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.
A lot of “pro-life” people have inconsistent beliefs and believe there are some circumstances where it’s acceptable. For me, the absolute only acceptable reason is ectopic pregnancy and I feel they should be trying harder to do fetal transplants. It’s been done and they stopped trying for some reason. At least they could say they tried. Any other reason is unacceptable and arguably not aligned with believing all lives are valuable.
A lot of “pro-life” people have inconsistent beliefs and believe there are some circumstances where it’s acceptable. For me, the absolute only acceptable reason is ectopic pregnancy and I feel they should be trying harder to do fetal transplants. It’s been done and they stopped trying for some reason. At least they could say they tried. Any other reason is unacceptable and arguably not aligned with believing all lives are valuable.
Link for the bolded?
So you think a ten year old should be forced to carry a pregnancy?
Sounds like she was basing her comments on the fact that it has been shown that because of her age carrying the baby to term could endanger her life. All but a few extremely radical Pro-Life people have always said that there should be exceptions when the health or safety of the mother is at stake.
But yea...let's get hung up on semantics instead of thinking that there could actually be some exceptions and some points that people on both sides could agree on. Where instead of coming together, let's bash the testimony to make political points...
It definitely is an abortion and she needs to think long and hard about what she said. If she believes that ten year old rape victims should be allowed exceptions, she should be honest and make sure they are allowed expectations.
Sounds like she was basing her comments on the fact that it has been shown that because of her age carrying the baby to term could endanger her life. All but a few extremely radical Pro-Life people have always said that there should be exceptions when the health or safety of the mother is at stake.
But yea...let's get hung up on semantics instead of thinking that there could actually be some exceptions and some points that people on both sides could agree on. Where instead of coming together, let's bash the testimony to make political points...
There are lots of women for whom carrying the baby to term could endanger her life, women over 40, cancer patients, obesity, etc.
If in fact the pregnancy is actually endangering the life of a 10 year old then it is an exception.
I am pro-choice, but if abortion is being banned or restricted on the basis of the embryo/fetus being a living person and thus aborting the pregnancy is murdering a person, there should be NO exceptions other than imminent risk of the mother's life. Our laws do allow murder in situations of self-defense.
I'm noticing how Huffpo calls it abortion for a child but you used the word girl in your thread title.
Hopefully in the future you will be more diverse and will not assume it's a girl getting an abortion.
Also instead of an abortion we'll call it a choice process. You know, that's why they say they're pro-choice, not pro-abortion.
If it's done illegally we'll call it an undocumented choice process.
But I appreciate the outrage from Huffpo and others about how saying an abortion is an abortion because that's what the word means...when it's convenient for them.
So for forced-birth activists, this is all just a question of semantics? Okay pro-lifers: when is an abortion not really an abortion?
An abortion is a medical procedure - it doesn't become something different just because you personally feel the circumstances are justified.
I agree with you. An abortion is an abortion. It does not change its nature because of extenuating circumstances. Similarly, a baby doesn’t magically become a baby only after taking its first breath of air outside the womb, but was just as much a baby while still inside the womb. So, an abortion is an abortion, just as a baby is a baby. So be careful, as that knife cuts both ways.
One of the biggest obstacles to reaching some type of productive conversation is the unwillingness to be honest. And the pro-abortion side is flagrantly guilty of being dishonest at every turn. In all fairness, the pro-life side has its own extremists too. Some of them are so dogmatic that they even reject the legitimacy of birth control. That mindset amazes me just as much as the other side’s refusal to acknowledge a baby as anything other than a clump of cells.
Extremists on both sides now dominate the debate, and actually create each other. And this is the world we live in nowadays, and the first casualty in such wars between extremists is common sense.
While I am fundamentally opposed to abortion as a general practice, I recognize there must be exceptions to deal with extraordinary situations, such as victims of rape, and especially so when it involves a young child, and also when the mother’s life is legitimately in danger.
And this is where extremists on one side tend to create the opposition. The pro-choice crowd, rather than accepting the rational concessions in certain circumstances, choose to condemn the compromise, and exploit it.
There are lots of women for whom carrying the baby to term could endanger her life, women over 40, cancer patients, obesity, etc.
If in fact the pregnancy is actually endangering the life of a 10 year old then it is an exception.
I am pro-choice, but if abortion is being banned or restricted on the basis of the embryo/fetus being a living person and thus aborting the pregnancy is murdering a person, there should be NO exceptions other than imminent risk of the mother's life. Our laws do allow murder in situations of self-defense.
Yup. If I agreed with the utter nonsense about children being a living person from the moment of conception I would feel the same. Anything else is hypocrisy of the worst sort. Once you say you think that way, then abortion just because the parent is 10 is still murder. Raped and pregnant? Why would we allow a murder to occur of a innocent because of another crime?
Fortunately I DO NOT agree with that nonsense. And down deep neither do the vast majority. A lot of people get upset with the folks saying no exceptions, but they at least have a actual belief. I disagree with it, but they are being honest. The rest to me seem to be just hypocrites.
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.
