• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How would you solve the abortion issue?

So why is a pro-choice poster asking for legislative solutions? Just posting a bait thread so the usual suspects can trot in and attack those who respond?

We have a legislative solution, the enforcement of RvW. Unfortunately, some states still choose to try and do end runs around it.

But the solution IS pro-choice, women making the best decisions they can for their lives and those of their families (present and future).

No one is forced to have an abortion and no one is forced to remain pregnant.

Most women still choose to give birth rather than abort and the abortion rate goes down every year. What other solution is needed that doesnt involve violating women's rights? Any 'solution' that involves that is not a solution.

Fix the socio-economic issues that make abortion the better choice and that is the solution.
 
How is it intruding on a woman's privacy to say that if women want to avoid unwanted pregnancies that aren't the result of violence they need to take actions that avoid such unwanted pregnancies by having sufficient respect for themselves and their own needs/desires? I'm not dictating anything - in fact, I've specifically said legislation related to abortion will solve nothing.

If you have any more inane twists or misrepresentations of my comments you'd like to present, save yourself the trouble - I won't be responding.

A woman choosing to enjoy sex and using birth control doesnt have 'sufficient respect' for herself or her desires? Why on earth should women deny themselves that pleasure? Esp. if they are being responsible and using bc?

It always astounds me when people say, 'oh, just dont have sex' when it's one of the greatest things on the planet. Like men and women that never want kids should never have sex? That people that arent ready for kids shouldnt have sex? Good lord, how respressively sad that world would be.

I would agree that I havent seen any ideas on legislation that will solve any abortion issues because I believe the current decision RvW, when properly enforced in law, should be adequate.
 
Denial suits you.

It's amazing that someone who claims to have a legal background continually asks why/if the right to abortion is included in the Constitution, when they should know that that is not necessary, since anything not enumerated in the Const. is left up to the states to decide....as long as their decisions dont violate people's Constitutional rights. Which the laws and enforcement needed to actually make abortion illegal would do to women. (He hasnt explained how it could work otherwise...I've asked a few times)
 
Abortionist is probably the second oldest profession in the world...occasioned by the first.

No law is going to stop it.

But allowing it to be legal will at least make it safe as possible for the woman who chooses to terminate a pregnancy occurring in her own body.

So the best way to "solve the problem" is not to make laws against it.
 
Because it has nothing to do with the issue of abortion. People CHOOSE to focus on the act and the possible result. But in all of human history, NOTHING has changed this human behavior. And nothing will.

And in America, we have no control over those actions...people are free to have sex as they wish. It's not even worth discussing. But people do in order to place blame and to judge.

Those things are meaningless to the issue of abortion however since...which people CHOOSE to ignore frequently...we cannot control them and never will.

So the acts leading up to abortion are not even relevant to whether or not abortion is moral, or evil, or murder, or justifiable. It just comes down to if women should be allowed to have abortions. Because if you believe the unborn is equal to the born...then abortion cant be right, ever, unless to save the mother's life (if then). And if they are not, then why make it illegal?

If they are not equal to the born, then why do people continue to fight against it? Because after 40+ yrs of legal abortion, more women still choose to have their babies instead of abortion. And the abortion rate goes down every year.

IMO it is because some people still choose to judge the actions of women, whether warranted or not. Some self-indulgently choose to unrealistically personify the unborn and get emotionally wrapped up in something none of their business.

And then people wonder why women are secretive about having an abortion? Something they believe in their best interests and their families (present & future)? Because they are still severely judged and many make it plain that they find NO excuse for abortion at all except to save the mother's life...so why open themselves up to that?

Sorry, but it's inane nonsense to claim that what leads to pregnancy has nothing to do with abortion. If there's no pregnancy, there's no need to discuss possible abortion - that's just a simple fact. Your attempt to divorce the two is idiotic.
 
We have a legislative solution, the enforcement of RvW. Unfortunately, some states still choose to try and do end runs around it.

But the solution IS pro-choice, women making the best decisions they can for their lives and those of their families (present and future).

No one is forced to have an abortion and no one is forced to remain pregnant.

Most women still choose to give birth rather than abort and the abortion rate goes down every year. What other solution is needed that doesnt involve violating women's rights? Any 'solution' that involves that is not a solution.

Fix the socio-economic issues that make abortion the better choice and that is the solution.

You should address your comments and your indignation at the creator of the OP.
 
A woman choosing to enjoy sex and using birth control doesnt have 'sufficient respect' for herself or her desires? Why on earth should women deny themselves that pleasure? Esp. if they are being responsible and using bc?

It always astounds me when people say, 'oh, just dont have sex' when it's one of the greatest things on the planet. Like men and women that never want kids should never have sex? That people that arent ready for kids shouldnt have sex? Good lord, how respressively sad that world would be.

I would agree that I havent seen any ideas on legislation that will solve any abortion issues because I believe the current decision RvW, when properly enforced in law, should be adequate.

Perhaps you'd like to point out the percentage of women who have abortions as a result of properly administered birth control methods that fail. There were approximately 1 million abortions in the US last year - how many of those were the result of faulty birth control means?

You're like Minnie who likes to toss out the rape statistics when rape and incest are minuscule in the larger incidence of abortions in the US each year.

If you actually believe that the vast majority of abortions in the US are the result of faulty birth control, instead of wasting your time bleating here on DP you should be organizing marches on Washington to demand Congressional investigations into this serious health issue.
 
Sorry, but it's inane nonsense to claim that what leads to pregnancy has nothing to do with abortion. If there's no pregnancy, there's no need to discuss possible abortion - that's just a simple fact. Your attempt to divorce the two is idiotic.

It's none of your business if a woman is pregnant.

Perhaps you'd like to point out the percentage of women who have abortions as a result of properly administered birth control methods that fail. There were approximately 1 million abortions in the US last year - how many of those were the result of faulty birth control means?You're like Minnie who likes to toss out the rape statistics when rape and incest are minuscule in the larger incidence of abortions in the US each year.

If you actually believe that the vast majority of abortions in the US are the result of faulty birth control, instead of wasting your time bleating here on DP you should be organizing marches on Washington to demand Congressional investigations into this serious health issue.

Again, why do you care? Also, you conveniently fail to mention rape that goes unreported, either due to fear or social stigma (specifically from people like you, who believe that women should maintain a false Victorian notion of respectability). A woman can decide to have an abortion for many reasons. Get over it.
 
Last edited:
Abortionist is probably the second oldest profession in the world...occasioned by the first.

Slave trader was pretty old, too.

No law is going to stop it.
See above. Your kind said the same thing about slavery.

But allowing it to be legal will at least make it safe as possible for the woman

When you say "at least," you need to be listing something remotely positive. That's a negative. We shouldn't want killers to be safe.
 
Slave trader was pretty old, too.

See above. Your kind said the same thing about slavery.



When you say "at least," you need to be listing something remotely positive. That's a negative. We shouldn't want killers to be safe.

The slave trade is illegal, along with slavery.
 
Slave trader was pretty old, too.

See above. Your kind said the same thing about slavery.



When you say "at least," you need to be listing something remotely positive. That's a negative. We shouldn't want killers to be safe.

Keep talking.

Keep saying that stuff.

You do more to further the cause I am fighting for than I can do on my own.
 
Keep talking.

Keep saying that stuff.

You do more to further the cause I am fighting for than I can do on my own.

Okay I will happily keep informing you that your statements are wrong, including this one.
 
Okay I will happily keep informing you that your statements are wrong, including this one.

Works for me.

I know my statements are spot on...and I suspect you know it also. So I can be reasonably sure you will keep it up despite the damage you do to your position.

My position, once again, is that a woman who wants to terminate a pregnancy going on in her own body should have the right to do so.
 
My position, once again, is that a woman who wants to terminate a pregnancy going on in her own body should have the right to do so.

Right, your position is that some human beings are inferior and it's okay to kill them without just cause, and my position is that you're wrong.
 
Right, your position is that some human beings are inferior and it's okay to kill them without just cause, and my position is that you're wrong.

That's my JayDubya!!!!
 
Sorry, but it's inane nonsense to claim that what leads to pregnancy has nothing to do with abortion. If there's no pregnancy, there's no need to discuss possible abortion - that's just a simple fact. Your attempt to divorce the two is idiotic.

Yeah, predictable. You have to cling to the blame game. Your inablity to grasp the point...or wilfull decision to do so....is more along the lines of your attempted insult.

Nothing is going to stop people from having sex. The reasons they do so and if they use birth control....nothing anyone else will ever be able to control...I know that annoys the **** out of some people, not being able to control others.
 
You should address your comments and your indignation at the creator of the OP.

You reiterated the point about a legislative solution, so I tried to clarify it further for you.
 
Perhaps you'd like to point out the percentage of women who have abortions as a result of properly administered birth control methods that fail. There were approximately 1 million abortions in the US last year - how many of those were the result of faulty birth control means?

You're like Minnie who likes to toss out the rape statistics when rape and incest are minuscule in the larger incidence of abortions in the US each year.

If you actually believe that the vast majority of abortions in the US are the result of faulty birth control, instead of wasting your time bleating here on DP you should be organizing marches on Washington to demand Congressional investigations into this serious health issue.

It doesnt matter. The reasons for the pregnancy dont matter. The reasons for the choice to have an abortion dont matter. A woman should be able to...and can...have an abortion for any reason she wants. Because all the discussions in the world wont affect those things for other people.

I usually point out that most people are using BC when they have sex because I get tired of some people constantly harping on women being so irresponsible and "deserve' the consequences they get....in other words, a kid. The kid is their punishment for being irresponsible :doh

Newflash! Nobody like people who act irresponsibly, esp. when we have to pay for the results of that irresponsibly. I dont like paying for welfare, etc either. But in those discussions I dont bother whining about how irresponsible people on welfare are...mostly because many of them are not on welfare because of irresponsible decisions.
 
It's amazing that someone who claims to have a legal background continually asks why/if the right to abortion is included in the Constitution, when they should know that that is not necessary, since anything not enumerated in the Const. is left up to the states to decide....as long as their decisions dont violate people's Constitutional rights. Which the laws and enforcement needed to actually make abortion illegal would do to women. (He hasnt explained how it could work otherwise...I've asked a few times)

Exactly. And it doesn't matter how many ways you explain it to ML.

So many pro-life advocates just can't grasp that all of the related S.C. cases pre-dating Roe v Wade up to about Planned Parenthood v Casey ALL validate that WOMEN'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS EXIST WITHIN SEVERAL PROVISIONS of the Amendments to the Bill of Rights, which allow women to have control over their sexual health and reproductive decision. A reproductive decision may include obtaining a legal medical procedure called "abortion".
 
Semi-permanent birth control implanted in males & females when puberty hits. Can't get it taken out or reproduce till one is 30.

i can understand you are probably being facetious, but there is something in what you wrote

stopping the youth pregnancies would be a huge plus

it would stop the drain on resources, and the kids wouldnt have the "kid" holding them back from finishing school, completing educations, etc

how do we accomplish this?

free birth control...as much as they want? yeah....but not enough

free morning after pill? yeah....

but it is more than that....some of it is attitude, and knowing the "system" is out there to provide for them

so if a young girl gets pregnant, it isnt as scary as it could, maybe "should" be

and how do we get the males to understand that they are "responsible" for those lives created?

science needs to create a pill, taken at puberty, that cuts off all chance of pregnancy

then when a young woman is ready, she talks to her doctor, takes a second pill which puts her back to "fertile"

no more accidental 14 & 15 year old pregnancies....no more need to abort unwanted children

only abortions needed after that would be special circumstances....rape, possible health of mother, etc

i know...a pipe dreeam
 
However, can you tell me how states would enforce laws making abortion illegal, if that was a 'state's choice?' How would they do so while, as they must, still respect a woman's Constitutional and civil rights? What exactly would they do to 'solve' their abortion issue...

You don't seem to have understood my post. States, as sovereigns, have inherent power to make laws and policies regulating the public health, safety, and welfare--what the Supreme Court has usually called the "police power." How they enforce those laws is a separate question, but states obviously manage to prosecute many thousands of violations of criminal laws of all sorts every day.

You talk about "constitutional and civil" rights, but I don't know what distinction you are trying to draw between them.

In the situation I described, Congress has acted to remove the jurisdiction of all federal courts over cases involving abortion. Put another way, neither the federal district courts, the Supreme Court, or any other federal court would any longer have authority to decide any case involving abortion. Congress has power to do that, and on occasion it has exercised it. Congress has always been a far more powerful branch of the federal government than the judiciary. It is not by accident that Congress is the subject of Article I, while the Constitution does not take up the judicial branch until Article III.

The part of the Constitution relevant to stripping lower federal courts of jurisdiction is Article III, sec. 1, which vests the federal judicial power "in one Supreme Court, and in any inferior courts Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." Since the lower federal courts would not even exist if Congress had not passed laws creating them, Congress's power to limit their jurisdiction is beyond question.

The part of the Constitution relevant to limiting the Supreme Court's power to hear cases is Article III, sec. 2, cl. 2, which makes the Court's appellate jurisdiction subject to "such exceptions . . . as the Congress shall make." Since only a small part of the Court's jurisdiction is original, and almost all of it is appellate, the Exceptions Clause gives Congress a strong restraint on the Court's power to decide cases. Congress once used its Exceptions Clause power to make a law removing the Court's power to decide a case it had already taken. See Ex Parte McCardle.

A plaintiff would still be free to challenge the constitutionality of a state abortion law in that state's courts. But if the state law prohibited abortion, that is the law its courts would be applying to the case, and they might very well not interpret the Constitution the same way the Supreme Court had. And if the case reached the state supreme court, no federal court would any longer have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from its decision.
 
You don't seem to have understood my post. States, as sovereigns, have inherent power to make laws and policies regulating the public health, safety, and welfare--what the Supreme Court has usually called the "police power." How they enforce those laws is a separate question, but states obviously manage to prosecute many thousands of violations of criminal laws of all sorts every day.

You talk about "constitutional and civil" rights, but I don't know what distinction you are trying to draw between them.

That the states cannot create laws that violate women's Constitutional and civil rights, like life, due process, privacy, no matter what they consider in 'the state's interest.' Just like the states cant decide to pass laws that would be discriminatory against blacks.


So, once again I ignore the other crap you cut and paste and ask AGAIN....what laws would a state pass to make abortion illegal and how would they enforce them without violating women's rights?

Come on, at least attempt to commit to something in your own words.
 
It's none of your business if a woman is pregnant.



Again, why do you care? Also, you conveniently fail to mention rape that goes unreported, either due to fear or social stigma (specifically from people like you, who believe that women should maintain a false Victorian notion of respectability). A woman can decide to have an abortion for many reasons. Get over it.

I never claimed a woman couldn't get an abortion for whatever reason she chooses. Stop throwing up strawmen as a form of debate.

As for "why do you care"? I'd ask you the same ignorant question. Why the hell are you viewing and responding in a thread about abortion when it apparently is none of your business?

On that note, have a good day - I'm done with your nonsense.
 
So many pro-life advocates just can't grasp that all of the related S.C. cases pre-dating Roe v Wade up to about Planned Parenthood v Casey ALL validate that WOMEN'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS EXIST WITHIN SEVERAL PROVISIONS of the Amendments to the Bill of Rights, which allow women to have control over their sexual health and reproductive decision. A reproductive decision may include obtaining a legal medical procedure called "abortion".

I am not a "pro-life advocate," but I still just can't grasp that. Maybe it would help if you were not so vague and general. You claim the Supreme Court's related cases pre-dating Roe v. Wade ALL validate that something here or there in the Constitution guarantees a right to control reproductive decisions, and that that right may encompass the decision to have an abortion. Please name those cases specifically, and tell us exactly what the Court said. That should be easy enough for anyone who understands constitutional law as well as you claim to.
 
Yeah, predictable. You have to cling to the blame game. Your inablity to grasp the point...or wilfull decision to do so....is more along the lines of your attempted insult.

Nothing is going to stop people from having sex. The reasons they do so and if they use birth control....nothing anyone else will ever be able to control...I know that annoys the **** out of some people, not being able to control others.

Funny - I'm one of the few posters in this thread who's actually responded to the question raised in the OP, even though it's simply a bait thread. You, on the other hand, like the rest of the pro-abortion clique and as usual, simply come into these threads to attack and criticize anyone who isn't carrying the pro-abortion water. You're like tag-team wrestlers. It's why I asked one of your clique-ites if you guys coordinate these threads and your responses.

In case you didn't know it, cause and effect is simple science and nature. I appreciate that you may think pregnancy is like the flu and easily caught or you think innocent women get pregnant through immaculate conception on an epidemic basis. If you take the OP seriously, which is probably a big mistake, the simple fact remains that the only way to reduce abortions is to reduce unwanted pregnancies. As stated, you can't legislate in that area even if some wanted to. The alternative is to reduce unwanted pregnancies. I gave my response to that "issue", suggesting women have more respect for themselves and their individual needs and consider the consequences of not doing so. Your alternative is to throw your hands in the air, and rant about how women are going to have sex and there's nothing to be done about it.
 
Back
Top Bottom