Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If that isn't government overreach, I don't what the hell is.
Are you also against forcing individuals to get prostate exams as a part of their check-ups if they want to get everything else done but not the prostate exams?
Not exactly true. Not only do liberals and conservatives fit on a spectrum that overlaps on issues such as abortion, but abortion is an emotional and social debate, not a science debate. Science has very little to do with abortion since personhood is a human construct, not a scientific one.
There are both good and bad arguments on both sides. There two best arguments in favour abortion are:
1) People will do it anyway (harm deduction argument)
2) You can't legislate morality
There are also weak arguments in favour of abortion:
1) Science is on our side
2) Tradition (personhood has always been bestowed at birth)
Likewise, the pro-life side has stronger and weaker arguments. Stronger:
1) The foetus is human, and thus should have rights.
2) Life begins at conception, and thus abortion should be murder.
Weak arguments:
1) Minorities and poor people get disproportionately more abortions
2) You can legislate morality
Let me try responding to/commenting on all of these arguments.
1. People will also commit infanticide, rape, post-natal killing, theft, assault, domestic violence, child abuse, et cetera anyway. Should we make these things legal?
2. Many, if not most or all, of our current laws do legislate morality. Some examples of this would be the things which I said in #1 which are currently banned.
1. Yeah, this is a weak argument.
2. But then why are elective abortions illegal past viability (and/or past another stage of development, such as in some European countries)?
1. This is a decent argument, but one needs to elaborate on this.
2. The life at conception thing is a good point, but one needs to elaborate on this, and abortion should not necessarily be murder as opposed to manslaughter, et cetera.
1. Yeah, this is a bad argument.
2. Actually, as I pointed out above, this is an extremely strong argument.
Not always--in fact, the courts might have sometimes helped anti-abortion people--for instance, remember who the U.S. SC supported in 2000? Remember which U.S. SC Justices Bush Jr. appointed?
Oh, and for the record, I have some online friends who are pretty knowledgeable in regards to the U.S. Constitution and/or Constitutional law who disagree with these courts' rulings.
I wasn't really talking about the man here, but rather about the prenatal human being.
Of course, the man's interests in regards to being forced to pay child support does make abortion affect him as well.
Even if that wasn't your original argument, the fact remains the same when it gets boiled down to it:
Her body, her choice. You can be as anti-abortion as you want and I can be as pro-abortion as I want, but the only person who can decide whether or not to get an abortion is the pregnant woman.
Her body, her choice.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
