Are You Pro or Anti Choice?

[want2cmyone]

I'm guessing the Poll is "For" abortion/choice or "Against" abortion/choice. I hope it's that because if not then I've voted wrong

Abortion should stay legal and no other person other than the father/mother should get a say in what they decide to do when it comes to getting an abortion. I personally think a father should have a say in things though if he wants the child but the woman doesn't, but that's a whole other topic.

A big reason why people are against abortion can be because they are religious. The thing is, they preach about their "right for religious freedom" (even though they already have it) and that others have no right in telling them what they should/shouldn't do i.e. if a baker owns their own business and they are religious, they can choose to not serve gay people who want to get married (as in making a cake for them) because it goes against their "religious beliefs", yet it's OK for THEM to preach to someone who's pro-choice and that it's "a sin" and they shouldn't do it. Their "religious freedom" allows them to discriminate against gays so they should mind their own business when it comes to another person's freedom of choice.

The only time I'd be against it is if a female decides to try and use abortion as a form of contraception. That may sound a bit far-fetched but it's not really. Other than that, then, like I say, it should be down to the would-be father/mother and no one else.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by want2cmyone

The only time I'd be against it is if a female decides to try and use abortion as a form of contraception. That may sound a bit far-fetched but it's not really. Other than that, then, like I say, it should be down to the would-be father/mother and no one else.

Sadly this is not far-fetched. It happens rather a lot. All freedoms are abused. Before being tempted to be instantly judgmental, one needs to also remember that some people have lost control over their own lives; drug addicts are a classic example, but not the only ones. Some people are very weak; the truth is that all of us are very weak in some specific vulnerable area, usually known only to ourselves and those very close to us. As a matter of public policy as well as of decency and morality, the frequent recourse to abortion by the same woman is something which should be discouraged. In some cases, when the same woman is presenting herself for the seventh or eighth time (which does happen), there is a very strong argument for refusing a legal abortion; but in such a case there also should be a fall back position, involving counselling, enquiry into the causes of the situation, and a constructive engagement in trying to resolve the underlying problem.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Sadly this is not far-fetched. It happens rather a lot. All freedoms are abused. Before being tempted to be instantly judgmental, one needs to also remember that some people have lost control over their own lives; drug addicts are a classic example, but not the only ones. Some people are very weak; the truth is that all of us are very weak in some specific vulnerable area, usually known only to ourselves and those very close to us. As a matter of public policy as well as of decency and morality, the frequent recourse to abortion by the same woman is something which should be discouraged. In some cases, when the same woman is presenting herself for the seventh or eighth time (which does happen), there is a very strong argument for refusing a legal abortion; but in such a case there also should be a fall back position, involving counselling, enquiry into the causes of the situation, and a constructive engagement in trying to resolve the underlying problem.

One would have to wonder why such a woman would not opt for birth control or sterilization. IMO having seven or eight abortions is the behavior of a person who may need to be confined for her own well being.

All those years of Catholic education have forever shaped my thinking. Here is a nun explaining my position.

https://www.popsugar.com/news/Cathol...rtion-43096831

[banquomerc]

I am 56 years old and have spoken on this issue for years as discussion with Roe v. Wade; yet I have always struggled with a government infusion into a woman's private life-still, the fetus should have some Constitutional protection. I have decided and as a man that this issue is intensely a private one and for each woman that decides to terminate a pregnancy the issue is probably different at some level. It thus is not my call or my business although I believe the compromise is not the police force-harsh Republican judgement in America but the common goal of life-create policies and conditions whereas a woman could have more support in the U.S. to continue the pregnancy whether it be financial help longterm or easier, safe adoptions. Republicans shout life and tout their Christianity-watch them cringe and run if you tax them to help pregnant women who can't afford a child. Therefore, the current right to privacy since 1973 is an appropriate government response.

[Butterboy]

If men could get pregnant abortion clinics would be like Starbucks.

I had a friend whose girlfriend couldn't take the pill so they used condoms. One time the condom broke and he didn't realise until it was too late. This was about 1996, and either they'd never heard of emergency contraception or it wasn't available to them. As soon as they could they had an abortion.

To me that's perfectly reasonable, the foetus wouldn't have any form of nervous system let alone a brain. They didn't want a child, they used contraception which failed.

[Arturo2nd]

I was just wondering how many of our Pro-life brethern would be in favor of a government run program that could determine male suitability for breeding and enforce compulsory sterilization of those who do not pass muster. Obviously, this would require genetic testing before puberty and the most pain free methods of castration would be used.

[bigtrain45]

Don't like abortion? Don't have one. Mind your own business. What other people choose to do with their bodies is their business, not yours.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

I was just wondering how many of our Pro-life brethern would be in favor of a government run program that could determine male suitability for breeding and enforce compulsory sterilization of those who do not pass muster. Obviously, this would require genetic testing before puberty and the most pain free methods of castration would be used.

This sort of thing has been done before; they call it "eugenics". It is now recognised as a crime against humanity and some surprising parties, notably Sweden and the state government of Alberta, Canada, have found themselves in a very difficult position after having operated eugenics programs to remove the "unfit" from the gene pool when this was already illegal under international law.

[LadyLuck]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

I was just wondering how many of our Pro-life brethern would be in favor of a government run program that could determine male suitability for breeding and enforce compulsory sterilization of those who do not pass muster. Obviously, this would require genetic testing before puberty and the most pain free methods of castration would be used.

I don't think it should be limited to male suitability (discriminate much?) but I'm all for it. Here's how you do it: observe how they drive. If they can't operate a motor vehicle properly then remove them from the gene pool. I'm all for it.

[LadyLuck]

Originally Posted by want2cmyone

I'm guessing the Poll is "For" abortion/choice or "Against" abortion/choice. I hope it's that because if not then I've voted wrong

I suppose "pro-choice" and "anti-choice" are a bit more politically correct than "pro slaughtering innocent... oh, never mind.

The only time I'd be against it is if a female decides to try and use abortion as a form of contraception.

It's only 9:20am on Jan 01 and I may have already read the dumbest thing I'm going to read all year. Was that actually a serious statement?