Is "Pro Choice" Actually "Pro Abortion?"

[TCPluto]

so you think it's better to have the personal choice then, even though you know that you would never use your gun unless it's an extreme circumstance then right?

What makes that different than having some choice in abortion, for the most dire circumstances?

I read that as pro guns, not pro choice.

Just like abortions.

 

[ChrisFL]

I read that as pro guns, not pro choice.

Just like abortions.

So people who want the right to own a gun can go around shooting people with no problems, just like supposedly "pro abortion" people can go having abortions all the time with no problem.

I get it now

 

[TCPluto]

So people who want the right to own a gun can go around shooting people with no problems, just like supposedly "pro abortion" people can go having abortions all the time with no problem.

I get it now

That's an intersting conclusion to draw, but I have no idea how you got there.

Owning guns is not equal to shooting people. Having abortions is equal to killing people.

 

[ChrisFL]

That's an intersting conclusion to draw, but I have no idea how you got there.

Owning guns is not equal to shooting people. Having abortions is equal to killing people.

No, having the CHOICE to have abortions is akin to having the CHOICE to own a gun, it's the usage of that choice that's the question.

So

Situation A: The government decides you are not capable of being able to use your firearm safely and decides you can't own one, even if someone invades your home and threatens to kill you

Situation B: The government decides you are not allowed to have control of your own body safely and decides you can't choose to have an abortion, even if complications happen in pregnancy that could threaten to kill you

Both situations are extreme, but lead to the same conclusion, under certain dire circumstances people should be allowed to have a choice for their own safety.

 

[TCPluto]

No, having the CHOICE to have abortions is akin to having the CHOICE to own a gun, it's the usage of that choice that's the question.

So

Situation A: The government decides you are not capable of being able to use your firearm safely and decides you can't own one, even if someone invades your home and threatens to kill you

Situation B: The government decides you are not allowed to have control of your own body safely and decides you can't choose to have an abortion, even if complications happen in pregnancy that could threaten to kill you

Both situations are extreme, but lead to the same conclusion, under certain dire circumstances people should be allowed to have a choice for their own safety.

I disagree with your flawed analysis.

But the real issue is that this is not a constitutional question. It's not addressed, nor should it be. It should properly be left in the hands of the states. It's a state right to be decided by the various states.

 

[themilesfamily]

But the real issue is that this is not a constitutional question. It's not addressed, nor should it be. It should properly be left in the hands of the states. It's a state right to be decided by the various states.

Surely this is something that people on both sides of the issue can agree on.

 

[Slem liten katt]

I have read page one and page six of this thread.


I am pro abortion.


That isn't to say that I think everyone should have one.

But I do believe abortion, and birth control, should be made readibly available to all women of reproductive age. Governament , both the fedaral and state level, doesn't get to decide who whould be sterile, nor who should bear children.

All women, regardless of economic standing, should be able to seek safe and legal options in the state in which they live.

 

[Master Mason]

Surely this is something that people on both sides of the issue can agree on.

Unfortunately no, some people believe that there is a right to privacy in our counstitution, even though those words are no where in it.

 

[themilesfamily]

Abortion rights is not a constitutional matter and in the end, that is what makes Roe v. Wade a very shaky decision that will be overturned at some point in time.

The Supreme Court only has the right to enforce what is in the Constitution, not enact law. That is for the states and the legislature -- which is where the abortion question belongs.

 

[Goofyluver]

Pro-choice means just that...you have the right to CHOOSE to do with your body as you wish.

It's none of my business what a woman does with her uterus.

It's none of your business what I do with mine.

The choice belongs to the woman.

If people want to call it pro-abortion to make their own staunch stance on the issue (not believing in a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body) somehow appear to be the "right" or "moral" choice...then so be it.

Those of us who are pro-choice know the difference.

Your uterus...your choice.

 

[Master Mason]

Pro-choice means just that...you have the right to CHOOSE to do with your body as you wish.

It's none of my business what a woman does with her uterus.

It's none of your business what I do with mine.

The choice belongs to the woman.

If people want to call it pro-abortion to make their own staunch stance on the issue (not believing in a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body) somehow appear to be the "right" or "moral" choice...then so be it.

Those of us who are pro-choice know the difference.

Your uterus...your choice.

See, and here is where your painting with a broad brush and are incorrect. I call it proabortion because that is exactly what it is, and is the actual definition of the word. And I don't do it to say it should be made illegal because I think it should be legal.

 

[Master Mason]

Abortion rights is not a constitutional matter and in the end, that is what makes Roe v. Wade a very shaky decision that will be overturned at some point in time.

The Supreme Court only has the right to enforce what is in the Constitution, not enact law. That is for the states and the legislature -- which is where the abortion question belongs.

yep I agree, Roe v Wade is a crappy decision there is no right to privacy in the constitution. I would not be abject to puting one in there, but it doesn't currently exist.

 

[Goofyluver]

See, and here is where your painting with a broad brush and are incorrect. I call it proabortion because that is exactly what it is, and is the actual definition of the word. And I don't do it to say it should be made illegal because I think it should be legal.

You're right. I shouldn't have said that those who see pro-choice as pro-abortion do not believe in a woman's right to choose.

However, I stand by my sentiments.

Go ahead...if you want to call it pro-abortion...or refer to yourself as pro-abortion...feel free to do so.

Those of us who are pro-choice know the difference.

Your uterus...your choice.

 

[JennaTX]

If the anti-gun nuts had their way, I wouldn't (legally) have a gun to protect me & mine.

So then you are "pro" killing people?

This is an argument that many people have. Conservatives are against abortion. But yet they are for guns to protect me and mine and for the death penatly. I don't understand, you are either against taking a life or not, which is it?

 

[stacyp9]

I voted no.

There are two camps. Pro-choice and Anti-choice. Those terms more accurately reflect what is actually being argued.

 

[Master Mason]

Your uterus...your choice.

If I had a uterus that would be the medical miracle of the ages.

 

[Master Mason]

I voted no.

There are two camps. Pro-choice and Anti-choice. Those terms more accurately reflect what is actually being argued.

No they don't since what is being debated is abortion. Why not just call it abortion?

 

[Master Mason]

So then you are "pro" killing people?

This is an argument that many people have. Conservatives are against abortion. But yet they are for guns to protect me and mine and for the death penatly. I don't understand, you are either against taking a life or not, which is it?

And yet many liberals are for abortion but against capital punishment so the dicotemy is on both sides.

 

[themilesfamily]

I was just reading up on Roe v. Wade. This is interesting. Jane Roe who petitioned for the right to abort her child -- the case that went to the Supreme Court -- had already given birth by the time the Supreme Court decision was reached, so she was not affected by the ruling.

I wonder how that child feels today about the great lengths that his/her mother went to abort him/her? I mean, really, that has got to be a heavy bit of emotional baggage to carry around!

edited to add: Okay, I just read a little farther. She (Roe) had a girl who she gave up for adoption.

 

[JennaTX]

And yet many liberals are for abortion but against capital punishment so the dicotemy is on both sides.

Well I am pro choice and for capital punishment.

IMO there are more pro life people who also belive in capital punishment. Not to mention talking about the right to "bear arms".