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.
Of course doctors do not have crystal balls, that is why it is impossible to limit abortions to pregnancies that endanger a woman's life......because doctors cannot always tell which pregnancies are going to take a woman's life!
That means that every single woman who decides to carry a pregnancy to term is taking the risk that doing so could kill her and no doctor can promise her it won't.
Government has no right to force a woman to risk death against her will......
........just like government has no right to force you to risk your life by giving up a piece of your liver just because it could save the life of a child.
BTW.....would you be willing to take the very small risk of losing your life by donating a part of your liver to save the life of a child? ....if possible, how about giving up a part of your liver to save the life of a fetus?.....since you seem to be so very concerned about their right to life.
You're in the grip of desperation and not making any sense at all. I have no doubt that under the right circumstances, people who think like you would slaughter their children post-birth if their was any convenience to be gained, and immunity from prosecution present. Selfishness beyond belief.
Personally I don't care, but those are clearly state issues in our federal system. DOMA was unconstitutional, but swinging past that and requiring gay marriage is not the federal government's prerogative.
Roe was a terrible decision because it was legal nonsense and was out of line with the country's politics. These issues really must be decided at the ballot box and not the bench. Judicial activism also gives cover to do-nothing legislators who kick controversial decisions to the courts.
No..Roe vs. Wade being removed would be no different than allowing the states to decide themselves on other intolerable actions, like, say, legally mandating that all fetuses with genetic disorders be aborted.
We wouldn't let the states decide to euthanize all of one ethnic group, even if most voters wanted that. Our government isn't strictly ruled by mob rule. Rather than that, we have the sense to mandate that certain basic rights be nationally available. That's just common sense. Roe v. Wade is required. Removing it would be the first step to turning America into a Christian version of Iran. I could very easily imagine pretty much the same thing that happened in Iran happening in America. They used to be more secular too.
It's entirely understandable that sensible people would be outraged if Roe v. Wade were to be removed. In fact, every sensible person would he outraged if Roe v. Wade would be removed.
The argument is, if our culture encourages more-responsible behavior, then it would actually improve the lives of children far more than by making abortions easier to get. And could theoretically eliminate the need for abortions altogether.
Another concern of many conservatives is "no-fault divorce". It isn't that they want to force unhappy people to stay married. It is that, by making divorce easier to get, you end up with more divorce. Which usually means, more broken homes, and all the ills associated with it(which affect children the most).
Anyone who wants to make divorce harder is an idiot. It's nobody's damn business who divorces who except for the couple doing the divorcing.
If people are getting divorced more often because it's easier...clearly their marriage didn't matter much to them anyway, so it wouldn't matter if they get divorced or not.
This is the type of attitude we need more of. If someone is against abortion by all means get out there and educate people. Speak, pass out info, help those struggling with unwanted pregnancy to find a better solution than abortion. Those who want to sit around complaining and demanding we pass laws because of their personal feelings on an issue are what we need less of. We also need more people who live in this reality, not some dream reality where eveyone is perfect and always does the right thing. Worldwide 47K women die from unsafe abortions each year. I do not want to see Americans add to the numbers.
Banning abortion does not eliminate it, it simply drives it underground. This is already happening in US states that limit abortions. If someone actually cares about those unborn children, do something real to help. Sitting around self righteously preaching and demanding we pass laws that don't work, take away rights, and end up hurting many women is lazy and selfish.
No woman needs to justify to anyone else why she wants an abortion. It's her body and her right. Near 70% of Americans support a woman's right to have an abortion. It's not going anywhere, some states will keep trying to restrict it and as that continues we will likely see more consequences affecting poor women. Women with resources will just go elsewhere to have it done.
That's a mentality that I see as a success. It shows empathy and consideration for multiple perspectives. It's a healthy mentality.
A little off topic here, this is exactly why women's first and foremost responsibility is herself. I am not saying a woman should be selfish, but losing herself for the sake of another man is just a total waste of time.
I believe a pregnancy is two people's responsibility. My fiance always says "if WE are pregnant, I will be the best support for you." I think this is the great attitude. This said, If I do decide to get an abortion (if being the keyword), I would ask his opinion, and we will make a decision together. If I decide to go with an abortion without telling the man, then I don't feel I have the right to "demand" support. If a woman wanted the child, but the man didn't, then I don't believe the woman should "demand" monetary help from the man. Sounds harsh, but it is what it is for me. This is my opinion about the whole thing. That is why woman should have the total control of her body.
In your friend's case, the man is a total jerk. The woman got an abortion for him, I am not saying he owes her a relationship, but he should have been there for her. Taking care of her and offering some monetary help at the very least.
No..Roe vs. Wade being removed would be no different than allowing the states to decide themselves on other intolerable actions, like, say, legally mandating that all fetuses with genetic disorders be aborted.
We wouldn't let the states decide to euthanize all of one ethnic group, even if most voters wanted that. Our government isn't strictly ruled by mob rule. Rather than that, we have the sense to mandate that certain basic rights be nationally available. That's just common sense. Roe v. Wade is required. Removing it would be the first step to turning America into a Christian version of Iran. I could very easily imagine pretty much the same thing that happened in Iran happening in America. They used to be more secular too.
It's entirely understandable that sensible people would be outraged if Roe v. Wade were to be removed. In fact, every sensible person would he outraged if Roe v. Wade would be removed.
That's why there's little chance of it beng overturned. The SC is not going to go against the opinions of the vast majority of Americans on such hugely divisive issues. The SC didn't rule in favor of gay marriage until the public was largely in favor of it. To command the public's respect, the court must pay attention to the public. History, shows this is what the court has done, whether they admit it or not. They aren't going to risk their power (and for Rs, their party), at a time when many recent decisions and appointments have been quite unpopular.
I'm fully in support of providing free, easy to obtain BC for everyone. It would likely decrease the amount of abortions performed. Unfortunately, it's often the same people who want to ban abortion that fight subsidized BC. Many of these people also fight against sex education. They live in a dream world where parents preaching abstinence only means people stop having sex and unwanted pregnancies don't happen all the time.
Those of us living in reality know that kids are going to have sex, BC or not. Plenty of parents never even talk to their kids about sex, and getting BC can be difficult and expensive.
I hava Idea on how to (mostly) solve this issue! Looks like there are 2-5 million abortions per year in the U.S... There are far more Pro Lifers than abortions.
For those who are Pro Life, please sign-up to adopt an about to be aborted fetus. Or, at least, sign-up to financially support the fetus if it’s born
Maybe we should implement a lottery. Submit your name and we’ll see if you win the lottery.
This system ain’t perfect, but, it should reduce abortions!
It'd still cause unnecessary pain and physical hardship for mothers who didn't want a child though, and it would somewhat punish the child being born with being placed into a family out of their sense of duty, rather than genuinely wanting it though.
Early abortion would probably be the more humane route the vast majority of the time.
You show an horrifyingly depressing total lack of rational thought in your rumination.
No...that's you, the one who failed to comment in any worthwhile detail on my intelligent and carefully thought out statement, or my other intelligent and carefully thought out statements, which made perfect sense and I have a right to be proud of. Here is that shining example of the ideal Citi-Data post again: //www.city-data.com/forum/53349714-post548.html
What a surprise it is that you didn't care enough to explain why I'm wrong (sarcasm). That's not surprising because you clearly don't care about anything besides your delusional fantasy land, or else your statements would show some kind of empathy for someone. instead, your comments have repeatedly shown you neither give a rat's behind about children, or their parents, or whether or not you change the minds of people reading this thread. You just don't seem to care. You don't engage in intelligent discussion. Your comments for, at minimum, the last 20 pages of this thread have been almost entirely snarky, un-informative comments, that usually are incorrect.
I suppose another thing you might care about, in addition to maintaining your fantasy land you live within, is your ego. You don't care about convincing me of anything because you didn't try. You just responded with a snarky push-back post. You, apparently, just cared that I wounded your ego.
My comments, on the other hand, are usually intended to try to change someone's mind somehow. Even when I just respond with snark, that's just to try to get people to think more about things they should have already been thinking about. I do, often, explain my views in quite a lot of detail though. Be more like that to get more respect.
This is the type of attitude we need more of. If someone is against abortion by all means get out there and educate people. Speak, pass out info, help those struggling with unwanted pregnancy to find a better solution than abortion. Those who want to sit around complaining and demanding we pass laws because of their personal feelings on an issue are what we need less of. We also need more people who live in this reality, not some dream reality where eveyone is perfect and always does the right thing. Worldwide 47K women die from unsafe abortions each year. I do not want to see Americans add to the numbers.
Banning abortion does not eliminate it, it simply drives it underground. This is already happening in US states that limit abortions. If someone actually cares about those unborn children, do something real to help. Sitting around self righteously preaching and demanding we pass laws that don't work, take away rights, and end up hurting many women is lazy and selfish.
No woman needs to justify to anyone else why she wants an abortion. It's her body and her right. Near 70% of Americans support a woman's right to have an abortion. It's not going anywhere, some states will keep trying to restrict it and as that continues we will likely see more consequences affecting poor women. Women with resources will just go elsewhere to have it done.
If roe v wade was overturned it would not ban abortions nationwide. It would become a states issue which is where this decision belongs.
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.
