Good post. I'm one of the countless millions of conservatives who does NOT wish to ban all abortions and is a long-standing member of the pro-choice tendency.
all 5 of them?
I'm pro-life, and banning ALL abortions makes no thinking sense. Sometimes, the mother's life actually IS in danger. sometimes...not all the time, but sometimes, a girl is raped, and she had no consent, or decision, in whether to make a baby, so why should she be forced to carry it?Good post. I'm one of the countless millions of conservatives who does NOT wish to ban all abortions and is a long-standing member of the pro-choice tendency.
All 5 of them?
From USA Today, May 2019:
Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Yet the battle over exceptions for both has garnered outsized attention in the national abortion debate.
Well, anti-choice doesn't sound accurate. I certainly support your choice to take hamburger over pasta.There are way more than five anti-choicers who strongly believe in not making exceptions, even if the mother would die.
BTW you are anti-choice, not pro-life.
I have NO CLUE who is out there, promoting pro-life rhetoric, and then is for killing children after their born but......okay? I guess you're right?A true pro-lifer cares about the unwanted person's entire life from birth to death, not just up to when the umbilical cord is cut off.
Well, anti-choice doesn't sound accurate. I certainly support your choice to take hamburger over pasta.
I have NO CLUE who is out there, promoting pro-life rhetoric, and then is for killing children after their born but......okay? I guess you're right?
yea, if a pro-lifer kills a child, you have my permission to go do something about it. Woooh got me!
Well, that's a different kind of choice isn't it? I'm sure you're very anti-choice on Ted Bundy's decision to kill all those girls.Anti-choice specifically is about forcing girls and women to give birth. It has nothing to do with personal preferences like what people eat.
no true scotsman fallacy?True pro-lifers oppose the right to kill any born person who has not explicitly given legal permission in writing to be killed (pulling the plug or euthanasia), the death penalty in nearly all cases, and wars that can be avoided.
Well, that's a different kind of choice isn't it? I'm sure you're very anti-choice on Ted Bundy's decision to kill all those girls.
So, it's about punishing women for consensual sex......not all the time, but sometimes, a girl is raped, and she had no consent, or decision, in whether to make a baby, so why should she be forced to carry it?
Kinda like how anti choicers make a big deal out of the less than one percent that are done in the third trimester, eh?From USA Today, May 2019:
Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Yet the battle over exceptions for both has garnered outsized attention in the national abortion debate. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ew-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/
anti-choiceWell, anti-choice doesn't sound accurate. I certainly support your choice to take hamburger over pasta.
I wouldn't call pregnancy a punishment.So, it's about punishing women for consensual sex......
well, that's hardly accurate of me. I fully support the idea of an endangered mother freely choosing an abortion.anti-choice
adjective
disapproving
opposing the idea that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an abortion (= the intentional ending of pregnancy):
anti-choice
1. opposing the idea that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an…dictionary.cambridge.org
Well, I think it's quite murderous to kill little girls, don't you?Killing girls obviously is nothing like deciding whether I should eat a cheeseburger or pasta for supper, obviously.
Why do you bring up Ted Bundy, anyway?
Agreed. And that's about the same as the attempts of the pro-life side to use 3rd term abortions as a major focus of their arguments. Dont you agree? That in the realistic discussions on abortion, such outliers should not be driving the laws surrounding abortion? Yes, no? Explain?From USA Today, May 2019:
Just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Yet the battle over exceptions for both has garnered outsized attention in the national abortion debate. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ew-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/
Kinda like how anti-choicers make a big deal out of the less than one percent that are done in the third trimester, eh?
they probably don't even know what an ectopic pregnancy is. They just haven't bothered thinking about the issue at all.I've been debating abortion since the 90s and I have only encountered maybe 3-4 pro-lifers who think ALL abortions should be banned. Those people are even against abortion for emergency situations like ectopic pregnancies.
Conservatives who claim to want exceptions to an abortion ban are just lying because they know it's less palatable for them to admit they think that 12 year old should be forced to carry her rapist's child to term.all 5 of them?
They're lying, they want to ban those abortions too.I've been debating abortion since the 90s and I have only encountered maybe 3-4 pro-lifers who think ALL abortions should be banned. Those people are even against abortion for emergency situations like ectopic pregnancies.
They're lying, they want to ban those abortions too.
Let's be honest here. "Abortion is murdering a baby but it's ok to murder a baby sometimes" is not a real position people hold.