Is it possible for someone to tell me (WITHOUT DEBATE!)...

[cardaway]

And please don't flame me for saying this-I know it is controversial and pretty radical. But if women weren't faced with an unwanted pregnancy, the number of abortions would decline.

Which is why the morning after pill, or another similar solution is the answer. People would have some explaining to do if they wanted to end a late first trimester pregnancy.

 

[RachelEllen]

I appreciate the conversation. Problem is, the quotes in your post are not mine. Did you mean to ask someone else? Or did you mean to ask me to clarify something else?

It isn't completely about the woman's right. Or, at least, it's not about the woman's right to deny life to a fetus. It's about the woman's right to use of her body. It's quite distinct.

For example, and this is something I personally deal with on an almost daily basis, a woman has a right to stop being pregnany if carrying the fetus is putting her life at risk. Before viability, this is an abortion. However, after 23 weeks, she would be induced or receive a C/S. This happens every day in cases of severe preeclampsia.

Personally, I definitely think it's more complex than a bumper sticker. Most things worth thinking about

But that's not the law. So I'm assuming you don't fall into the category of keep Roe v Wade exactly as it is today?


With all due respect, it's far more than just some of the leaders. And they never qualify that by saying "only when a woman is in danger"


Rachel, not trying to be argumentative, I just really want to understand your position..



Because it seems like you're saying it's completely a woman's right, then you say you don't agree with abortion to term (in most cases I'm assuming.)

So it really shouldn't entirely be a woman's choice? You would agree there are larger moral questions beyond the bumper sticker "My body, my choice?"

 

[punkin]

I don't suppose any of you read a novel by Tolstoy called Ressurenction? There is a very interesting part in the begining of how the peasants got rid of unwanted children in Russia in the 19th century. They would birth the child; have it baptized (to make sure it went to heaven-these were religious people after all; and then stop feeding it. The poor thing would probably stop screaming for food after the first day or so and then quietly die.

Now that's a post-term abortion!!!

Is that what the anti-abortion advocates here want?
Don't even get me started on the anti-contraseption crowd.

 

[WIcruizer]

I'm still waiting for an explanation of what exactly a "post-term" abortion is

My mistake. I meant partial-birth.

 

[punkin]

Personally, I definitely think it's more complex than a bumper sticker. Most things worth thinking about are

Yes, exactly, but if you legistlate away the right, there is no wiggle room. Anything you do, no matter how valid medically and ethicaly, becomes a crime.

 

[WIcruizer]

Is that what the anti-abortion advocates here want?

This has actually been the most civil debate about abortion I have ever seen, please don't flame like that. Why would a Pro LIFE person want to kill young children? That's just flaming and insulting. Is that what Anti- Life advocates want?

 

[WIcruizer]

Yes, exactly, but if you legistlate away the right, there is no wiggle room. Anything you do, no matter how valid medically and ethicaly, becomes a crime.

Why?? Do you think the law has to be either/or?

 

[punkin]

This has actually been the most civil debate about abortion I have ever seen, please don't flame like that.

You are right. I appologize.

However, I firmly believe (note this is my belief and not a flame) that people who can't afford or don't want children will find a way not to have them, legally or illegally. I really believe that if states were allowed to legistlate against abortion, you would have rich (and middle class) women travelling to states where abortion is still legal and poor women dying in back alleys or abandoning newborns.

 

[chobie]

Which is why the morning after pill, or another similar solution is the answer. People would have some explaining to do if they wanted to end a late first trimester pregnancy.

I think the majority of pro-choice believe, as I do, that abortion should be legal without restrictions for the first 12 weeks; and after that legal for health reasons.


The late -term abortions are only done in extreme circumstances.

 

[WIcruizer]

You are right. I appologize.

However, I firmly believe (note this is my belief and not a flame) that people who can't afford or don't want children will find a way not to have them, legally or illegally.

Not a problem, I just didn't want this to get out of hand like so many other abortion debates. I agree that in the end, women can get an abortion whether it's legal or not. That's why whenever I discuss this topic, I focus more on what I feel is logically or morally right or wrong, not necessarily what should be legal.

But that's why I also don't buy the " back alley abortion" argument. Either something is right or wrong. If it is wrong, it doesn't matter to me that someone is forced to do something like that.

It's sort of like stealing. Theft should be legal, otherwise the poor are forced to break the law to get what they need. No...they have a choice to do the right thing or not not. Just as a woman has the choice not to have sex or use contraception if they don't want a child. If you choose to ignore those choices, don't compound the mistake by ending another human "life."

Now in my mind, that's true for women who are in that position. And that's where most abortions come from. In matters of a woman's health or life being threatened, that's a different moral decision in my mind.

 

[chobie]

Not a problem, I just didn't want this to get out of hand like so many other abortion debates. I agree that in the end, women can get an abortion whether it's legal or not. That's why whenever I discuss this topic, I focus more on what I feel is logically or morally right or wrong, not necessarily what should be legal.

But that's why I also don't buy the " back alley abortion" argument. Either something is right or wrong. If it is wrong, it doesn't matter to me that someone is forced to do something like that.

It's sort of like stealing. Theft should be legal, otherwise the poor are forced to break the law to get what they need. No...they have a choice to do the right thing or not not. Just as a woman has the choice not to have sex or use contraception if they don't want a child. If you choose to ignore those choices, don't compound the mistake by ending another human "life."

Now in my mind, that's true for women who are in that position. And that's where most abortions come from. In matters of a woman's health or life being threatened, that's a different moral decision in my mind.

I agree and what is logically and morally right is to allow each woman to decide what is morally right for her and what is the is the most logical choice for health and well-being. It is also logical that the developed life gets precedence over the undeveloped life. It is also logical that if you think abortion is wrong then you should not have one.

 

[WIcruizer]

agree and what is logically and morally right is to allow each woman to decide what is morally right for her

Sorry, but I think that's too simplistic. Do you then believe that every moral decision in life is a personal decision, and there is, in fact, no right or wrong? Some people believe there are moral absolutes. There are actions that are wrong, regardless of what any one individual thinks.

[/QUOTE]It is also logical that the developed life gets precedence over the undeveloped life.

We all know that's not the choice. It's not the developed life vs undeveloped life. It's a woman's conveience over an undeveloped life. We can debate that point, but don't make it sound like it's one life vs another.

 

[jodifla]

For the people I know, it wasn't about "convenience." It was about having to drop out of school, or lose a job, or something else that was absolutely life-changing.

I read an interesting statistic on one of the Christian web sites the other day. It said 38 percent of today's high school seniors considered themselves pro-choice, but the number jumped to 73 percent for college students. The college students saw that it was economic suicide to have children before they were financially set.

 

[JennyMominRI]

Sorry, but I think that's too simplistic. Do you then believe that every moral decision in life is a personal decision, and there is, in fact, no right or wrong? Some people believe there are moral absolutes. There are actions that are wrong, regardless of what any one individual thinks.

I don't think we should legislate morality... IMO anything should be legal unless an innocent victim is harmed. You rights end where mine begin... SInce for some people,Life begins at conception,in there view an innocent is being harmed,so this falls in that place for many

 

[chobie]

Sorry, but I think that's too simplistic. Do you then believe that every moral decision in life is a personal decision, and there is, in fact, no right or wrong? Some people believe there are moral absolutes. There are actions that are wrong, regardless of what any one individual thinks.

It is also logical that the developed life gets precedence over the undeveloped life.

We all know that's not the choice. It's not the developed life vs undeveloped life. It's a woman's conveience over an undeveloped life. We can debate that point, but don't make it sound like it's one life vs another.

It is one person's life over the life of a parasitic potential life. Don't be sorry, you frame it the way you want and I will frame it the way I want. And its my absolute moral that a woman should not be forced to gestate against her will

 

[hokiefan33]

For the people I know, it wasn't about "convenience." It was about having to drop out of school, or lose a job, or something else that was absolutely life-changing.

I read an interesting statistic on one of the Christian web sites the other day. It said 38 percent of today's high school seniors considered themselves pro-choice, but the number jumped to 73 percent for college students. The college students saw that it was economic suicide to have children before they were financially set.

That may be the mindset of the 73%, but it doesn't have to be the reality. I speak from experience. My wife and I were married when I hadn't yet gone to college (I was working), and she was a senior in college. She was pregnant when she graduated from school. So 2 years later I went back to school, and we had our 2nd child while I was a junior. I vividly remember getting extensions on my final exams due to the birth of my daughter (most college professors never heard that excuse before). So when I graduated, we had 2 kids, DS4 and DD1. And we were fine then, and we are fine now. And all of this happened before we were "financially set", I can assure you of that. So it's all about the quality you place on life over other things.

 

[WIcruizer]

For the people I know, it wasn't about "convenience." It was about having to drop out of school, or lose a job, or something else that was absolutely life-changing.

I read an interesting statistic on one of the Christian web sites the other day. It said 38 percent of today's high school seniors considered themselves pro-choice, but the number jumped to 73 percent for college students. The college students saw that it was economic suicide to have children before they were financially set.

Maybe convenience isn't quite the right word, but close. Some would argue ending a human life is more life changing than putting off school temporarily.

As far as the college student "poll" it's no secret that most college campuses are very liberal, and in turn the students become very liberal. Which is why you would find anequal percentage of college students calling for higher taxes...until they graduate and have to actually PAY them.

 

[BelleMcNally]

Sorry, but I think that's too simplistic. Do you then believe that every moral decision in life is a personal decision, and there is, in fact, no right or wrong? Some people believe there are moral absolutes. There are actions that are wrong, regardless of what any one individual thinks.

I, personally, believe that there are some things that are immoral that are also illegal, there are some things that are immoral that are legal, and there are some things that are moral that aren't legal. The laws of the nation aren't there to legislate morality, they are there to prevent chaos and maintain order and safety. I don't look to the government to tell me what is moral or immoral--I have my spirituality and personal intellect to tell me that.

I think that abortion is a moral issue, not a legal one. Keeping abortion legal in no way hurst the functioning of our society and civil structures. People take on their own moral responsibility for such an action--it's on their soul, so to speak. I've watched friends go through unplanned/unwanted pregnancies and take both routes--and, believe me, they have all struggled.

My own views on the morality of abortion are beside the point--it should remain legal no matter what I think about it.

On another note...I can't even begin to fathom the logistics/money involved in actually making abortion illegal at this point....

 

[WIcruizer]

And its my absolute moral that a woman should not be forced to gestate against her will

So you would agree it's perfectly moral for a woman to have 30 late term abortions if she chooses?

 

[chobie]

Maybe convenience isn't quite the right word, but close. Some would argue ending a human life is more life changing than putting off school temporarily.

As far as the college student "poll" it's no secret that most college campuses are very liberal, and in turn the students become very liberal. Which is why you would find anequal percentage of college students calling for higher taxes...until they graduate and have to actually PAY them.

Liberal bashing? So much for keeping respectful.