• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

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

She had the right to choose to prevent an unwanted pregnancy...................... or, to go on ahead and take the risk of getting pregnant.
Once you create a life, that created human being would also have the right to be protected (as much as every one of us does).

A woman doesn't want to have a baby for whatever reasons she may have? Fine.
Therefore - don't create another human being inside you. 🤷

There's no longer any excuse today getting an unwanted pregnancy.
Women cannot will themselves to get or not get pregnant. If we could, there'd be no abortion clinics or fertility clinics.
 
@ all those that post information about abortion, contraceptives, fetal development and social attitudes: how many times must substantial proof in historical records, studies, statistics, research and peer juried books and articles be posted before anti-abortion advocates stop palming off utter nonsense as truth about these subjects?
 
@ all those that post information about abortion, contraceptives, fetal development and social attitudes: how many times must substantial proof in historical records, studies, statistics, research and peer juried books and articles be posted before anti-abortion advocates stop palming off utter nonsense as truth about these subjects?
Because their point is she's a weak, irresponsible slut that should keep her legs closed.

And if she doesnt, then that paragon of a female should become a mother.
 
Because their point is she's a weak, irresponsible slut that should keep her legs closed.

And if she doesnt, then that paragon of a female should become a mother.
LOL That is one of their stranger dicta: women who are indiscrete skanks, promiscuous sluts, lazy, puerile, unstable and selfish.They should be denied abortions and forced to become mothers as punishment.

(warning to the language challenged sarcasm ahead) And so another child is born into an intelligent, stable home complete with parental love.
 
LOL That is one of their stranger dicta: women who are indiscrete skanks, promiscuous sluts, lazy, puerile, unstable and selfish.They should be denied abortions and forced to become mothers as punishment.

(warning to the language challenged sarcasm ahead) And so another child is born into an intelligent, stable home complete with parental love.
It makes no sense. They call women who abort "irresponsible", so in essence, they are saying that they want irresponsible women to be mothers. All I can do is smh at the inanity of it.
 
LOL That is one of their stranger dicta: women who are indiscrete skanks, promiscuous sluts, lazy, puerile, unstable and selfish.They should be denied abortions and forced to become mothers as punishment.

(warning to the language challenged sarcasm ahead) And so another child is born into an intelligent, stable home complete with parental love.


It makes no sense. They call women who abort "irresponsible", so in essence, they are saying that they want irresponsible women to be mothers. All I can do is smh at the inanity of it.
I agree.


Blue states have fewer single moms….because
Blue states citizens are more likely to accept abortion.
Blue states have fewer divorces.
Blue states have more stable two parent homes.

Actually, the pro life movement may be responsible for the increase of single mothers.

It is very telling that the highest numbers of single mothers live in the red states.


From the following :


Did the Pro-Life Movement Lead to More Single Moms?

As the co-authors of Red Families v. Blue Families, we often give talks about the recent rise in what’s called the “nonmarital birthrate,” or the idea that more than 40 percent of children are now born to women who aren’t married.


Sometimes at our talks someone will come up to us, confess his or her encounter with single parenthood, and say something like:
“When my daughter got pregnant and decided to keep the child, we were OK with that because we are Christians. When she decided not to marry the father, we were relieved because we knew he would be bad for her and the marriage would never work.”[/B]

They express these two beliefs—that they are Christian and thus uncomfortable with abortion and that they are relieved their daughter decided to raise the child alone—as if they are not connected.

But in fact this may be one of the stranger, more unexpected legacies of the pro-life movement that arose in the 40 years since Roe v. Wade: In conservative communities, the hardening of anti-abortion attitudes may have increased the acceptance of single-parent families.

And by contrast, in less conservative communities, the willingness to accept abortion has helped create more stable families.

 
Last edited:
I agree.
Blue states have fewer single moms….because
Blue states citizens are more likely to accept abortion.
Blue states have fewer divorces.
Blue states have more stable two parent homes.
Actually, the pro life movement may be responsible for the increase of single mothers.
It is very telling that the highest numbers of single mothers live in the red states.
Additionally, the unavailability of abortion services in red states is increasing the numbers of unwanted children. Unwanted children in single parent homes are at high risk for child abuse.

The belief that denying an abortion and saddling a family with unwanted children is the Christian thing to do is not only irrational it is cruel.
 
Additionally, the unavailability of abortion services in red states is increasing the numbers of unwanted children. Unwanted children in single parent homes are at high risk for child abuse.

The belief that denying an abortion and saddling a family with unwanted children is the Christian thing to do is not only irrational it is cruel.


I don’t believe that the so called “ Christian Right pro life “ groups and organizations are truly representing Christian values.

It is hard for me to believe that they do not know what they are doing.
They are making families far less stable.
 
I don’t believe that the so called “ Christian Right pro life “ groups and organizations are truly representing Christian values.

It is hard for me to believe that they do not know what they are doing.
They are making families far less stable.

It doesn't make sense that a Christian group would choose death of an unborn child as a way to make families more stable. That can be done in many ways that don't include death -- financial help, mental health counseling for individuals and families, rehab services, etc.

Also, I think more pro-lifers should be rejecting abstinence only sex education. Some kids are going to have sex - you can't pretend like they magically won't. So they need the education to know how to not get pregnant and protect themselves from STIs (as well as knowing that abstinence is also a good option) .
 
It doesn't make sense that a Christian group would choose death of an unborn child as a way to make families more stable. That can be done in many ways that don't include death -- financial help, mental health counseling for individuals and families, rehab services, etc.

And yet there are so many dysfunctional families and families living in poverty. For those in poverty, so many are single mothers.

Where are the "Christians" doing what you claimed? Stopping the abuse and neglect and over-work? The lack of safe housing and decent food? If what you claimed was successful...there would be very little of that...but it's significant.

So your "solution" is only a partial solution...and abortion is a valid partial solution as well. And it respects a woman's recognition of her own circumstances and capabilities.

Unless you think you can convince the "Christian" and other pro-lifers to kick in even more to end all those crippling family consequences?
 
It doesn't make sense that a Christian group would choose death of an unborn child as a way to make families more stable. That can be done in many ways that don't include death -- financial help, mental health counseling for individuals and families, rehab services, etc.

Also, I think more pro-lifers should be rejecting abstinence only sex education. Some kids are going to have sex - you can't pretend like they magically won't. So they need the education to know how to not get pregnant and protect themselves from STIs (as well as knowing that abstinence is also a good option) .

I agree that abstinence only sex education is not a solution in fact it creates more unwanted pregnancies since birth control is not taught to the teens and they are unprepared.


The Religious Coalition of Reproductive Choice works very hard to promote policies to ensure families and communities have the resources needed to promote healthy families and that are equipped to nurture children in peace and love.
………
As an organization committed to actualizing reproductive justice, RCRC is expanding beyond the bitter abortion debate to seek solutions to pressing national problems such as disparities in access to reproductive health services, unintended pregnancy, the spread of HIV/AIDS and STIs in already marginalized communities,
inadequate health care, and severe attacks on privacy and the moral agency of women.

We support access to comprehensive sexuality education, family planning and contraception, affordable child care and health care, and adoption services
as well as safe, legal, abortion services, regardless of income or any other unique circumstance.

We work for public policies that ensure the medical, economic, and educational resources necessary for healthy families and communities that are equipped to nurture children in peace and love.
 
It doesn't make sense that a Christian group would choose death of an unborn child as a way to make families more stable. That can be done in many ways that don't include death -- financial help, mental health counseling for individuals and families, rehab services, etc.

Also, I think more pro-lifers should be rejecting abstinence only sex education. Some kids are going to have sex - you can't pretend like they magically won't. So they need the education to know how to not get pregnant and protect themselves from STIs (as well as knowing that abstinence is also a good option) .

Here are 5 groups you can donate to to help comprehensive sex education.

The number 1 group mentioned in the article is the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice:

Their mission: to advocate for reproductive choices, health, rights, and justice.

They continuously work for policies that aim towards giving everyone access to sex education, as well as family planning and contraception, affordable child and health care, and safe/legal abortion services. The RCRC puts together religious communities that come together to ensure reproductive choice through education and advocacy. If you would like to ensure the RCRC works to allow access to sex education, you can donate

The others are listed in the link below:




5 Advocacy Groups for Sexual Health Education, Get Involved!
 
Last edited:
It doesn't make sense that a Christian group would choose death of an unborn child as a way to make families more stable.
Let me get back to that in another post.
That can be done in many ways that don't include death -- financial help, mental health counseling for individuals and families, rehab services, etc.
You are absolutely right we should be doing much more of those sorts of programs. They would be an enormous help to families struggling to welcome an unexpected child. But we aren't doing it and until we are willing to spend tax money on families abortion is the solution.
Also, I think more pro-lifers should be rejecting abstinence only sex education. Some kids are going to have sex - you can't pretend like they magically won't. So they need the education to know how to not get pregnant and protect themselves from STIs (as well as knowing that abstinence is also a good option) .
Also right. Randy teens are going to experiment no matter how much good advice they get. Unfortunately Congress voted to financially support abstinence-only education so many schools in order to save money opt for abstinence-only sex-ed instead of paying for science based honest and useful sex-ed and kids suffer the consequences.
 
It doesn't make sense that a Christian group would choose death of an unborn child as a way to make families more stable. That can be done in many ways that don't include death -- financial help, mental health counseling for individuals and families, rehab services, etc.

Also, I think more pro-lifers should be rejecting abstinence only sex education. Some kids are going to have sex - you can't pretend like they magically won't. So they need the education to know how to not get pregnant and protect themselves from STIs (as well as knowing that abstinence is also a good option) .

Here is a list of denominations and religious groups who are members of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice:

Coalition Council Members:

Rabbinical Assembly
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
Union for Reform Judaism
Women's League for Conservative Judaism
Episcopal Church (United States)
American Ethical Union National Service Conference
Society for Humanistic Judaism
Presbyterians Affirming Reproductive Options (PARO) of the Presbyterian Church (USA)
Jewish Reconstructionist Federation
Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association
Central Conference of American Rabbis
North American Federation of Temple Youth
Women of Reform Judaism, The Federation of Temple Sisterhoods
Women's Rabbinic Network of Central Conference of American Rabbis
The United Church of Christ
Unitarian Universalist Association
Unitarian Universalist Women's Federation website
Young Religious Unitarian Universalists
Continental Unitarian Universalist Young Adult Network
American Jewish Committee
American Jewish Congress
Anti-Defamation League
Catholics for Choice
Christian Lesbians Out (CLOUT)
Church of the Brethren Women's Caucus
Disciples for Choice
Episcopal Urban Caucus
Episcopal Women's Caucus
Hadassah, WZOA
Jewish Women International
Lutheran Women's Caucus
Methodist Federation for Social Action
NA'AMAT USA
National Council of Jewish Women
Women's American ORT
YWCA of the USA
 
It doesn't make sense that a Christian group would choose death of an unborn child as a way to make families more stable.
It seems to me that the leaders of the anti-abortion movement have forced their followers into a position where they can't be moderate. They can't say, as you have said, better and more family support would help reduce abortions and abstinence-only isn't a very effective sex-ed program.

The insistent rhetoric of anti-abortion leaders has forced followers to accept a mental image of abortion as the brutal killing of a something that looks like a 6 month old baby. This imagery has effectively consolidated political power for the leaders but it has kept a lot of sensible anti-abortion people from expressing more rational views. Worse yet it has kept them from collaborative discussions with other groups that also want a reduction of abortion.

It's too bad that the Christian Right picked legal abortion around which to create a political base. They have essentially cut off all opportunities for women to work together on an important problem that affects us all and have driven us into opposing corners where to their satisfaction nothing gets done.
 
It seems to me that the leaders of the anti-abortion movement have forced their followers into a position where they can't be moderate. They can't say, as you have said, better and more family support would help reduce abortions and abstinence-only isn't a very effective sex-ed program.

The insistent rhetoric of anti-abortion leaders has forced followers to accept a mental image of abortion as the brutal killing of a something that looks like a 6 month old baby. This imagery has effectively consolidated political power for the leaders but it has kept a lot of sensible anti-abortion people from expressing more rational views. Worse yet it has kept them from collaborative discussions with other groups that also want a reduction of abortion.

It's too bad that the Christian Right picked legal abortion around which to create a political base. They have essentially cut off all opportunities for women to work together on an important problem that affects us all and have driven us into opposing corners where to their satisfaction nothing gets done.

Well, I'm pro-life and I just said it, so.....................................
 
Well, I'm pro-life and I just said it, so.....................................
And yet, were unable to actually put a real life foundation under it, as I pointed out.

You make an empty "argument."
 
Well, I'm pro-life and I just said it, so.....................................
But yet you vote for people who refuse said aid and argue against providing easy access for birth control. It’s like the guy who says he is pro-gay but votes for gay bashers.

They call that empty platitudes.
 
But yet you vote for people who refuse said aid and argue against providing easy access for birth control. It’s like the guy who says he is pro-gay but votes for gay bashers.

They call that empty platitudes.

Oh? Who do I vote for?

And we already have easy access to birth control.
 
Oh? Who do I vote for?

And we already have easy access to birth control.

I think @calamity was speaking about pro life groups and organizations generally.

We know the Catholic Church dogma is against any artificial birth control.

They use lots of money and their influence to try to take away birth control covered by Medicare and or the ACA (Obamacare.)

Many American Catholics use birth control but the Catholic Church does everything it can to chip away a woman’s access to it.

Oh , and I already proved that the better more reliable birth control meds and devices are not easily accessible to many US women.


It was the Religious Coaliation for Reproductive Choice that fought hard for years to get prescription birth control medications and devices covered by insurance with no copays and the ACA did adopt the policy that RCRC tried so hard to get.

It is the republican party that because of politics that is trying so hard to prevent women who want the long acting Birth control devices . If more women were able to have the long acting birth control at no extra cost to them there would be fewer unplanned pregnancies.

I have stated many times that if both pro choice and pro life advocates worked together we could greatly reduce the numbers of abortions.


Abortions have been lowed quite a bit the last decade thanks to comprehensive sex education and better access to more effective Birth control.

As I stated on multiple other threads...

Eliminating unwanted pregnancies will make abortion very rare.

Women do not electively abort a wanted pregnancy.

(When a pregnancy is very much wanted they would only choose abortion if something goes terribly wrong with the pregnancy.)
 
Last edited:
Oh? Who do I vote for?
Are you going to lie about it now? Of course you are. It's been the pattern.
And we already have easy access to birth control.
Nonsense. The Right Wing war on planned parenthood (which you support) has restricted access to B/C for youth and the poor. Ergo, you just told another lie.
 
Are you going to lie about it now? Of course you are. It's been the pattern.

Who do I vote for, calamity? Tell me - since you think you know. :)

Nonsense. The Right Wing war on planned parenthood (which you support) has restricted access to B/C for youth and the poor. Ergo, you just told another lie.

The only thing wrong with PP is abortion. I (and many other pro-lifers I know) have no problems with anything else PP does.

The personal attacks need to stop in order to have an intelligent, mature conversation.
 
Last edited:
Who do I vote for, calamity? Tell me - since you think you know. :)



The only thing wrong with PP is abortion. I (and many other pro-lifers I know) have no problems with anything else PP does.

The personal attacks need to stop in order to have an intelligent, mature conversation.

Birth control access and family planning are among the majority of services at planned parenthood.



Abortion is a very small part of family planing and of Planned Parenthoods. Yet many pro- lifers continue to protest and try close down Planned Parenthoods. Some even go so far as to use violence to close them down.

They often harass young women going into a Planned parenthood assuming every woman going in is there to have ian abortion when many of those women are going there for birth control pills or family planning advise.
 
Last edited:
Abortion is small part of planned parenthood. Yet many pro- lifers continue to protest and try close dotwn planned Parenthoods. Some even go so far as to use violence to close them down.

They should be shut down if they perform abortions. They shouldn't be targeted with violence.
 
They should be shut down if they perform abortions. They shouldn't be targeted with violence.
See? You lied about supporting easy access to birth control.
 
Back
Top Bottom