and try support groups that could help to prevent problems where unwanted births usually occur. I think that environmental protection is more important than anti-abortionism because if people would take care of the environment more then they would eliminate a lot of problems that cause abortions. In some cases when a woman is pregnant and a doctor tells her that her baby will be born defected an she goes and get an abortion because of whhat the doctor says. The mother could have drank water that was not very well treated and had pollutants in it still. Another possibility coulds have been that the surroundings where the mother lived. If she lived close to a chemical plant then she could have breathed in oxygen that had chemicals in it. The same thhing if the mother lived close to say a farming area and the chemicals that the farmers use for their crops could have been passed to the mother. There are a lot of possibilities like if the mother lived in a house that had lead based paint, asbsstos, mold, carbon-dioxide that were in the house where the mother lived. If people focused on anti-abortionism the only positive that I can think of would be that it would support thhe persons religious beliefs. The negatives would be | ||
Revision as of 23:41, 26 March 2006
Bonus
*Is it morally correct for religious extremists to impose their beliefs against abortion by bombing OB/GYN clinics in the US? After reading the above material, which is more important, anti-abortionism or environmental protection? Explain sides and rationally compare and contrast both sides.
- I don't think that the people that are against abortion should go as far as bombing clinics but they could show their beliefs in other ways like pickiting clinics or starting a group that could help people that are pregnant or they could even look at the situations around where they are living and try support groups that could help to prevent problems where unwanted births usually occur. I think that environmental protection is more important than anti-abortionism because if people would take care of the environment more then they would eliminate a lot of problems that cause abortions. In some cases when a woman is pregnant and a doctor tells her that her baby will be born defected an she goes and get an abortion because of whhat the doctor says. The mother could have drank water that was not very well treated and had pollutants in it still. Another possibility coulds have been that the surroundings where the mother lived. If she lived close to a chemical plant then she could have breathed in oxygen that had chemicals in it. The same thhing if the mother lived close to say a farming area and the chemicals that the farmers use for their crops could have been passed to the mother. There are a lot of possibilities like if the mother lived in a house that had lead based paint, asbsstos, mold, carbon-dioxide that were in the house where the mother lived. If people focused on anti-abortionism the only positive that I can think of would be that it would support thhe persons religious beliefs. The negatives would be
