• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Where the Rubber Meets Roe (1 Viewer)

F

FallingPianos

Where the Rubber Meets Roe

By William Saletan
Sunday, October 1, 2006; Page B02


The issue that never changes is finally changing.

If you're among the millions of Americans who don't like the idea of abortion but also don't like the idea of banning it, good news is on the way. In the past several weeks, two bills have been filed in the House. Without banning a single procedure, they aim to significantly lower the rate of abortions performed in this country. Voluntary reduction, not criminalization or moral silence, is the new approach.

How do you stop abortions without restricting them? One way is to persuade women to complete their pregnancies instead of terminating them. The other is to prevent unintended pregnancies in the first place. And there's the rub -- or, in this case, the rubber. The two House bills used to be one proposal, backed by an alliance of antiabortion lawmakers and organizations. The alliance split because one faction wanted to fund contraception and the other didn't.

In short, the good news is that we no longer have to fight about abortion. The bad news is that we're now fighting about contraception. The old question was abortion as birth control. The new question is abortion or birth control. To lower the abortion rate, we need more contraception. And that means confronting politicians who stand in the way.

Continued at Link

I'm glad to see such bills are being proposed, but it seems absurd to me that conservatives are opposing it on the grounds that it might increase the amount of premarital sex. If human life really is sacred, wouldnt preventing abortions be more important than preventing premarital sex?
 
To be perfectly honest most so called conservative politicions seem to be living inside condoms, they have not the slightest idea of actual life, just their own imagination of the way we should (in their minds) live.
 
jujuman13 said:
To be perfectly honest most so called conservative politicions seem to be living inside condoms, they have not the slightest idea of actual life, just their own imagination of the way we should (in their minds) live.

the conservative eutopia...

All parents are loving parents who have open relationships with their kids
All parents talk to their kids about sex and abstinence
All teens listen to what their parents say
All teens go to their parents first when they have a problem
Everyone waits until marriage to have sex
Teenage relationships dont go beyond kissing if that
Adult non-married relationships dont go much if any further
All women who accidentally get pregnant are willing to either keep the child, or deal with the pregnancy for 9 months and give birth so that it can be given up for adoption
Abstinence only education reduces the teen pregnancy rate
Withholding contraceptives from teens reduces the pregnancy rate

out of touch? just a little bit.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom