Are you Prochoice? Or Pro Life?

When it comes to the topic of Abortion, what are your thoughts on it?

I'm very Pro choice, not pro life (or anti choice).

I'm pro-choice because it's been proven that that the opposite is harmful unless proper measures are taken(which will never be). Abortion is cultural now, and dual-income families are necessary for the majority to survive in this world. I'd prefer it if abortions didn't happen, it shouldn't be used as a means of contraception, but abortion is necessary.

If the country were to outlaw abortion right now, then the health of women would take a huge hit, the economy would take a huge hit, there would still be likely around as many abortions as before, it wouldn't be a constructive decision.

I'm fine with people being pro-life, but I find that far too many can't comprehend that they cannot ban abortion. They need to make abortion irrelevant, and no one is willing to put the work into it and get the necessary funds to make it happen.

Pro-life.

i say a person should only be able to abort their unborn child if they were raped, as they really have no say in the matter. other than that, it is their fault they got pregnant, whether it be consentual sex or getting too drunk and having sex. may not have chose to have sex but they chose to get drunk.

I'm pro-choice because it's been proven that that the opposite is harmful unless proper measures are taken(which will never be). Abortion is cultural now, and dual-income families are necessary for the majority to survive in this world. I'd prefer it if abortions didn't happen, it shouldn't be used as a means of contraception, but abortion is necessary.

If the country were to outlaw abortion right now, then the health of women would take a huge hit, the economy would take a huge hit, there would still be likely around as many abortions as before, it wouldn't be a constructive decision.

I'm fine with people being pro-life, but I find that far too many can't comprehend that they cannot ban abortion. They need to make abortion irrelevant, and no one is willing to put the work into it and get the necessary funds to make it happen.

Lockedge

This pretty much covers it.

Pro-not using goofy labels that unnecessarily simplify a complex issue. :P

I am pro-I don't really know cause it doesn't really apply to me currently and I feel like the only way to be objective would be to have experienced it.

Pro-Hater

100% Pro-life. It's the deciding factor in all of my votes.

Opposed to abortion. The one issue where I would describe myself as "socially conservative."

i say a person should only be able to abort their unborn child if they were raped, as they really have no say in the matter. other than that, it is their fault they got pregnant, whether it be consensual sex or getting too drunk and having sex. may not have chose to have sex but they chose to get drunk.

konvikt_17

If the baby in the womb was just part of the woman's body , he or she would have the same DNA as the mother .

Babies do not have the same DNA as the mother.

Different DNA = different person = murder.

Plus - babies in the womb feel pain and have a detectable heartbeat at 6 weeks - that's BEFORE most abortions take place.

If the baby were taken out of the womb to be murdered where everyone could see it - abortion would become history overnight.

[QUOTE="KH-mixerX"]

100% Pro-life. It's the deciding factor in all of my votes.

thegerg

Your American Idol texts must be researched to a ridiculous degree. Also, how do you vote in OT polls? Those PMs must be interesting.

I imagine you feel quite clever right now...

[QUOTE="Mr_Alexander"]People should have control over their own bodies.thegerg

True. The argument arises, though, from the question of whether or not they should have control over the body of another.

I'm pro choice and I don't think that'll ever change.

Pro-not using goofy labels that unnecessarily simplify a complex issue. :P

GabuEx

[QUOTE="konvikt_17"]

i say a person should only be able to abort their unborn child if they were raped, as they really have no say in the matter. other than that, it is their fault they got pregnant, whether it be consensual sex or getting too drunk and having sex. may not have chose to have sex but they chose to get drunk.

Lockedge

hmm good point. id have to let that be an exception, but it is also on the woman to know her partner as best she can, i know you cant know everything about a person, but if someone is that messed up to switch contraceptives with placebo or poke holes in his condoms, im sure he would also show other signs that he is not the right person for her.a guy should be able to respect his partners decisions, if not, then maybe he should find another partner.

sorry if it didnt really answer your questions, im not too good at debating:P

Nothing good can come of this thread.

Pro-choice.

If the baby in the womb was just part of the woman's body , he or she would have the same DNA as the mother .

Babies do not have the same DNA as the mother.

Different DNA = different person = murder.

Plus - babies in the womb feel pain and have a detectable heartbeat at 6 weeks - that's BEFORE most abortions take place.

If the baby were taken out of the womb to be murdered where everyone could see it - abortion would become history overnight.

Born_Lucky

What would make abortion history over a few years would be legislative upheavals involving:
-Vastly improved daycare infrastructure and funding
-Vastly improved ma/paternal leave & job security
-A more open-ended adoption system
-A vastly improved school curriculum on sex ed, especially in urban areas
-Restrictions on sexual content in types of media and marketing
-Cheap or free Male birth control and implementation of a similar infrastructure that female birth control currently has
-Higher salaries for teachers, higher standards for teachers.
-More extracurricular focus on urban, impoverished neighbourhoods and schools.

and probably a dozen or two other changes, adjustments.

People should have control over their own bodies.Mr_Alexander

I'm pro-life.

If the baby in the womb was just part of the woman's body , he or she would have the same DNA as the mother .

Babies do not have the same DNA as the mother.

Different DNA = different person = murder.

Plus - babies in the womb feel pain and have a detectable heartbeat at 6 weeks - that's BEFORE most abortions take place.

If the baby were taken out of the womb to be murdered where everyone could see it - abortion would become history overnight.

Born_Lucky

I agree that the whole "it's part of the woman's body" line is a pretty bad argument.

That said, there are three things that doctors use to determine whether or not a given human being is alive - it must have:

1. A functioning circulatory system;

2. A functioning respiratory system; and

3. A functioning cerebral system.

Fetuses gain a functioning circulatory and respiratory system fairly early in the pregnancy, but they have absolutely no brain waves until fairly late in the pregnancy (near the end of the second trimester), and if we're going by the medical determination of life, before that point it seems to me that an argument could be made that it is not "alive" in the human sense.

Out of curiosity, if a woman wants to abort a fetus before its heart starts beating, would you consider that acceptable?

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="thegerg"]

True. The argument arises, though, from the question of whether or not they should have control over the body of another.

thegerg

One will likely argue that one's rights stop where another's begin and that the right to life supersedes the right to not give birth to a baby with which one has been impregnated.

I don't really care too much either way about the issue. I, too, just find discussion of the topic interesting.

Just sayin'.

I think I'll go with George Carlin on this one : I'm Pro-Choice. Is an embryo considered a person? If so, why don't they get a funeral if they'r miscarried? Why aren't they included in the cencus of the given country? And besides, say a woman decides she's made a mistake wanting a baby, realising she (and perhaps her partner as well) cannot raise the baby due to financial or emotional problems, or that the baby was conceived against her will (by rape), and that she doesn't want to raise a baby where she couldn't provide properly for him or her. Would you deny her, an honest, caring woman the choice to abort a life that probably wouldn't live up to it's fullest potential in life due to its upbringing? I wouldn't. It's her choice.MrBlazing_S

The thing I don't like about the financial or "doesn't want it" argument is this: what if the baby has already been born? What if the baby is two years old? Would you support the right to infanticide in such a situation?

[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="konvikt_17"]

i say a person should only be able to abort their unborn child if they were raped, as they really have no say in the matter. other than that, it is their fault they got pregnant, whether it be consensual sex or getting too drunk and having sex. may not have chose to have sex but they chose to get drunk.

konvikt_17

hmm good point. id have to let that be an exception, but it is also on the woman to know her partner as best she can, i know you cant know everything about a person, but if someone is that messed up to switch contraceptives with placebo or poke holes in his condoms, im sure he would also show other signs that he is not the right person for her.a guy should be able to respect his partners decisions, if not, then maybe he should find another partner.

sorry if it didnt really answer your questions, im not too good at debating:P

Pro-Choice.

Pro-Choice.

Pro Life. Besides, if you don't want the child/ can't afford one, you could give it up for adoption. Also, why did you do the act in the first place if you didn't want a child?

I see more economic and social benefit in permitting abortion than removing it entirely, hence I am "pro-choice".

However, if technology progressed to the point where we could extract a developing foetus from the womb without killing it, then I would be "pro-life" - because all my potential reasons for supporting the freedom would be rendered invalid.