[W:962]The right to intervene in someone's private life.

[Josie]

The OP asks that question.
Aren't most of the abortion threads posed by conservatives ........ simply opportunities for anti-abortion advocates to explain why they have the right to intervene and interfere in other people's most intimate and private lives?

You, nor any other anti-abortion advocate has answered the question who gave you the authority to interfere in the pregnancy of another man and woman?

My conscience doesn't allow me to be a-ok with the killing of unborn humans. Just as your conscience doesn't allow you to be a-ok with not allowing the killing of unborn humans. No one has to give me or you authority to have our own opinions.

 

[weaver2]

My conscience doesn't allow me to be a-ok with the killing of unborn humans. Just as your conscience doesn't allow you to be a-ok with not allowing the killing of unborn humans. No one has to give me or you authority to have our own opinions.

I'm fine with opinions. However, as several states are evidencing right now, we aren't dealing with opinions; we are dealing with laws. Texas's conservative and religious senators have just passed a law stating that anyone connected even remotely with an abortion can be sued by someone that knows about the abortion. There is language in the law stating that nobody can stop these suits. The Christian Right has finally gotten the SC to review Roe v Wade with the hopes of overturning legal abortion. The conservative anti-abortion churches in the South have passed law after law restricting abortion, punishing women and abortion providers that have been overturned in the courts.

It is impossible to give yourself permission to interfere in the pregnancy of a man and a woman unknown to you, which is why anti-abortion advocates are actively lobbying the law to make it legal for them to direct the private lives of people they have no way of knowing and no way of knowing how much damage they are doing with their interference.

A good conscience doesn't permit someone to damage other people's lives.

 

[Josie]

I'm fine with opinions. However, as several states are evidencing right now, we aren't dealing with opinions; we are dealing with laws. Texas's conservative and religious senators have just passed a law stating that anyone connected even remotely with an abortion can be sued by someone that knows about the abortion. There is language in the law stating that nobody can stop these suits. The Christian Right has finally gotten the SC to review Roe v Wade with the hopes of overturning legal abortion. The conservative anti-abortion churches in the South have passed law after law restricting abortion, punishing women and abortion providers that have been overturned in the courts.

It is impossible to give yourself permission to interfere in the pregnancy of a man and a woman unknown to you, which is why anti-abortion advocates are actively lobbying the law to make it legal for them to direct the private lives of people they have no way of knowing and no way of knowing how much damage they are doing with their interference.

A good conscience doesn't permit someone to damage other people's lives.

Correct. No one should have permission to damage the lives of any human. Since pregnancy is about another human, though .....

Yes, I already know your opinion on this. We don't need to keep beating the dead horse.

 

[Lursa]

A good conscience doesn't permit someone to damage other people's lives.

It's a balance...one or the other is harmed, up to and including death. So then you have to weigh the greater harm.

Morally, to me it's much worse to cause pain and suffering to women, and also harm to society, which would occur if women's rights were violated to the point where abortion was illegal and therefore, must result in enforcement (use of force, legal and physical, to force women to remain pregnant). It reduces women to 2nd class citizens again and no longer equal to men. Lord knows many women's lives have been damaged by having kids they werent prepared for. All that harms women and society.

Abortion causes the unborn no pain and suffering (this is fact, legal and medical) and there are no negative effects of abortion on society. (No one's ever been able to list any)

My conscience is clear, knowing that each woman can weigh this for herself and decide.

 

[Scrabaholic]

I already know why you are for killing unborn humans. I simply wanted to know if you had the same opinion of born humans who have done incredibly brutal and awful things.

I know this was addressed to someone else, but I would happily throw the switch if the person is 110% guilty.

 

[Ahlevah]

Abortion is voluntary

Yeah, right. I can see all of the fetuses volunteering to be aborted instead of put up for adoption. “Pick me! Me! Abort me!”

 

[vegas giants]

Yeah, right. I can see all of the fetuses volunteering to be aborted instead of put up for adoption. “Pick me! Me! Abort me!”

Any fetus that complains tell me about

 

[Ahlevah]

Oh? They’re just randomly aborting Black babies without the mother? That sounds weird.

Randomly? No. Compare how many abortion clinics there are in South Los Angeles compared to, say, Westwood or Beverly Hills. Do you think that’s an accident?

 

[vegas giants]

Randomly? No. Compare how many abortion clinics there are in South Los Angeles compared to, say, Westwood or Beverly Hills. Do you think that’s an accident?

It's called choice

 

[Ahlevah]

Any fetus that complains tell me about

Well, as you disingenuously know, that would be a problem because they never get the chance to volunteer. But we could ask adoptees if they would have preferred being aborted, especially if they now support the practice.

 

[vegas giants]

Well, as you disingenuously know, that would be a problem because they never get the chance to volunteer. But we could ask adoptees if they would have preferred being aborted, especially if they now support the practice.

I really dont care

 

[Ahlevah]

I really dont care

I didn’t think so.

 

[Lursa]

Well, as you disingenuously know, that would be a problem because they never get the chance to volunteer. But we could ask adoptees if they would have preferred being aborted, especially if they now support the practice.

And what about the kids already waiting to be adopted...that get passed over when new infants are added to that huge pool? And it is huge, more than 100,000 in the US waiting to be adopted. Those kids are aware, waiting and hoping for families. They may suffer negligence, abuse, hopelessness.

Why should we encourage the birth of more unnecessarily when it literally is harmful? That's no moral High Ground, IMO that's selfish and self-indulgent.

Some of us value quality of life over quantity.

 

[minnie616]

Yeah, right. I can see all of the fetuses volunteering to be aborted instead of put up for adoption. “Pick me! Me! Abort me!”

Only one percent of women from the United State give a newborn up for adoption .

Here are a few stats.

By the mid-1980s, the number of newborns given up for adoption had dropped to 2 percent, and it was just 1 percent by 2002, the last year the CDC data captured.

In 2014, only 18,000 children under the age of 2 were placed with adoption agencies.

 

[Ahlevah]

Only one percent of women from the United State give a newborn up for adoption .

Here are a few stats.

By the mid-1980s, the number of newborns given up for adoption had dropped to 2 percent, and it was just 1 percent by 2002, the last year the CDC data captured.

In 2014, only 18,000 children under the age of 2 were placed with adoption agencies.

Sure. Why carry a baby to term just to give it away when it's so much more expedient to abort it?

 

[Lursa]

Sure. Why carry a baby to term just to give it away when it's so much more expedient to abort it?

Esp. when so many others are waiting for homes?

Esp. when her loss of income or debilitating illness due to pregnancy endanger her ability to care for the children or other dependents (elderly, disable) she already has? When a pregnancy endangers her ability to uphold her other obligations and commitments to employer, church, community, society?

Sure, why put all that at risk? Why dont you tell us?

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Randomly? No. Compare how many abortion clinics there are in South Los Angeles compared to, say, Westwood or Beverly Hills. Do you think that’s an accident?

I don’t know if your stat is true or not, nor its relevance. And I don’t know why you feel Black women shouldn’t have access to a safe and legal alternative to pregnancy. You do realize the women taking advantage of this service don’t agree with your take on it, yeah?

 

[Scrabaholic]

Randomly? No. Compare how many abortion clinics there are in South Los Angeles compared to, say, Westwood or Beverly Hills. Do you think that’s an accident?

You do know that wealthy women are much less likely to abort, right?

 

[Scrabaholic]

Well, as you disingenuously know, that would be a problem because they never get the chance to volunteer. But we could ask adoptees if they would have preferred being aborted, especially if they now support the practice.

I am an adoptee. That **** should have aborted all of her pregnancies.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Sure. Why carry a baby to term just to give it away when it's so much more expedient to abort it?

I would never place a child for adoption. Ever.

 

[minnie616]

Sure. Why carry a baby to term just to give it away when it's so much more expedient to abort it?

In the United States adoption organizations will not even talk to a pregnant woman about adoption options until she is In her third trimester of the pregnancy .

Even if abortion were not an option only 1 percent of US women would give up a newborn for adoption.

 

[Ahlevah]

Esp. when so many others are waiting for homes?

If we're talking about newborns, prospective parents are waiting in line.

Esp. when her loss of income or debilitating illness due to pregnancy endanger her ability to care for the children or other dependents (elderly, disable) she already has? When a pregnancy endangers her ability to uphold her other obligations and commitments to employer, church, community, society?

Sure, why put all that at risk? Why dont you tell us?

For the same reason she shouldn't be robbing banks. It's wrong.

 

[Ahlevah]

I don’t know if your stat is true or not, nor its relevance. And I don’t know why you feel Black women shouldn’t have access to a safe and legal alternative to pregnancy. You do realize the women taking advantage of this service don’t agree with your take on it, yeah?

I just think it's ironic to make a statement that "black lives matter" when it's obvious they really don't.

 

[Ahlevah]

You do know that wealthy women are much less likely to abort, right?

Yeah. They use condoms.

 

[minnie616]

Yeah. They use condoms.

Actually, Affluent women are much more likely than poor women to get an abortion.

Poor women get fewer abortions than rich women

Vox is a general interest news site for the 21st century. Its mission: to help everyone understand our complicated world, so that we can all help shape it. In text, video and audio, our reporters explain politics, policy, world affairs, technology, culture, science, the climate crisis, money...

www.vox.com