U.S. Still Split on Abortion: 47% Pro-Choice, 46% Pro-Life.

  • 54 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Master_Live (15404 posts) -

No decline in voters who prioritize abortion issue, now at 19%

------------------------------------------------------

Unlike gay marriage, I don't see this topic being settled in the public arena for the foreseeable future, if ever.

#2 Edited by helwa1988 (2114 posts) -

I think it is utterly disgusting men are more pro life than women are. It is heartless for a woman to kill their own child or support other women doing it. What we need to be supporting is 'pro birth control'. Don't get pregnant in the first place then you won't have to worry about having an abortion.

#3 Edited by alim298 (1871 posts) -

[URL="http://explosm.net/comics/2964/"]

[IMG]http://www.flashasylum.com/db/files/Comics/Rob/statistics.png[/IMG][/URL]

Cyanide & Happiness @ [URL="http://explosm.net/"]Explosm.net[/URL]

#4 Posted by wis3boi (31824 posts) -

I always kinda chuckle at calling one side "pro-life" because often times, the person who is claimed "pro-life" doesn't give two shits about the kid once they are born

#5 Edited by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@helwa1988 said:

I think it is utterly disgusting men are more pro life than women are.

So do I. Only women should have a say over women's bodies.

#6 Edited by AutoPilotOn (8571 posts) -

@Makhaidos: do you not think the father should have a say at all in the matter?

#7 Posted by helwa1988 (2114 posts) -

@Makhaidos: it is not about the woman's body, it is about that baby's rights. If. woman doesn't want the child, there are plenty of couples who can't have kids who would gladly take the child off of her hands.

Have you have seen an aborted fetus? It is a tiny baby. And some states have no restrictions of late term abortions, so there are women killing a fetuses at 7 and 8 months. Those are times in which a fetus can live outside the womb.

The reason why I said it is bad for women to be for abortion is that they are the ones carrying life. I could never kill my a baby that is growing inside of me.

#8 Posted by helwa1988 (2114 posts) -

@AutoPilotOn: exactly! Where are the father's rights. It takes two to tango.

#9 Edited by Serraph105 (28384 posts) -

@helwa1988: I agree with you on being pro-birth control. Not only that we need to be pro sex-ed in schools (which is sorely lacking in some states) and have a well funded adoption program.

All that being said I'm also pro-life of the women who would seek abortions regardless of safety. Less women women will be harmed if the have the option of safe abortion. Ultimately I have to argue the choice is up to them, but it's up to us to educate and provide viable alternatives.

#10 Edited by Master_Live (15404 posts) -

Legal, safe and extremely rare.

#11 Posted by AutoPilotOn (8571 posts) -

For some reason the adoption process seems to be extremely nitpicky and expensive that it's hard for a lot of people who might be good parents to go through. I don't have first hand experience but that's how it seems. It doesn't seem fair that anybody physically able to have kids can but if you can't or just want to adopt there are so many hoops to jump.

#12 Edited by Serraph105 (28384 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

Legal, safe and extremely rare.

agreed.

I know you haven't said it, but I don't think legislating it out of existence is the way to get there. The ways I mentioned above are what I believe to be far more powerful methods.

#13 Posted by CyberLips (1824 posts) -

Lol at "Pro-life" since in many cases it's the parents' life that is ruined.

#14 Posted by lamprey263 (24978 posts) -

Well, it's doesn't seem that split, only 21% want it outright banned, with 50% saying legal in certain circumstances and 28% saying legal in all circumstances.

#15 Edited by GamingGod999 (3134 posts) -

Pro-choice, with a better understanding/access to contraceptives.

It's shocking to see just how many US schools follow the abstinence-only policy.

#16 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@helwa1988 said:

@Makhaidos: it is not about the woman's body, it is about that baby's rights.

It's not a baby and it doesn't have rights. The mother, on the other hand, does--among them being the right to privacy and individual freedom over her own body.

If. woman doesn't want the child, there are plenty of couples who can't have kids who would gladly take the child off of her hands.

And there are plenty more who won't. Or are you actually arguing that we have more prospective adoptive parents than prospective adoptees?

Have you have seen an aborted fetus?

Yes--pro-life religio-fascists love plastering them around the area every few months or so.

It is a tiny baby.

It is a fetus that was never born.

And some states have no restrictions of late term abortions, so there are women killing a fetuses at 7 and 8 months.

That's horrible. It should be allowed up until it's born.

Those are times in which a fetus can live outside the womb.

Yes, with the assistance of medical technology. If the tech develops a conscience and decides it doesn't want to support a fetus, then it, too, should have the right to make choices about its own body.

The reason why I said it is bad for women to be for abortion is that they are the ones carrying life. I could never kill my a baby that is growing inside of me.

Well, thank God all women agree with you and are exactly like you, or it would seem like you're imposing your personal beliefs on millions of people who don't share them.

#17 Edited by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@helwa1988 said:

@AutoPilotOn: exactly! Where are the father's rights. It takes two to tango.

And one to gestate. Should a rapist get to have a say if he impregnates a woman? When men get pregnant, I'll be in full support for their right to choose what goes on in their own bodies as well.

#18 Posted by Rhocky (23 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

@helwa1988 said:

@AutoPilotOn: exactly! Where are the father's rights. It takes two to tango.

And one to gestate. Should a rapist get to have a say if he impregnates a woman? When men get pregnant, I'll be in full support for their right to choose what goes on in their own bodies as well.

The first rule to debating is to understand your opponent's argument so that you may debunk it.

Wait, let me rephrase. The first rule to debating is to yell really loudly and use hyperbole and emotion to brow beat your opponents into being the first to leave the discussion, but the first rule to INTELLIGENT debating is to understand your opponent's argument so that you may debunk it. This you have not attempted to do. To use your own analogy as an example, consider that what your refusal to attempt to see the perspective of your opponents is tantamount to the statement that only men should have a say in whether or not male rapists should be seen as criminals.

But of course, you realize that it's more important to protect the potential victims from the rapists, right? And so all should have equal say in determining that the act is wrong and working to attempt to stop it.

This applies to your opponents' argument in opposition to abortion, as well. Their view is that the fetus is the victim and needs protecting from their assailants. That the sex of the person from whom they believe a fetus needs protection is exclusively female is inconsequential. It is theoretically possible to, at some point in the distant future, adapt male bodies to allow for gestation, and of course the sex of the fetuses whom pro-lifers determine need legal protections can be either male or female. One would assume the same principal that applies to one combination should apply to all others, as well. Your attempts to blindly dismiss a portion of your opponents via an argument of sex-exclusive legitimacy of opinion are absurd, ignorant, ironically sexist, and hypocritical because you very clearly base this very claim upon your own opinion while presuming to tell a portion of your opponents that they may not form an opinion themselves. (I'm just guessing you're male based on your forum avatar.) Worse than all of these things is the fact that you make me look stupid by association, because we both happen to be "pro-choice," in the vernacular.

#19 Edited by Serraph105 (28384 posts) -

@Serraph105 said:

@Master_Live said:

Legal, safe and extremely rare.

agreed.

I know you haven't said it, but I don't think legislating it out of existence is the way to get there. The ways I mentioned above are what I believe to be far more powerful methods.

On another note, those who want abortion to be illegal are currently using the safety bit to try and make it illegal.

#20 Posted by Aljosa23 (25663 posts) -

@GamingGod999 said:

Pro-choice, with a better understanding/access to contraceptives.

It's shocking to see just how many US schools follow the abstinence-only policy.

Word, this.

The Religious Right (c) has an issue with abortion but at the same time is against better contraceptives. Pretty terrible "policy".

#21 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7865 posts) -

@helwa1988 said:

@AutoPilotOn: exactly! Where are the father's rights. It takes two to tango.

In the case of rape its still only ONE person engaging in the 'tangoing'. I guess a rapist gets a say in the matter.

#22 Edited by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@Rhocky said:

@Makhaidos said:

@helwa1988 said:

@AutoPilotOn: exactly! Where are the father's rights. It takes two to tango.

And one to gestate. Should a rapist get to have a say if he impregnates a woman? When men get pregnant, I'll be in full support for their right to choose what goes on in their own bodies as well.


This applies to your opponents' argument in opposition to abortion, as well. Their view is that the fetus is the victim and needs protecting from their assailants.

Thank God you pointed that out to me; I never would have figured it out without your wisdom. Their view is wrong. Fetuses are not victims and abortion providers are not assailants.

As for the rest of your. . .point, my argument was in response to the ridiculous (and sex-controlled) idea that men somehow have a right to control the bodies of women whom they have impregnated. I can see both sides to an argument while still taking a stance, and I'm under no obligation to tolerate bullshit just because some people really, really believe it to be true.

#23 Edited by Heirren (18443 posts) -

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

#24 Edited by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

The child isn't there. And abortion being a selfish act is no reason to ban it.

#25 Posted by SexyJazzCat (1340 posts) -

Pro choice only if the fetus is early in development.

#26 Posted by Heirren (18443 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

The child isn't there. And abortion being a selfish act is no reason to ban it.

Says who, you? Our knowledge on science is limited, but it makes the most sense that the second there is growth, life is there. Regardless, we know life comes, so better safe than sorry. And I won't even comment on banning this or that, but that the act itself is rather barbaric.

I know the big iffy in any of these conversations is the rape instant. I don't know how to answer that, other than I think the penalties for selected crimes should be MUCH more severe than they are. If there was more consequence I think people would be more inclined to think about their actions, or even question what kind of human being they are becoming.

#27 Edited by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

The child isn't there. And abortion being a selfish act is no reason to ban it.

Says who, you? Our knowledge on science is limited, but it makes the most sense that the second there is growth, life is there.

Life =/= child.

Regardless, we know life comes, so better safe than sorry.

Yours isn't a safe method.

And I won't even comment on banning this or that, but that the act itself is rather barbaric.

It's much more barbaric when done in a back alley with a coat hanger--like abortions were done before it was legalized, and like how it would be done if it was banned because some people think a sanitary medical procedure they dislike is "barbaric."

I know the big iffy in any of these conversations is the rape instant. I don't know how to answer that, other than I think the penalties for selected crimes should be MUCH more severe than they are. If there was more consequence I think people would be more inclined to think about their actions, or even question what kind of human being they are becoming.

#28 Posted by limpbizkit818 (15044 posts) -

I can't help but to think that in a few hundred years people will look back in horror at the practice of abortion. Once we have the technology to allow a child to survive outside of a women at any stage of the pregnancy the moral tide will turn against abortion.

@wis3boi said:

I always kinda chuckle at calling one side "pro-life" because often times, the person who is claimed "pro-life" doesn't give two shits about the kid once they are born

I never understood why this gets repeated so many times online. Is the underlining assumption here that pro-life voters are more republican, and since republicans want less social spending that must mean they "don't give two shits about the kid"?

#29 Posted by XilePrincess (13130 posts) -

I don't care who's pro choice or pro life or pro killing everyone and everything, as long as abortions remain safe, legal and accessible to those who wish to have them.

Regardless of where you stand on the issue, unless you are the woman carrying the child or perhaps the child's father, you should have absolutely no say in what she does. If you don't want an abortion, don't have one.

The problem with 'Murica is that they want to have their cake and eat it too. You can't prevent unwanted pregnancy without education and accessible, affordable resources to do so. 'Murica's old, white, bible-thumping republicans want to shut down planned parenthood (which provides everything from counselling to sex ed to affordable birth control and testing), not give any sex education besides 'abstinence only', and then they wonder why people are pregnant and wanting abortions for a kid they never wanted.

If the education was there, and the resources were there, the rate of unwanted pregnancies would drop sharply, and there would be far, far fewer abortions, if any at all.

And as for the almighty 'adoption' argument? Do you know how horrible that whole experience can actually be for everyone involved? The adoption process isn't rosy like when you go pick out a puppy at the SPCA. There are a lot of hoops to jump through and a lot of money shelled out. No matter how good of a parent somebody might be, if they're not well off enough to buy all sorts of stuff to impress the government into thinking they're a suitable parent and they're not a perfectly squeaky clean couple, they'll have a hard time getting a kid.

A lot of very adoptable kids end up waiting in foster homes or care for a long time. Some pass the age of 'adoptability' and end up in foster care until 18.

The solution isn't adoption. The solution is education. Reduce the need for abortions to occur, don't just redirect all unwanted pregnancies to adoption, which creates a whole new issue with the amount of kids with no homes taxpayers will be paying for.



But really, nobody's having an abortion for fun. 1 in maybe 1000 abortions are late term and many of those are medically necessary and are only done in extreme circumstances. Nobody carries a baby nearly to term and thinks it's a great, hilarious thing to do on a lazy Sunday afternoon to abort it at 7 or 8 months. Almost all abortions are done before 12 weeks, with a large majority done between 4 and 8 weeks. An 8 week old fetus is about the size of a raspberry. Not to be graphic here, but before I went on birth control to regulate my periods, I was getting lumpy blood clots falling out of my uterus nearly that size. It's not like at that point you need to go in there with an industrial vacuum and hedge trimmers to dislodge the thing.

But like I say, lack of education is the main issue here, because anti-abortion people love to take replica fetuses that are late-second or early-third trimester and say that's what an 8 week old fetus looks like, because they're trying to scare and upset people. Education will save you from being caught up in the blatant lies of stupid people.

#30 Edited by SolidSnake35 (58226 posts) -

You can have an abortion if there's a good reason for it. Clearly this is the best way to proceed. Doesn't take a genius, does it?

#31 Posted by wis3boi (31824 posts) -

@limpbizkit818 said:

I can't help but to think that in a few hundred years people will look back in horror at the practice of abortion. Once we have the technology to allow a child to survive outside of a women at any stage of the pregnancy the moral tide will turn against abortion.

@wis3boi said:

I always kinda chuckle at calling one side "pro-life" because often times, the person who is claimed "pro-life" doesn't give two shits about the kid once they are born

I never understood why this gets repeated so many times online. Is the underlining assumption here that pro-life voters are more republican, and since republicans want less social spending that must mean they "don't give two shits about the kid"?

Because many times the vocal anti abortion proponents are often the same vocal people complaining people are lazy, etc. Well if the mother had no intentions of getting pregnant and got there through force or other means, and has no ability to care or supply a healthy life for the kid, let alone care emotionally for it, the option to end the pregnancy early needs to remain an option, and an option for the mother only. Or the kid can grow up in a shitty house where he isn't cared for or rot in a foster home. Legislating what the mother can and cannot do with her pregnancy is one of the must disgusting things I can think of in this country right now. Pro choice isn't about pro-death, it's about not taking the right to choose away.

#32 Posted by Renevent42 (5451 posts) -

I'm pro-choice for the most part but only to a certain point. I don't think it's only a matter of a woman's body...there is a fetus involved. A baby that's almost to full term can survive outside the womb, is pretty much fully developed, and is a child in my eyes. At that point it's not big bad men telling women what to do with their bodies...there's another human to consider. I'm personally ok with women having the right to choose during the first few months before the fetus is more developed, and in later terms as well if there's risk to the mother's life. To disregard that and act as if this is nothing more than a matter of women's rights is unethical though, and I do believe most states have taken this more thoughtful approach.

#33 Posted by helwa1988 (2114 posts) -

@Makhaidos:

You pro choicers love to bring up rape, don't you? As if rape cases make up the majority of abortions. Majority of abortions are by women who forgot,too lazy or was using brith control improperly.

In cases of rape, incest and pregnancy being a danger to a mother's life I am actually for abortion. My issue is that abortion is most women who seek out abortions are only doing to get rid of their mistake or stupidity.

#34 Posted by Shmiity (5246 posts) -

I am not a woman, so I should not be deciding this matter. Pro-choice 100%.

Also... abortions have been happening for ages. There should at least be facilities available to do it safely. It doesn't matter if abortions are legal or illegal, they will still take place. Might as well have a safe place for women to go.

#35 Posted by MuD3 (1361 posts) -

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

the majority of people with your perspective are also the people who want to rid the country of social programs and anything else that their tax dollars doesn't directly effect them currently.... seems kind of selfish as well.

#36 Edited by helwa1988 (2114 posts) -

@MuD3 said:

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

the majority of people with your perspective are also the people who want to rid the country of social programs and anything else that their tax dollars doesn't directly effect them currently.... seems kind of selfish as well.

you misquoted me bro.

#37 Posted by deeliman (3381 posts) -

I never understood the stance of pro lifers that if the woman is raped that they are for abortion. I mean, if you believe that abortion is murder, then does the fact that the women was raped now suddenly mean it's ok to murder the fetus?

#38 Posted by Master_Live (15404 posts) -

@deeliman said:

I never understood the stance of pro lifers that if the woman is raped that they are for abortion. I mean, if you believe that abortion is murder, then does the fact that the women was raped now suddenly mean it's ok to murder the fetus?

Some pro-lifers are against abortion even in the case of rape.

#39 Posted by Revelation34 (546 posts) -

@helwa1988 said:

@Makhaidos: it is not about the woman's body, it is about that baby's rights. If. woman doesn't want the child, there are plenty of couples who can't have kids who would gladly take the child off of her hands.

Have you have seen an aborted fetus? It is a tiny baby. And some states have no restrictions of late term abortions, so there are women killing a fetuses at 7 and 8 months. Those are times in which a fetus can live outside the womb.

The reason why I said it is bad for women to be for abortion is that they are the ones carrying life. I could never kill my a baby that is growing inside of me.

A fetus is not a baby. A fetus is a fetus. A baby is only after it is born. You also need to do research since women who get late term abortions do it to protect their own life.

#40 Edited by Treflis (11715 posts) -

I'm for women having the option to have an abortion, I like people having a choice on what is their own affair. I'm strange like that. Granted it would be preferable that they wouldn't have to take such a step but if worst comes to worst and prevention fails, they make a bad choice one night or it's a result of a criminal act. Then they have the option regardless on what I believe on the matter or not.

Because what I can't stand are people like Helewa1988 who because they disagree with something that doesn't affect their lives, they still have the audacity to point fingers and lecture.

Abortions are going to happen even if it's legal or not, atleast with it legal then it'll be done in a environment that's safe and by medical personel that knows what they're doing. Not in a back alley place with a coat hanger or knitting stick where the risk of infections and more lethal outcome is much more possible. Or would you rather have the women risk death and being mangled for removing a child they do not wish or can provide for. How very Pro-life of you.

#41 Edited by Heirren (18443 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

The child isn't there. And abortion being a selfish act is no reason to ban it.

Says who, you? Our knowledge on science is limited, but it makes the most sense that the second there is growth, life is there.

Life =/= child.

Regardless, we know life comes, so better safe than sorry.

Yours isn't a safe method.

And I won't even comment on banning this or that, but that the act itself is rather barbaric.

It's much more barbaric when done in a back alley with a coat hanger--like abortions were done before it was legalized, and like how it would be done if it was banned because some people think a sanitary medical procedure they dislike is "barbaric."

I know the big iffy in any of these conversations is the rape instant. I don't know how to answer that, other than I think the penalties for selected crimes should be MUCH more severe than they are. If there was more consequence I think people would be more inclined to think about their actions, or even question what kind of human being they are becoming.

You aren't making any sense. The thought that putting science aside to allow room for future discovery surrounding birth, thus putting "abortion" into question, is not the safer method surrounding what is actually being done? Give me concrete facts on how life does not equal child. You can't because nobody on the planet can give concrete facts regarding this.

#42 Edited by Revelation34 (546 posts) -

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

The child isn't there. And abortion being a selfish act is no reason to ban it.

Says who, you? Our knowledge on science is limited, but it makes the most sense that the second there is growth, life is there.

Life =/= child.

Regardless, we know life comes, so better safe than sorry.

Yours isn't a safe method.

And I won't even comment on banning this or that, but that the act itself is rather barbaric.

It's much more barbaric when done in a back alley with a coat hanger--like abortions were done before it was legalized, and like how it would be done if it was banned because some people think a sanitary medical procedure they dislike is "barbaric."

I know the big iffy in any of these conversations is the rape instant. I don't know how to answer that, other than I think the penalties for selected crimes should be MUCH more severe than they are. If there was more consequence I think people would be more inclined to think about their actions, or even question what kind of human being they are becoming.

You aren't making any sense. The thought that putting science aside to allow room for future discovery surrounding birth, thus putting "abortion" into question, is not the safer method surrounding what is actually being done? Give me concrete facts on how life does not equal child. You can't because nobody on the planet can give concrete facts regarding this.

You could call it life but you couldn't call it a child since there's always a chance of miscarriage and whatnot.

#43 Edited by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

The child isn't there. And abortion being a selfish act is no reason to ban it.

Says who, you? Our knowledge on science is limited, but it makes the most sense that the second there is growth, life is there.

Life =/= child.

Regardless, we know life comes, so better safe than sorry.

Yours isn't a safe method.

And I won't even comment on banning this or that, but that the act itself is rather barbaric.

It's much more barbaric when done in a back alley with a coat hanger--like abortions were done before it was legalized, and like how it would be done if it was banned because some people think a sanitary medical procedure they dislike is "barbaric."

I know the big iffy in any of these conversations is the rape instant. I don't know how to answer that, other than I think the penalties for selected crimes should be MUCH more severe than they are. If there was more consequence I think people would be more inclined to think about their actions, or even question what kind of human being they are becoming.

You aren't making any sense. The thought that putting science aside to allow room for future discovery surrounding birth, thus putting "abortion" into question, is not the safer method surrounding what is actually being done? Give me concrete facts on how life does not equal child. You can't because nobody on the planet can give concrete facts regarding this.

This is not a tree:

This is not a child:

#44 Posted by Heirren (18443 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

The child isn't there. And abortion being a selfish act is no reason to ban it.

Says who, you? Our knowledge on science is limited, but it makes the most sense that the second there is growth, life is there.

Life =/= child.

Regardless, we know life comes, so better safe than sorry.

Yours isn't a safe method.

And I won't even comment on banning this or that, but that the act itself is rather barbaric.

It's much more barbaric when done in a back alley with a coat hanger--like abortions were done before it was legalized, and like how it would be done if it was banned because some people think a sanitary medical procedure they dislike is "barbaric."

I know the big iffy in any of these conversations is the rape instant. I don't know how to answer that, other than I think the penalties for selected crimes should be MUCH more severe than they are. If there was more consequence I think people would be more inclined to think about their actions, or even question what kind of human being they are becoming.

You aren't making any sense. The thought that putting science aside to allow room for future discovery surrounding birth, thus putting "abortion" into question, is not the safer method surrounding what is actually being done? Give me concrete facts on how life does not equal child. You can't because nobody on the planet can give concrete facts regarding this.

This is not a tree:

This is not a child:

That is the worst analogy I've ever heard in my life.

#45 Edited by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@helwa1988:

Abortion is a selfish act. It goes deeper than the sole issue at hand, though. Parents and society, in general, have this odd way of babying kids these days. First, be responsible. If you don't want kids, don't go sleeping around. "But blah de bla bla bla I love him..." ..." I'm pregnant?" "I don't want to have a baby right now." See there's an awful lot of use of the letter "I" going on there, almost as if the child isn't even there. Anyways, this generation of children up and coming have the least amount of respect I've ever seen.

The child isn't there. And abortion being a selfish act is no reason to ban it.

Says who, you? Our knowledge on science is limited, but it makes the most sense that the second there is growth, life is there.

Life =/= child.

Regardless, we know life comes, so better safe than sorry.

Yours isn't a safe method.

And I won't even comment on banning this or that, but that the act itself is rather barbaric.

It's much more barbaric when done in a back alley with a coat hanger--like abortions were done before it was legalized, and like how it would be done if it was banned because some people think a sanitary medical procedure they dislike is "barbaric."

I know the big iffy in any of these conversations is the rape instant. I don't know how to answer that, other than I think the penalties for selected crimes should be MUCH more severe than they are. If there was more consequence I think people would be more inclined to think about their actions, or even question what kind of human being they are becoming.

You aren't making any sense. The thought that putting science aside to allow room for future discovery surrounding birth, thus putting "abortion" into question, is not the safer method surrounding what is actually being done? Give me concrete facts on how life does not equal child. You can't because nobody on the planet can give concrete facts regarding this.

This is not a tree:

This is not a child:

That is the worst analogy I've ever heard in my life.

And yet, you believe it.

#46 Posted by AutoPilotOn (8571 posts) -

@Revelation34: totally wrong. There is a point before birth that it is a baby and not out if womb yet. My wife was over 3 months premature and was around 2lbs at birth.

#47 Posted by Heirren (18443 posts) -

@Makhaidos:

@Makhaidos said:


This is not a tree:

This is not a child:

And yet, you believe it.

i do? It'd be more accurate if the first pic was some roots growing, or if the second pic was some flying sperm.

#48 Posted by AutoPilotOn (8571 posts) -

@Heirren: exactly my thoughts 10000s of acorns fall but only a few make it in ground and sprout. Not that comparing a baby to a tree makes sense anyways.

#49 Posted by Makhaidos (2162 posts) -

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos:

@Makhaidos said:

This is not a tree:

This is not a child:

And yet, you believe it.

i do? It'd be more accurate if the first pic was some roots growing, or if the second pic was some flying sperm.

If it's spreading roots and growing, it still isn't a tree.

If it was flying sperm, it would be no less a human than a fetus.

#50 Edited by Heirren (18443 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

@Heirren said:

@Makhaidos:

@Makhaidos said:

This is not a tree:

This is not a child:

And yet, you believe it.

i do? It'd be more accurate if the first pic was some roots growing, or if the second pic was some flying sperm.

If it's spreading roots and growing, it still isn't a tree.

If it was flying sperm, it would be no less a human than a fetus.

It is life. It is growing. Abortion is denying birth of something entering the world. The problem with your argument(probably the wrong word to use) is that it makes the assumption of being an all-knowing entity. In 50 years we may discover something which allows us to see the process in more detail, and then in another 100 years maybe something even further. Your opinion is taking a stance that this is it. This is all we will ever know of our own kind, and even in the state we are in now, abortion is still denying life.