You know where I stand, I just want to see percentagewise how the members of this board feel. Thank you!!

Your choices are a bit vague, Brian. Does the "it" refer to abortion or choice? The semantics are at the very heart of this issue.

Also, I'd like to qualify my vote by saying I support choice but with limiting conditions (i.e - a raped woman should not be forced to carry to term. A second or third trimester baby should not be killed).

I know you were just looking for percentages, though, so I'll shut up now.

I didn't know there where so many here in favor of abortion. I'd love to hear their arguments in the Abortion(murder) thread.

"It" refers to abortion. Are you against "it", for"it" etc...

So many people here in favor of abortion? That's only 3 people in favor of it so far.

3 too many.
I doubt I heard all the arguments, I'd really like to know what people think.

I'd be interested also in hearing arguments for abortion.

Here is the thread on Abortion.

abortion should be a woman's choice. I agree with the statement that no woman that has been raped should be forced to carry to term. As a matter of fact, I don't think any woman should be forced to carry to term no matter what the circumstances. Third trimester abortions should only be considered if there was a risk to the woman's life. Most all resposible women take care of an unwanted pregnancy as soon as they make the decision- to even bring up third trimester abortions( as if that is the norm) seems unfair

Only 3

Well, that was a month ago...Now it's up to 7.

**Sigh** liberals...

L. Zeved

*** sigh *** conservatives...

This is a tough one for me. I am strongly pro-choice, but that doesn't mean I'm for abortions. It's interesting to me that many conservatives seem to have a double standard here. Outlawing abortion because of the sanctity of human life would imply, to me, that the death penalty is also wrong. At least the Catholic church is consistent with this one. Furthermore, when claiming that government should not infringe upon the rights of the individual, how can one turn around and want to impose government sanctions on... someone's individual rights? Either way, it's a double standard.

There was a great Tom the Dancing Bug cartoon in which an unborn fetus commited a murder. The conservatives were torn, because on the one hand, they supported the death penalty, yet on the other, they were against abortion.

I don't take abortion lightly, and I think it is sick when someone uses abortion in a blase way to control after the fact their stupid choices. That said, these people, like the welfare queens, are very few, and very far between.

I do have to hand it to the conservatives on their very clever choosing of the term "pro-life." Sort of makes anyone in the opposition seem like a monster.

I take issue with many of the thing you said (even though I consider myself a liberal) but I am relunctant to take it up here seeing as this isn't the free-for-all abortion debate. I'd love to debate it there

Abortion Debate Thread

The above is a link to the abortion debate I spoke of.

I'm against it, but not for the normal 'sanctity of life' reasons usually cited. As quarkhead states, it is usually an after-the-fact way of avoiding the consequences of an action. This is a decision that should have been made earlier. Or, to put it another way, I am very pro-choice, I just think that the choice should have been made earlier in the process. Adoption offers a wonderful way to pass along the lifetime responsbilities, so it's really about the relatively temporary inconveniences of being pregnant. While I certainly understand that this is no small thing, I think anyone would have to admit that it pales in comparison to the miracle of life.

Really? Forgive me if I laugh out loud. So loosely stated as if it were having a cold or flu. How about if we consider the employment and financial aspects, rent, food and medical costs. Unless you are selling your baby before its birth.
Such an easy write off, for those who have no idea what it means to be pregnant and how it is when you wonder how you are going to get through the next 9 months, keep your job when you are tired, swollen and lactating on your blouse midday. Not everyone has the option of employment that 'understands' pregnancy. How do you pay the rent in month 7, 8 and 9?

Some of you live in a dreamworld of 'all the beautiful babies', and the wonderful world of adoption. Even adoption can suck. Its a long and grueling process that does not assure success for either child or parent. Someone already said, if its not white and 6mos old or less, it has so much lesser chances of adoption. In Commonwealth states adoptees can NEVER find their real parents because the State protects the information til the day you die, as in my case, Pennsylvania. The adoption bureacracy is ruthless.

An arguement has been stated many times and ignored. The issue is not abortion but why women seek abortion.
We have: A portion of the population saying abortion is wrong. The same saying that sex education is wrong and condoms should not be distributed in schools.

Another portion saying that because abortion is legal they should have no responsabilities towards unwanted children.

Another portion just irresponsible.

Another simply want to hold onto whats in their wallet and claim women are making babies as 'a career option'.

Another portion saying they should be able to force a woman to have a baby THEY want.

Most, generally agree that American society should not have to support, through taxes or programs destitute or impoverished pregnant women or children. There is little or no social health care in America.

Please, do me a big service here and explain where a woman is supposed to turn when she finds herself pregnant and does not know how to support the last months of pregnancy and the first months of childbirth?

Idealism is all well and good and we have debated it until almost noone has the stomach for it anymore, less the women of the forum.
Does anyone have any solutions, besides eliminating male reproductive responsability, making abortion illegal, and thereby having women to 'wing it' by themselves?

It's all about accountability. Maybe, in a rape in incest case you could abort, but most cases (about 95%) are just because a woman got pregnant that did not to get pregnant. I understand the womens liberation's movement but accountability has to be placed, instead of just aborting and killing a life. If you do not want a baby, don't have sex. If you do have sex, practice birth control, case closed. None of this ooooppps gotta abort stuff. Imagine if your life got aborted...

--Rob

True, men should not have sex if they dont want a baby, or they should use birth control, its all about accountability, completely solves the abortion is murder issue and removes the male as victim problem, also adresses mens reproductive rights, case not only closed but null and void. Take your life into your own hands and stop blaming women, thats an inovative idea!

I like how you simplified it and took jabs at me. It is an issue between men and women, not just men or women by themselves. We both have to work to be accountable for certain situations, one of which is child birth and care. However if 2 teens have sex, unprotected, and then have a child, isn't having an abortion telling kids they do not have to be responsible for their actions? I think so. Then again, I also think about morality and how it effects society.

--Rob

No, actually I was being serious, it was not about you at all. I like your post, as long as your not inferring its WOMEN only who have to comply to it but men also.

Accountability. Perhaps we should allow abortions only for those who used birth control and it failed. No? Weren't they responsible? Perhaps we should allow abortions for rape and incest victims then. They certainly weren't irresponsible....well, wait, what if the rape victim wore a short skirt. Is she then partially responsible for the pregnancy? I am very wary of arguments claiming to want to promote responsible sexual conduct, especially regarding something so life altering. It sounds more like a judgement, and not by a chosen impartial jury or knowledgeable overseer....Women who are forced to have sex should not be punished, women who have sex willingly should be punished. Perhaps we should allow abortions based on the level of sexual enjoyment. There's really no ground to stand on there. The only valid argument against abortion is the 'sanctity of life' one.

My view is that unless I am directly involved, it is not my business to tell women what to do with their own bodies. And should I be directly involved, I'll support the woman in question no matter her decision. However, it is that decision that I view as being a freedom for women. The government has no right to tell a woman that they have to carry a fetus and give birth. That is not their place nor their business. Taking away abortion=taking away a bit more of our freedom.

Nope. They knew that there was a chance on conception, even with the pill. Having no sex is the only way to be 100% sure that you will not get pregnant.



That issue should be up for debate on a case by case basis.



Like I said, case by case. If you walk around naked and don't expect to be raped, you are probably are not in the right state of mind.



Well, murder is a crime/ The fetus is not an alien or an animal, it is a human being. Murder is murder any way you slice it. Yes it is a JUDGEMENT. If you take a risk, sometimes it will bite you in the *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. ***. That is life, be responsible for your actions.



That's rather childish and sarcastic. 95% of the time, abortions are done for women who had sex, don't want the baby because it would be a "hastle" to their everyday lives. Guess what!, they shouldn't have been having sex to begin with if they didn't want a child. Let's get real here. Like I said, pure accountability is the issue at hand. I would also like to add that even if you couldn't take care of the child, there are many people in the US that cannot bear children and would love to adopt a child. All I am saying is think before you act. If you plan on having sex, be for warned, you might get pregnant.

--Rob

Your position (stated directly in your previous post) was that 'sanctity of life' is not an issue for you. Responsibility is the issue. In a nutshell, that is the same as saying women who willingly have sex should expect to be punished if their birthcontrol fails, to teach them a lesson about responsibility.

Now, you put forth the argument that 'murder is a crime'. We've had this argument on numerous threads. If aborting a fetus is a murderous crime, it is a crime whether or not the mother was irresponsible. Is this about saving babies or punishing the sexually active?

Thanks for the lecture on sexual responsibility. There's a lot of those going around on these threads. Your argument is a misogynistic one.

How ridiculous. Just because a woman's birth control fails, she should be expected to have a child? No way. What if a couple NEVER wants a children, then they should never have sex? Lets step into the real world for a minute, why should someone be punished for having sex? I think Mrs. P summed it up nicely. Why should a woman be held accountable to the life a child she went out of her way to avoid? Asking people to stop having sex is like asking people to stop eating, its not ever going to happen.



I just find this appalling, but if they arent in the right state of mind, why would a rape victim be expected to be in the right state of mind to take care of a child?



I think its fairly responsible to get rid of a pregnancy that you know you cant take care of. Do I want mothers running around living off welfare, and/or having to work two jobs to raise a baby that she cant afford to have someone babysit? Nope.

Sorry, had to break out the dictionary for that one. No, I don't think I am a woman hater thank you very much. Using those malicious words is not necessarily the best way to strike forth your argument.



Is getting pregnant the same as punishment? Maybe that is why the birth rate is down, because of dangerous thinking like that. All I was saying is that you know the penalty when you rob a bank is you go to jail, when you murder someone you either go to jail or you die, and when you have sex, you might get pregnant.

Thinking about this, not all of it is accountability, but also about people who are morally bankrupt. If more people learned from birth to take responsibility for their actions, we would have less problems in this world. Then again according to you, one might no be able to learn that from birth because they would be aborted.



It is obviously not about punishing the sexually active. I think you have been so indoctrinated with this womens liberation propaganda (I am not against womens liberation, please do not take me the wrong way, just using that as a point) that you do not see my point as correct. You seem to think that child birth is a punishment. I don't know why but you do. I will say again, if you do not want to get pregnant, don't have sex. It's quite simple.

--Rob

Imagine for a moment that there was a good chance you would be (or were) subject to the following….Extreme nausea, deformity, permanent physical impairment, permanent unfortunate physical alteration, inability to perform your job effectively and subsequent money loss. Breathing impairment, coupled with any asthmatic predisposition aggravated, and severe depression….eventually culminating into extreme injury and pain, with your bank account exhausted, and your nerves frazzled.

Half of the population (which appears to be disproportionately vocal) is unaffected by this affliction, but you are. Now, the never-to-be-afflicted explain that the affliction is necessary to encourage responsible behavior. Does that sound like a punishment to you?

Edited to add: Pregnancy is not always a punishment, but in the context put forth by many on this thread it most certainly is.

In most cases, abortion *IS* taking responsibility for the pregnancy. Realizing that you cannot hope to offer the child a decent life and doing something about it is certainly being responsible. Abortion is often the best of a number of bad options.

As for adoption, you haven't paid any attention to the adoption situation have you? There are thousands upon thousands of children right now waiting for adoption that will never get it. If the baby isn't young, male, white and perfect, it's pretty much out of luck. Adoption isn't an option in many cases and even if, by some stroke of luck, that young, male, white and perfect baby does find adoptive parents, that doesn't change the fact that the mother has to go through 9 months of difficulty, expense and health dangers to get to that point. You cannot hijack someone's body just because you personally don't like abortion.

Here's a hint: If you don't like it, don't have one. Stay out of everyone else's life.

So basically you explain pregnancy to be the same as a bad alcohol or drug habit? Drug and Alcohol habits could result in:

"Extreme nausea, deformity, permanent physical impairment, permanent unfortunate physical alteration, inability to perform your job effectively and subsequent money loss."

or

"Breathing impairment, coupled with any asthmatic predisposition aggravated, and severe depression….eventually culminating into extreme injury and pain, with your bank account exhausted, and your nerves frazzled. "

It's lovely to think that people look the same on the birth of life as they do to drug and alcohol addiction. A drug user knows the penalties that could occur when they do their drugs. Some don't care and figure, " (edit)i'll deal with that when I get to it". That is how most women today think about abortion. "(edit)i'll have sex, worry about conception or std's in the morning"

I find it funny that you support that. Thank you for making my argument for me

--Rob

-Edited to remove banned words filter bybass attempt. -J

You're very welcome
I'd never considered the concept of government enforced drug addiction. I was under the impression that the user was allowed to quit. Thank you for explaining the parallel.

This is exactly the problem with the pro-abortion argument...you view pregnancy as a punishment.

Call me a mysogenist ( ), but my wife and I had our first child before we were married, before either of us had jobs and neither one of us for a second considered abortion as an option. My (then) girlfriend asked me what my opinion was, simply to find out my position, and I explained that it was not and would never be, an option. She agreed wholeheartedly with me.

Contrary to popular opinion, it IS possible to abstain from sex . Ask any unattractive person... You choose to have sex just as you choose to do drugs. Both provide a temporary euphoria, followed by potentially life-altering consequences.

My position: pregnancy is not a punishment unless you have a very negative (or self-centered) attitude. Abortion is wrong.

Sex is no longer an act purely for the purpose of reproduction, Rob. Neither you, society or the government would ever have the authority in a free and democratic nation to prohibit sexuality amongst those citizens who choose to engage sexually for recreational purposes. While birth control is not 100% the use of birth control is taking responsibility for recreational sex.

Sex is a choice whereas conception is not. Even those making ardent attempts to conceive often fail to do so, and many more fail to carry a conception to term.


Elaboration on this would be better suited for the "Abortion(murder)" thread, but briefly: abortion is not murder. While a fetus is human in nature, it is no more a person than an individual sperm or ovum. Attempting to label it murder when it is not recognized as such is misrepresentation.

Pregnancy is not a punishment, but in many cases it is an unwelcome physical condition that the woman has a choice about. A woman can choose to try carrying the pregnancy to term or she can choose to neglect her health or she can choose to directly terminate an unwanted pregnancy. While every abortion qualifies as birth control, most are not merely done because the women wish to avoid a "hastle." Most are done as a result of failed birth control with economic and health issues also being reasons for terminations.

As there is no other person to speak of possessing any right to the woman's body, my view is that pregnancy does not rob a woman of her Constitutional right to her body. It is the responsibility of each woman to take steps to avoid unwanted pregnancy and to take care of any unwanted pregnancies should they occur. Whether they choose abortion, adoption or parenting is the choice and responsibility of each woman.

Edited to add:Pregnancy is not a punishment in itself... the idea that society or government should force a person to attempt carrying to term would be punishment. No woman should be expected or obligated to surrender their bodies to the development of an organism with unknown potential as an individual member of our species and society. Women have, and should continue to have, the right to choose whether they deal with a pregnancy by abortion, adoption or parenting.

Abortion might be wrong, but if so, it is wrong on the premise that taking a life is wrong, not that the woman should be penalized for her behavior. Penalty for a behavior is, by definition, punishment, reagrdless of anyone's personal attitude towards pregnancy.

Edited to add: Let me put it this way...When your wife-to-be explained that she was pregnant, did you both deliberate about your future and come to the conclusion that the child must've been fated to be, and you should make the best of it. Children are a blessing, afterall....or, did you turn to her and say,"Honey, you had sex, so now you need to live up to your responsibilities and deal with it." If she slapped you for the second comment, would that indicate she had a 'bad attitude' towards pregnancy? It's exponentially more insulting coming from an uninvolved third party.

See, that's the nice thing about choice. You and your girlfriend had the option to have an abortion or the option to keep the child. You made a CHOICE! However, instead of a choice, you want to take choices away from everyone, just because you have a personal problem with it.

My wife and I talked about this many years ago and decided that if we ever had an unwanted pregnancy, we wouldn't go the abortion route. That was our CHOICE, and we're both staunchly pro-choice. Our decision isn't any of anyone else's business, any more than yours was, any more than anyone else's is.

News flash: Abortion isn't "wrong". You just want to think so.

I dont necessarily consider pregnancy a punishment for everyone, but it is for me as I dont want children. So does that mean I should never have sex? Ive been married before, and neither of us wanted children, should I simply abstain from sex? Contrary to what some people think, sex isnt just for reproduction, its also a good way to express your love for someone, but I guess I shouldnt do that unless I want a kid, huh?

On the other hand, if someone wants a child and is pregnant, its a call for congratulations, and I would in no way put down someone's choice of having a child. I dont see pregnancy as a punishment if the woman who is pregnant doesnt it see it that way, but the fact is not everyone sees the blessing of a child. Some people dont want them.

And youre damn right I have an extremely self-centered attitude, exactly the reason Im not having childern. So why should self absorbed people be forced to have children they dont want? Do you really want those people taking care of children?

You cant frce people to be responsible and you cant force them to think of unwanted pregnancies as a blessing.

Yes but the covernment has the right to stop murder in it's tracks. Like I said, fone by me if you have sex, go right ahead, but it it bites you in the ###, do the right thing.



I qam going to call you out on this. I feel you just made a false assumption. Please CITE your source that says a fetus is no more human than sperm. If you cannot back it up, which I doubt you can, please step away from the debate.



Is that a typo? Host aren't done because they want to avoid the "hastle", it's because of bad birth control practice??? Isn't that the same thing. Come on......




I tend to believe that a women holds another human inside of her. If a judge can rule two people murdered if a woman is murdered with a fetus in her womb, then shouldn't all fetus's count as human beings according to this? I could be wrong, but I am sure I have seen that happen before. If it did happen, wouldn't that be a double standard? Call me crazy, but I think it would.

--Rob

It would be a double standard, and such cases never receive a double homicide conviction during the first trimester (the legal limit for abortion permitted under Roe, after which time the decision goes to the states). Look at the scream made over the Laci case, in which the 'fetus' was an actual viable baby, well past the point that any rational human being would advocate elective abortion.

There is no murder taking place with abortion, RJ. Murder is the illegal taking of life from another person. Abortion is not illegal, and there is no other person to speak of. Whether you feel it is "right" or not is a personal opinion. There are many things people feel are wrong and have personal objections to without the law seeing it the same.


I've already been over it here:
Abortion(murder)

To sum it up for you, both gametes and a fertilized egg (until viability independent of the woman) represent only the potential to become persons. While both qualify as both human and alive, neither qualify as individual persons. If you have a contention, I would ask that you take it up in the other thread intended for such elaboration.


I never said "bad birth control practice" so I would appreciate you cease attempts to misrepresent my position. I stated "failed birth control" which doesn't have any necessary tie to bad practice as there is no applicable birth control method achieving a 100% success rate at this time.

Mrs.Pigpen has already addressed the remainder of your post, though I would stress the importance of the word viability in her post.

I rechecked the question posed in this thread, and it states, "What is your view on abortion," not what is considered the scientifically correct view. The question is calling for an opinion, a value judgement. Therefore, it's up to the posters whether they want to back up their views with links to this or that.

My view is fairly well-known here: Abortion is a needless death in altogether too many cases. When it is undertaken in a cavalier and/or repetitive manner, I believe that it is akin to murder. While I acknowledge the reasons a woman would have to remove the life in her womb, I also believe that if there is any other way to solve the woman's dilemma without hurting the unborn child, it should be undertaken.

Life is the basic thing we share, if we survive beyond birth. We can have no expectation of having anything else in common with the richest or the poorest person on earth. Whether a child's needs are met in their individual circumstances is the responsibility of those around him/her.

While overpopulation is common in many areas of the world, many problems could be solved by the populace consciously helping the helpless, rather than callously suggesting that termination of the pregnancy is the solution to the problems of an inhospitable world.

In India, women have CAT scans to determine the gender of the baby, and most have abortions if the child is female. As a consequence, India is facing a dearth of females for the boys who will be coming of age for marriage.

That is why education and proper nourishment are vital. Abortion is not a panacea; the same women who aborted, if their reproductive systems aren't damaged, will again become pregnant and suffer from malnutrition and lack of education if their basic needs are not met. Abortion does not relieve friends and family of their basic responsibility to love and support each other.

Yes, and eventually, it will end up something like that in america. "Populace consciously helping the helpless" will never happen. It has too much of a socialist flavor to it.



Oh, so now we open up a new can of worms here. So in this case you feel the fetus was a human being, but, in other cases you don't. And you say rational as if everybody would support your opinion on this. That my friend is a double standard, and a silly one at that. Like I said, show me the scientific evidence that proves a fetus is not a human. I was not privey to the other threads of conversation, and I do not care to read over 25 pages of whiney propaganda about how you all justify killing unborn babies. All I want is the proof.

--Rob

i think I expalined myself very well in the post. No rational human being would advocate elective abortion during the eighth month. That is a baby. The first trimester (when elective abortions are universally legal throughout the states) is not a baby, it is a potential baby. Abortion is the topic, not viable infanticide. If you choose to believe there is no difference between an eight week old fetus or a eight month old, there's no point in arguing with you. The law disagrees with you on that point.

So, in essence, you are saying the law is always 100% correct. That is a BOLD statement. All I asked for was proof, not law. Scientific proof is better evidence than law. You could always find some slanted judge make a law that is just dumb. Example would be how 14 year old girls in Florida can get abortions without their parents knowing. What a wonderful idea that was. Show me proof, don't just do a drive by saying that it's not worth arguing. I am a show me person, convince me.

--Rob

Show you what? Proof that an eight month old fetus is more viable than an eight week old and can survive outside of the womb?

Your avoiding the point. Show me proof, a website, some scientific records, something. All you do is respond back sarcasticly. Is that any way to argue?

--Rob

Are you following the course of this discussion at all? Let me refresh your memory....

You said that it was hypocritical to charge a person with double homicide when a pregnant woman was murdered. I explained that double homicides are only charged after the point of viability, when elective abortions are banned in almost all states. You maintained (for reasons which still elude me) that this was hypocrisy on my part. I explained myself (virtually the same) a second time, indicating that the law recognizes the difference between an eight week old fetus and an eight month old one. You asked (twice now) for scientific proof, accusing me of responding sarcastically and arguing ineffectively. That about sums it up. Please explain to me tha point I'm avoiding in all this.

I explained to you that law is not always 100% correct. Before the civil war, it was legal to own slaves. Law proves nothing in this case. Please show me proof that an 8 week old fetus is not a human, but an 8 month old is. It is a simple request.

--Rob

An eight week old fetus is not a viable, developed human. Get a biology book. An eight month old is.

Ok well, I asked for proof 3 times, you do not seem to want to debate. **looks up at url http://www.americasDEBATE.com** hmm......

I will bow out until someone wants to have a rational discussion with facts to back up their points.


--Rob

Did I say a fetus was an undeveloped tomato?

Could we try and have a constructive debate on this issue, please?

P.S. If anyone thinks it's time to close all the abortion threads and open a fresh, new one, PM me. If I get enough response, we'll do that.

And since abortion isn't murder, fine and dandy. Did you have a point with this?

The government has no right to interfere in the private lives of its citizens.



Please show where anyone has ever claimed that a fetus wasn't human. Please show us why it makes a difference if a fetus is human.

Once you realize the fetus is human, you need to then consider that it could be viewed as murder.

--Rob

The reason that I support a woman's right to choose abortion is a simple one.

It is my firm belief that in the first trimester (3 months) of pregnancy there is
no soul or spirit present (inside the body). Therefore, whatever is forming is merely a piece of matter. The potential for "life" may be there, but it has not yet been claimed or realized.