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.
1. Because, if every fetus is a person, and equally deserving of life, then it would not be OK for someone to stand back and wait until it was "murdered" and then prosecute. Do we do that with serial killers? Nope. We try to prevent the next murder by finding them and stopping them before the next murder takes place.
2. I do think there are pro-lifers who believe abortion is murder, and though I don't agree with them, I appreciate they are consistent.
3. Others, I believe, despise that women have legal control in this issue, They resent it and want to punish women for not only having the last say,
4. but also for being sexually active while not wishing to reproduce.
1. The thing is that serial killers don't live inside someone else's body. Thus, even if one is politically anti-abortion, one should acknowledge that these are different circumstances than other cases and should thus perhaps be treated differently. Also, even from a politically anti-abortion perspective, I don't think that it would be a good idea to consider abortion to be murder; perhaps manslaughter or something like that would be a better fit for this.
2. Good; however, I don't think that I said anything inconsistent here.
3. As I stated before, if I was advocating a politically anti-abortion position, then I would primarily be focusing on results, and if prosecution and jailing is a way to achieve better results, then I would not see why I shouldn't support such things.
4. Regardless of what my views on the abortion issue will be, I have no problem with females or males being sexually active if everything is consensual and whatnot.
Feminists claim to care about women, they claim to care about ALL women's rights and well-being, often times at the expense of men, but yet they support abortion. How can you truly care about women's rights if you support the violation of the Right to Life of other women? And the brutal murder of baby girls in the womb? That's definitely not within their well being is it? How would you like it if someone did that to you?
This is why the feminist movement has no credibility and why it should be completely ignored until they change their stance on abortion (and hating men). I'm all for women having equal pay and dissolving the glass ceiling, but you don't have to be a feminist to support those things, and I won't support the feminist movement because they support baby killing (abortion is a PC term). Plus I am a man so they never wanted my support anyway. I actually care more about women and their rights than they do as I want all baby girls to live, they do not.
I'm going to go out for some lunch, I will check back on this thread later.
Wow, you found an airtight loophole that nobody ever thought of before because pro-choice people totally consider the fetus a person, and therefore a "woman" or "man." Abortion's going to just disappear now.
Not really. And your little bit isn't even all that consistent. If the feminists were really anti-men, they'd wait until the sex could be determined and abort the male ones.
1. The thing is that serial killers don't live inside someone else's body. Thus, even if one is politically anti-abortion, one should acknowledge that these are different circumstances than other cases and should thus perhaps be treated differently. Also, even from a politically anti-abortion perspective, I don't think that it would be a good idea to consider abortion to be murder; perhaps manslaughter or something like that would be a better fit for this.
2. Good; however, I don't think that I said anything inconsistent here.
3. As I stated before, if I was advocating a politically anti-abortion position, then I would primarily be focusing on results, and if prosecution and jailing is a way to achieve better results, then I would not see why I shouldn't support such things.
4. Regardless of what my views on the abortion issue will be, I have no problem with females or males being sexually active if everything is consensual and whatnot.
I'm baffled. By your responses I can only gather that it's not about the individual fetuses. Why, exactly, are you anti-abortion, politically? Why do you want the result to be fewer abortions (I think all of us do) if the individuals (fetus) is only worthy of a manslaughter charge? What difference does it make?
I'm baffled. By your responses I can only gather that it's not about the individual fetuses. Why, exactly, are you anti-abortion, politically? Why do you want the result to be fewer abortions (I think all of us do) if the individuals (fetus) is only worthy of a manslaughter charge? What difference does it make?
Really? How about fewer unplanned pregnancies in the first place?
That would be fine. But when it comes to abortion, I believe it's a woman's choice. Be they few or many is of no concern to me, only weak-willed liberals easily cowed by the right say things like abortion should be legal, but rare (a statement Bill Clinton made and Obama essentially echoed). It should be legal and I don't care if it's rare or not.
We have had this discussion before. We have yet to do something with the hundreds of thousands of kids born unwanted who are already in the system. There was no bond between mother and child because the child was put up for adoption. Who are the advocates for these children who are looking for a loving home. The outcry and outrage should be for children already here. I don't see that at all.
"In the USA, there are approximately two million infertile couples waiting to adopt, many times regardless of the child’s medical problems such as Down Syndrome, Spina Bifida, HIV infection or terminally ill. Dr. Brad Imler, President of America’s Pregnancy Helpline, confirms the challenge of waiting couples by stating: “Only 1% of the Helpline’s annual 40,000 clients inquires about adoption.”
1. Again, one would advocate prosecuting females if they will actually get abortions.
2. This is because other factors, such as contraception accessibility, the prevalence of comprehensive sex ed, et cetera, are different in various countries. If all other factors in all countries were completely equal/the same, then I strongly suspect that the countries with abortion bans will have lower abortion rates than the countries without abortion bans.
By the same token, countries with NO limits on abortion should have higher rates of the same. That's not necessarily true.
Canada has no limits, and our abortion rate is lower than yours.
That would be fine. But when it comes to abortion, I believe it's a woman's choice. Be they few or many is of no concern to me, only weak-willed liberals easily cowed by the right say things like abortion should be legal, but rare (a statement Bill Clinton made and Obama essentially echoed). It should be legal and I don't care if it's rare or not.
Well that is the epitome of not giving this subject any thought. Because even most "pro-choicers" will admit that abortion carries with it its own risks, physical if not emotional/psychological, rare as they may be. Though you boast the proclamation that it's the woman's choice, how pro-woman are you really if you literally do not care how often women choose to/have to put themselves at said risks?
Prochoice.org - Safety of Abortion (keep in mind the real statistics may be higher, this is from a website devoted to supporting abortion)
And this "weak will" you're commenting on is a natural moderation of the mind, trying to keep the individual from becoming an extremist. More people should reevaluate their stances more often. It would do wonders for us all to stop pretending the issue is oh so simple.
That would be fine. But when it comes to abortion, I believe it's a woman's choice. Be they few or many is of no concern to me, only weak-willed liberals easily cowed by the right say things like abortion should be legal, but rare (a statement Bill Clinton made and Obama essentially echoed). It should be legal and I don't care if it's rare or not.
By 'rare', they meant that we should as a nation try to remove the barriers that keep women from being able to carry every pregnancy to term. Things like economic disparity between men and women (most abortions happen for economic reasons), improving prenatal health care (avoiding abortions due to fetal health issues), and domestic violence.
ACA is helping with the prenatal care -- despite shouts from the Right -- and a report this morning came out saying that American women have saved $485 Million on contraceptives since ACA. Make medical contraceptives cheaper and more widely available and the incidence of abortion will drop. Not being dependent on a man to get contraception right every time was one of the leading factors in the improvement of women's lives as delaying childbirth is a huge contributor to the improvement of health not only of the woman, but of any children she does have later on.
Unfortunately, many so-called 'pro-life' groups are also vehemently against birth control. The logic there escapes me entirely.
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.
