Is my view that abortion should be banned except in rare cases where the mother's life is in danger (means: both baby and mom could die)...
And rape. You're making them relive it for 9 months. That's just insane
While I would probably not choose abortion for myself, I would not limit the choice of another that much.
I’m ok with abortion during the first few weeks. The reason, it’s not yet human. I believe your view is too extreme.
The party filter tells me if you're an unborn baby, your chances at being carried to term are better if your parents are Republicans.
That's closer to what I would like to see. Health reasons for both mother or child.
Fund adoption as much as we do abortion.
Fund adoption, not abortion.
That is better.
Too extreme and restrictive. This isn't an issue a government should waste time on.
A victim of rape should be forced to deliver and raise the child of a rapist, most likely as a single mother?
The rape isn't the child's fault, and the mother isn't forced to raise the child, she could give it up for adoption.
IMO ... should a mother be allowed to murder her three year old if she finds out the child’s father is unfaithful?
Think - sure!
That's mad but then ...
We need fewer people saying ‘no’ to hypothetical questions. I say, let the author explore! ❤️😂🤣
Mad ... there’s nothing hypothetical about it! It happens. It’s also a good example to show the barbarity of murdering an innocent child — born or unborn.
Then, if you were a scientist, you’d know that unborn children are alive.
Rape situations we should be able to provide early on access to the morning after pill. I'm fine with that
I’m saying that we should let IMO reach the logical conclusion of his argument.
Here, let me help: let’s legalize medical abortions to age 7. Why not? Because it’s a medical procedure, it’ll have to be done at the doctor’s office. Of course, part of the paperwork for evaluation would include the option of the doctor to place your child if it doesn’t qualify. The rules would be pretty tight (I mean, how many good reasons can you think for aborting a 5 or 6 year old?). If the kid clearly didn’t match the postnatal abortion criterion and the parent just wanted to kill their child (for fun?), then the doctor places the child ..like auto-adoption. Get the kid away from that parent!
This is an obvious and clearly necessary system as a part of the process. IMO would have gotten there on his own if you’d let him. But y’all are just forcing your own ideas down his throat.
I doubt many, if any rape victims would do well with the burden of carrying a rapist’s child to term, let alone go though the adoption process, all while forced. I’d like all women to get pregnant on their own terms with the father to be, but that’s not reality. I couldn’t live with the fact knowing I stopped a beating heart and I never will. I’m a man and I’m pro life, personally. No person has a say what I do with my body and I believe that should apply to all. This matter is one between a woman and her doctor. I’m pro-choice politically. That said, there should probably be some ground rules, legal abortion during contractions... eh, WTF? But again, this isn’t a concern of mine. I have very little experience on the matter. I’ve only known of one person who’s had the produce. A coworker, she had two and was very callous about it. It disgusted me. Also, I didn’t follow the gibberish about aborting a 7 year old. You talk about logic then ramble nonsense. A fetus is human, not a person.
IMO ... and murder should always be between justice the murderer and their victim as you and I have “very little experience with it”. Right?
Think - so you’re suggesting that, because murder spelled backwards is red rum, that abortion is just backwards murder because abortions make a kind of red rum as everything comes out? Because that’s twisted even for a prolifer.
Mad ... you’re left with nothing but pathetic — non-scientific reaches. You strike out again.
Sorry, I thought pointing out your false analogy was critical thinking rather than science. I didn’t much care to, so I tried being as valid as your comment. Seems you still took me too seriously, though. Humph. Oh well.
Mad ... you pointed out nothing bet the impotence of your position.
Well Think, you’re not wrong. Murder is defined by one human being killing another. So when is a fetus its own being? According to human genetics, anatomy, physiology, and biology, 21 weeks is a critical point where a fetus has the ability to survive outside the body (it’s not even a fetus until 8 weeks after conception). It’s still not a person but it does seem to be a defining time when sustainable human life begins. But as long as a fetus is in utero, it has no option but to be bound to its mother’s will. Even if it her will is to terminate its life. Her body, her choice. And for now, a legal choice. A newborn, infant, toddler or 7yo is equally reliant upon its mother but these are all persons; self conscious, autonomous beings of free will. Like I said, I have no dog in this fight. I would never suggest or encourage an abortion but far be it from me to force a woman to carry to term a child she didn’t want to keep or give up for adoption.
IMO ... an unborn child is it’s own being at conception. It has its own heart beat after just a few days, it’s own fingerpick, it’s own circulatory system, independent nervous system and has the ability to feel pain within the first few months. The unborn child is protecting from their carrier by the placenta, which filters many of the ills of the carrier from the child.
Do you get it now?
IMO ... if a two year old causes their mother’s body, should the mother be allowed to kill that child too?
Again, all good points. I do get it; you don’t like abortions. Lucky for you, no one will force you to get one. At the same time, you can’t force someone not to get one. Your opinions differ from the law of the land. Don’t like it? Go change it (thru legal means and methods!). Good luck.
IMO ... do you support any laws that don’t impact you directly?
That would ban virtually all abortions, so it's completely reasonable.
Too extreme. Just because something is banned it doesn’t mean it will disappear. Such measure would put women in danger.
Shic ... except there’s actually NO evidence to support your assertion. How many women died from botched illegal abortions in 1972, the year before the unconstitutional decision was handed down on Rowe v Wade?
Even one is too many. Catholic Ireland realized that and repealed the ban.
Shic ... how many?
It really depends on the severity of it. Every mother is “at risk” during birth since there is always a chance of death to the unborn baby and the mother’s health. However, I believe in extreme cases where the mother is most likely to be permanently damaged or fatally wounded as a result of delivery, I do somewhat agree that she should have the option to save herself. However, aborting because the child is “defected” such as a deformity and the mother doesn’t want to “put up with that” I have no sympathy for her and she shouldn’t be the one holding this baby back from living because she doesn’t believe she has the capability to take care of him or her.
Many women have gotten abortions for non health related issues, and sometimes play to health risk card to cover their own guilt and their reputation and it’s sad. You can always put them up for adoption if you can’t financially take care of it, but giving the child no future is not the way to go. Overall, don’t kill unborn babies.
Reasonable enough as a personal guideline, totally unreasonable as an excuse to impose that restriction on someone else.
Zod ... “someone else”, like an unborn or recently born child who’s rights are stolen by a murderous carrier? I agree!
If that’s your opinion that’s one thing, when your opinion takes rights away from women then it’s too extreme.
Abortion is something each woman should have access to. It’s their right and has been well established as their right.
I know putting undue hardship on women is cruel at a difficult time. I believe if men had abortions it would be a nonissue.
It's not about gender.
You have to draw a line somewhere and why not at conception? There's only one way to get pregnant and unwanted pregnancy is avoidable.
Even if you want to be pregnant and have complications it needs to be available without a legal hassle.
I don’t blame women for not wanting to carry a baby. It’s expensive and there are many risks.
It’s up to each individual, it’s a medical issue, it’s not my business. I would rather they had an abortion than abuse it or murder it once it’s born.
So you accept psychopaths? Like, better murder them in the womb than after birth? Dead is dead.
It's just your view - it's as reasonable or as extreme as you want it to be for yourself... That is, until you start pushing "objective morality" onto people and saying that having a choice at all is immoral. Your opinion is great for you to live by.