Why do you think it is ok to abort a lifeform (or potential lifeform) just because a birthing lifeform cannot use free condoms (fromPP), free birth control pills (from PP), or the free day after pill (from PP) or even abstain from sex during the 3-4 days a month of ovulation, or just engage in oral sex for those 3-4 days, or engage in anal sex for those 3-4 days? Elective abortions make up 95-97% of all abortions, meaning the abortion is not due to rape, incest, or life /health of the birthing lifeform.
Serious question for pro-choice folks...
- Thread starter ribbont
- Start date
Link? Peer reviewed study, please. Failed miscarriages alone, then assisted by surgical abortion, are way, way WAY more common than that alleged 3-5%.
Because it should be the choice of the birthing life form if they prefer to be responsible for a life forever.
You do understand that many of the same wackos who oppose any abortion also oppose BIRTH CONTROL, right?
So what happens if the "free contraceptives" you mentioned are criminalized/banned?
And SCOTUS ruled that the issue of abortion should be decided by "states". So does that mean thru a statewide plebiscite where it's essentially one person one vote and the population of that state gets a say? If so, I have no issue with the way Kansas wants to decide the question
Final day to register to vote before election on Kansas abortion amendment is Tuesday
Here’s what you need to know to register to vote before the August 2 primaries in Kansas.
Or does that mean gerrymandered Legislators in states like WI and PA ? For example in the state of WI Dem/Pub voter registration is basically even and in PA Dems actually have a fairly significant lead in voter registration. Polls in both states show widespread support for Roe. So if it's Legislators making that decision instead of allowing the people of the state to actually vote on the issue, then why is the minority controlling the political destiny as well as the life choices of the majority?
Got it from Guttmacher.
Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions: Quantitative and Qualitative Perspectives
Public discussion about abortion in the United States has generally focused on policy: who should be allowed to have abortions, and under what circumstances. Receiving less attention are the women behind the statistics—the 1.3 million women who obtain abortions each year1—and their reasons for...
Now instead of focusing on what %, how about answering the question.
Great! So with better/easier adoption services, you are for eliminating elective abortions, as am I.
You do understand that many of the same wackos who oppose any abortion also oppose BIRTH CONTROL, right?
So what happens if the "free contraceptives" you mentioned are criminalized/banned?
And SCOTUS ruled that the issue of abortion should be decided by "states". So does that mean thru a statewide plebiscite where it's essentially one person one vote and the population of that state gets a say? If so, I have no issue with the way Kansas wants to decide the question
Final day to register to vote before election on Kansas abortion amendment is Tuesday
Here’s what you need to know to register to vote before the August 2 primaries in Kansas.www.yahoo.com
Or does that mean gerrymandered Legislators in states like WI and PA ? For example in the state of WI Dem/Pub voter registration is basically even and in PA Dems actually have a fairly significant lead in voter registration. Polls in both states show widespread support for Roe. So if it's Legislators making that decision instead of allowing the people of the state to actually vote on the issue, then why is the minority controlling the political destiny as well as the life choices of the majority?
TLDR. But you deflected well from my question and never answered it.
When does that choice end and why? Shouldn't they logically be able to have that choice after the child is born?
Nonresponsive.You do understand that many of the same wackos who oppose any abortion also oppose BIRTH CONTROL, right?
So what happens if the "free contraceptives" you mentioned are criminalized/banned?
And SCOTUS ruled that the issue of abortion should be decided by "states". So does that mean thru a statewide plebiscite where it's essentially one person one vote and the population of that state gets a say? If so, I have no issue with the way Kansas wants to decide the question
Final day to register to vote before election on Kansas abortion amendment is Tuesday
Here’s what you need to know to register to vote before the August 2 primaries in Kansas.
Or does that mean gerrymandered Legislators in states like WI and PA ? For example in the state of WI Dem/Pub voter registration is basically even and in PA Dems actually have a fairly significant lead in voter registration. Polls in both states show widespread support for Roe. So if it's Legislators making that decision instead of allowing the people of the state to actually vote on the issue, then why is the minority controlling the political destiny as well as the life choices of the majority?
Maybe 50-100 years from now, as technology has advanced, scientists, philosophers and medical ethicists are going to look back at the abortion industry and wonder at how barbaric this era was/is. They’ll shake their heads at how cavalierly so many treated human life and wonder how medical professionals could live with themselves.
We’ll not see it, but I believe science will eventually prevail and any “unwanted” child, early in the process, will be able to be transferred from the womb and transplanted into an “artificial womb” so that the life can continue and the child can be born and then the child can be raised appropriately by loving parents.
As with slavery, there will be those on the wrong side of history, despite their denial and protestations.
No, not at all. I love how men act like carrying and delivering after 9 months is no big deal.
Ok. So it's not about caring for a life forever, like you posted. Rather it's really about the 9 months of pregnancy. Am I understanding you correctly?
BTW, I don't know any man who thinks it is no big deal to be pregnant.
This isn't a real question. It's just an argument disguised as one. I can't believe people fell for it and answered.
No you don’t understand correctly. Like everything in life, it’s not singular. There are multiple factions to consider. Which is why it’s a personal decision between physician and pregnant being.
It is the mirror of the thread TMFT started.
It is starting the same discussion. The discussion that would or could be had between these two threads is exactly the type of discussion that we are going to be having as a country.I won't insult your intelligence by pretending you actually believe that.
I don't want to put words into Zeke's mouth but it appears that if a woman could find a doctor to do it, that she would be cool with abortion up to the point where the baby has crowned? Gotten fully out of the birth canal? At any rate, really late. That is a position that is every bit as extreme as someone who would not allow abortion for rape or incest. It is also about the most logically consistent position a pro-choice individual could have. If it is truly a choice between a woman and her doctor, then why should there be any arbitrary cut off point before then? And if you do place an arbitrary cutoff point before then, that means you are placing value on the child pre-birth.
Eventually everyone is going to have to confront their inconsistencies.
No, you're just going to let your biases get in the way. The most logically consistent argument for Pro-Life is no abortions, ever. The most logically consistent argument for Pro-Choice is abortions up until birth. Of course, most people are against both of those position because they are extremely stupid and/or immoral. As for the other thread, people answered TMFT honestly and he is purposely being obtuse. If you can't understand the difference between having an abortion because you don't want a child and because of rape, it's pointless to even discuss the issue.I won't insult your intelligence by pretending you actually believe that.
Last edited:
You're far too optimistic.
About 140,000 children are adopted each year in the U.S; on any given day, there are nearly 428,000 children in foster care in the United States.
US Adoption Statistics | Adoption Network
US Adoption Statistics may surprise you as nearly 100 million Americans have adoption in their immediate family. Learn more here.
adoptionnetwork.com
These numbers will get worse as the Republicans work to eliminate and restrict contraception, birth control and sex education.
Well my personal reason for supporting abortion rights above and beyond the obvious fubar complications that will now happen because we've made it so restrictive and absolute, along with the obvious right to privacy Pandora's box that we just opened (can the state, which now represents the child's best interest, now override other parental decisions) is that I have zero confidence that conservatives that are pushing this have made any kind of legit preparations for the impacts of this decision.
To me it's a circle of idiocy based on emotional reactions.
Pass something that will likely cause a birthing spike but have zero contingency on how to handle that birthing spike.
Who is covering the massive increase in health care costs? Are we expanding and upgrading the foster care that will now be taken on a huge wave.
I've seen arguments that the sex trafficking industry prays on the foster care system so....I'm sure it's happy to have more displaced children.
More broken homes, more likely crime, more people addicted to drugs, more homelessness.
The pubs have been ranting about how fatherless homes are the root of all evil in the country....then you push to have more fatherless children as a percent of the population. Again, nice job.
As far as the morality of it, I go back to my personal experience. I supposedly had complications. I was born breach (tore my mother up in birth) and then got an infection and had to have surgery. Add to it I was circumsized then also (which I appreciated later on lol).
I don't remember any of it. My first memories was at Kings Island when I was 3.
What I'm getting at is life development. A skin tag is technically life. An embryo is the start of life...but is it life?
We can freeze embryos.
Can we freeze babies?
Roe was the great compromise. I get how in some arguments compromise is the worst outcome (like slavery, there really is no compromise to making people slaves. It's a 100% moral question). I know for some abortion is not a compromise, particularly those that have destroyed the great compromise that we had for half a century so please spare me this 'its just going to the states' BS.
I personally believe in the original compromise but since you guys want to blow that up than I support the right to that decision to be left up to who's most impacted and who has to do the actual work to bear the fruit of that labor.
Since you're making me have to choose.
I absolutely did not read this OP that way, but now you've explained it, I concede the point. TMFT wrote more clearly, but they do both point at the same issue.
Declining populations could also be a major reason for changing laws on abortion, at some point.
Similar threads
Do we need a 3rd party to end the forever wars?
- anon_6hv78pr714xta
- The Water Cooler 2
