When Abortion Should Be Allowed

[Lursa]

.P.S. this is quite possibly the dumbest attempt I've ever seen to justify Pro-Life garbage.

Yeah, it's right up there with the pro-life fantasy, "if you asked that unborn baby if it wanted to live, what do you think it would say?"

 

[Lursa]

Did the state force these women to spread their legs?

When people write this stupid statement, do they realize that it means men would be going without sex a great deal more?

Men demand this a lot...and yet it means seriously denying that pursuit that motivates so much of many of their lives. Then they'd blame women for being stuck up bitches.

Or maybe many of them are too stupid to remember that no birth control works 100% of the time.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

With conjoined twins, sometimes the twins can be surgically separated but in order for it to be done both twins have to consent to it. That's how it should be with abortion, the baby should also have to consent to it. So if somebody wants to have an abortion if the unborn baby also consents to it, that's when it should be allowed.

Conjoined twins can't give consent for bodily separation before adulthood. By then, depending on where they are conjoined, the twins may be inseparable. It must be done ASAP so that their physical development will be normal if separation is possible.

There are several reasons to abort them: a high risk one or both will be stillborn, no chance of long-term survival, a very low chance of both surviving separation surgery, and how/where they are conjoined. But if none of these are true (or their names are Abby and Brittany Hensel), there is nothing wrong with letting them live either.

 

[I'm Immemorial]

 

[Da Mole]

That is my position.

Holy smokes, I agree with someone on the left.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

The state isn't forcing anything within a reasonable time period. I don't much care either way, just as long as you pay for it and not me.

Yes it is. The only reasonable time period is up to nine months.

When has your state ever made you pay for abortions?

 

[Patriotic Voter]

That would be nature forcing the woman give birth

Nothing forces a woman to give birth. It is her choice alone.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Did the state force these women to spread their legs?

It is never the woman's fault if a man raped her and she got pregnant. There is no reason to punish the mom for what the dad did.

America needs a federally standardized sex education program at all public and private schools with no parental right to opt out if that is what it takes for all 10-45 year old female Americans to practice safe sex using the most effective birth control methods, completely avoid evil men who want to sexually assault them, and choose to abstain from having sex at all times if they are not married.

 

[Noodlegawd]

With conjoined twins, sometimes the twins can be surgically separated but in order for it to be done both twins have to consent to it. That's how it should be with abortion, the baby should also have to consent to it. So if somebody wants to have an abortion if the unborn baby also consents to it, that's when it should be allowed.

That's easy. You write a letter to the embryo telling it that if it objects to the abortion, it should return a countersigned copy of the letter within 5 days, otherwise it will be assumed that it consented.

 

[weaver2]

Did the state force these women to spread their legs?

Why so hateful and why aimed only at women? Pregnancy involves two people. Accusing women of sexual immorality is indicative of your own uneasiness about mutual enjoyment of sex.

 

[Patriotic Voter]

Why so hateful and why aimed only at women? Pregnancy involves two people. Accusing women of sexual immorality is indicative of your own uneasiness about mutual enjoyment of sex.

The Bible address this in 1 Corinthians 7:2 (English Standard Version):

But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.

So both partners should be equally condemned if they have consensual sex outside of wedlock. Not one more than the other.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Holy smokes, I agree with someone on the left.

Well, I'm a left libertarian. So if you are some flavor of right libertarian there is bound to be some overlap.

 

[HonestJoe]

When people write this stupid statement, do they realize that it means men would be going without sex a great deal more?

I suspect the problem is that for the people who make that kind of statement, it wouldn't actually make any practical difference.

 

[cpwill]

With conjoined twins, sometimes the twins can be surgically separated but in order for it to be done both twins have to consent to it. That's how it should be with abortion, the baby should also have to consent to it. So if somebody wants to have an abortion if the unborn baby also consents to it, that's when it should be allowed.

I'm pretty pro life - and this is.... A very bad argument. Poe?

 

[Da Mole]

Yes it is. The only reasonable time period is up to nine months.

When has your state ever made you pay for abortions?

Maybe you are not a taxpayer but I am. Abortion money I believe, comes from the taxes I pay just like everything else the government spends money on.

 

[prometeus]

Maybe you are not a taxpayer but I am. Abortion money I believe, comes from the taxes I pay just like everything else the government spends money on.

Just because you believe stupid crap fed to you it does not make that reality.

 

[choiceone]

That would be nature forcing the woman give birth

Once the state makes a law restricting abortion, nature has nothing to do with it. It is natural for women to decide whether or not to continue a pregnancy, and they did that for millenia with natural abortifacients. The only reason for having medical/surgical abortions is because they are safer for women, and the only reason for the state to have restrictions on them is because the state regulates medicine so that it will be safe.

If the state banned all abortion with medical exceptions to save the life/health of the woman, if even one woman died or was irreparably injured, it would be the state's fault for not allowing her to choose at an earlier point in pregnancy. There are always some medically unforeseeable complications leading to deaths/injuries.

 

[choiceone]

Maybe you are not a taxpayer but I am. Abortion money I believe, comes from the taxes I pay just like everything else the government spends money on.

Elective abortion is not paid for by the government. The government can use Medicaid in cases of rape and incest and emergencies that threaten the life/health of the woman. All other abortions are self-financed.

If people don't have abortions, the government can pay for prenatal care, hospital births, and postnatal care as well as infant care.

Do you know how expensive births are? Early abortion costs about $500-600, which women pay for themselves. A birth will cost well over $15,000 on average. That's what you pay for, along with all the rest of the health care.

 

[Josie]

Nothing forces a woman to give birth. It is her choice alone.

Really? Ok. I’ll let my 8 months pregnant friend know that she can just go on with her life as usual if she doesn’t want to give birth. If she doesn’t want to give birth, it just won’t happen.

There are many states that, after a certain point in pregnancy, do “force birth” on the woman since it’s illegal to get an elective abortion after that point.

 

[soylentgreen]

It is never the woman's fault if a man raped her and she got pregnant. There is no reason to punish the mom for what the dad did.

America needs a federally standardized sex education program at all public and private schools with no parental right to opt out if that is what it takes for all 10-45 year old female Americans to practice safe sex using the most effective birth control methods, completely avoid evil men who want to sexually assault them, and choose to abstain from having sex at all times if they are not married.

Another wonderful example of slut shaming. it is because women are uneducated about sex that we have rapists.

So at what point did having sex become women's work. It would appear that women need to get an education and make life long commitments. While I am guessing, men need only bring an erection to the party.

 

[soylentgreen]

The Bible address this in 1 Corinthians 7:2 (English Standard Version):

But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.

So both partners should be equally condemned if they have consensual sex outside of wedlock. Not one more than the other.

If you want to bind yourself with religious doctrine that is your problem. Why should I care and why should I allow you to force your belief on me?

 

[soylentgreen]

Well, I'm a left libertarian. So if you are some flavor of right libertarian there is bound to be some overlap.

Yes, see, you can both be wrong at the same time

 

[soylentgreen]

Just because you believe stupid crap fed to you it does not make that reality.

I would hope it was a reality. The alternative is that it becomes a for profit industry.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Yes, see, you can both be wrong at the same time

What am I wrong about? If I'm wrong you must be to because I've agreed with basically every post I've ever seen of yours. Are you pro-life?

 

[HangLow]

Yeah, it's right up there with the pro-life fantasy,
"if you asked that unborn baby if it wanted to live, what do you think it would say?"