50% say "legal under certain circumstances" and only 21% say "illegal under all circumstances." http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx Yes, because we can all agree that a living, breathing person has had their rights violated in those instances. I don't dodge yours either, you just don't like the answers. On this particular topic, I would argue that the law is wrong, we shouldn't punish women who are addicts, we should treat them. However, to answer your question directly, once the baby is born, the woman doesn't have any choice left. In fact, once the pregnancy reaches a certain point (determined by the states in which they live), the woman loses the right to choose as well. Again, you use inappropriate language in order to try and enflame passions. The primary interested party is THE WOMAN in whose uterus the fetus is gestating. Yes, we have. We used to have laws prohibiting abortions under any circumstances, which led to tremendously bad outcomes for a great many women. Thank God the SCOTUS gave our women the right to decide what their bodies are used for, as it should be.
A have REPEATEDLY stated, this whole situation is one of competing interests. My own personal opinion, based on my own personal morality, is that once a fetus becomes viable and could live outside the womb, the woman should no longer have the ability to choose abortion. Until then, her body, her choice.
I got married as a 22YO virgin so.... WHOOSH.... there goes your impossibility out the window! I'm pretty sure I am not the only one. Sexual relations are too complex and dangerous to encourage immature kids to have at it! I am not raising "ill-informd, ill-equipped **** puppets", are you? Where do you get off painting these broad caricatures about people you don't even know?
Sorry but that makes no sense. I mean I'm glad you cut the baby a break here but that is just totally inconsistent with your "my body, my baby" marching orders. That it "could" survive is a totally meaningless and arbitrary standard. What about the hour before it could survive on its own? The minute? The second? Unknowable! Just like the arrogance of any standard other than conception.
You have completely ignored a large part of my "marching orders" if you think your asinine characterization accurately reflects my opinion. You don't seem to get the "competing interests," as you only have ONE interest: that of the fetus. I have the ability to recognize that all parties in the situation deserve some consideration and, for me, the line is viability. Most states have similar lines and disallow late term abortions unless the mother's life is in danger. It is arbitrary, but a line has to be drawn somewhere. You would draw the line at conception, I would draw it at the point that an unbiased medical professional reasonably believes the fetus could survive outside the womb. Until then, the state has no reasonable right to compel a woman to continue a pregnancy she doesn't want to continue. Ignoring, of course, the fact that assuming a standard of conception is just as arrogant as any other assumption.
You are a VERY, VERY rare outlier in this day and time. Also, don't lie and say you weren't extremely tempted to have pre-marital sex on numerous occasions. Guys masturbate thousands of times in their life (us normal ones at least) but don't tell me that during those moments if a girl was next to you that things would not have escalated beyond masturbation. Sex is as natural as anything, and yes having lots of babies was beneficial in the early years before medical advancement and when we needed lots of offspring to tend the farm. We now live in a day and time when we MUST limit pregnancies. It's a harsh reality
Why would you personalize such a broad issue? YOU are not the more common example? The AVERAGE age for the first sexual experience in the US is 17. The outliers are much younger than that. Children should have a full understanding of the reproductive process before puberty, our children that choose of their own informed choice, to have sex (and that is most of them) should have easy and direct access to birth control methods without embarrassment. It's a natural and necessary act, and basically unavoidable in our sexualized society Making an effort to deal rationally and straightforwardly with the issue before it becomes a problem seems much more productive effort than trying changing the law of the land or argue semantics over viability or defining the beginning of life.
I just wanted you to recognize that your lines are arbitrary.... Sorry but it makes no sense in light of the my body, my baby line of thinking. It's my body until the baby doesn't need it anymore. It never really was my body, my baby then. It just sounds good. Name a point, with certainty, that makes MORE sense, then.
The claim was made that it was impossible. Objectively that is absurd; I just layered on a little subjective tale.
I never thought differently. It makes no sense when you believe my point has EVER been "my body" alone. You still don't seem to understand that there are COMPETING interests at play here. My position gives proper consideration to all involved parties, yours only considers one. When the fetus can live outside the mother's womb, with reasonable certainty. That makes a LOT more sense than forcing a woman with an eight week old embryo to bring it to term and bear it.
Eh, not really. Post 112: "If a woman is to have an abortion, IMO, that choice should be made as early as possible." -GR It's a woman's body to do with as she pleases until the fetus doesn't need her anymore. I'm confused because it is still the woman's body and the baby is still gestating within. However at that point the fetus should not be aborted because it has begun to have some rights-- why or when we are not really sure. Keep in mind that the only legal decision that lines up with this is Roe v Wade as far as I know.
My morality says that once you choose to have unprotected sex, there may be a fetus that results. A fetus with human DNA. I reject the notion that you should be able to just get rid of it as though it were a pest control problem. It is, however, also my morality that I am not the moral arbiter of the country. Why so many others think their morality is so superior to that of others is beyond me.
I think the sentiment among pro-lifers is that the legality of abortion causes woman to consider it more often or somehow be "okay" with it. I don't have any female friends or familiar acquantances that wouldn't be torn to pieces and sick about making such a decision. It will probably forever haunt them so why punish them further by putting them behind bars? All because they realized they weren't ready to bear a child and handle the enormous responsibility that child rearing presents.
Im against abortion but i am for choice if that makes sense... I would never have my child aborted but i do not think that gives me the right to decide for others
