Anyone else here pro-choice?

PRO ........... taking personal responsibilty and accountability on PREVENTING unwanted pregnancies! Turning a problem into a non-problem. :)
 
There is no such thing as Pro-Life and Pro-Choice. You cannot simplify people's position on this issue down to a little catch phrase. As a veterinary student I understand the complexity of ontogeny. It is not a matter of black and white. The Pro-Life and Pro-Choice designations are designed to cause divisiveness, as is the false left-right paradigm.

The fact is you have to look at each situation individually.

Obviously, if a women is raped, abortion is justified because there has been an incursion on the women's liberty. However, even in this situation, I think we have to accept that any case of abortion is killing a human being. The ontogenic process is one which is continuous and linear in complexity. There is no distinct point at which a something suddenly changes from a cluster of cells to a human being. I think people want to believe this is the case to justify their abortions. They are wrong. If you say an abortion is morally justifiable in any case, up to day 14, then why not day 15, and if day 15 then why not day 16 and so on. The fact is that ontogenic development is a continuous process. Any distinct point that is designated as a so-called cut-off point of morality is simply arbitrary. Life does begin at conception. Accept it.

On the other hand I think if a man and a women go for a roll in the hay because they got drunk at a party, I don't think abortion is justified in that situation. Also keep in mind that I think the newly created human being is the responsibility of both the male and female who participated in the act. The question is then, of course, whether legislation should be used to protect the human being inside the women. Personally I don't think creating a law that makes performing abortions illegal, is going to help the situation. If a women does not want the baby then there is a humane issue for that baby, not only during ontogeny (if the women tries to peform abort the baby by non-conventional means), but following birth.

It certainly is a tough issue. I think the philosophy of small government and individual responsibility will greatly reduce the number of abortions that occur. People have become reliant on government to tell them what is right and wrong, therefore they have lost their sense of self-responsibility. I think if responsibility returned to the individual in other areas, then it is more likely people will take more responsibility in their sexual behaviour. They will be more caring and concerned and so abortions will naturally reduce.

On the other hand, if you make abortions legal in a welafare-warfare state, you end up with an awful sitatuation of people not taking reponsibility, and rather thinking abortions are fine because the goverment said so and never doing your their research.

I really appreciate all the thought that went into your post. Thanks.
 
This is clearly not an issue for the Federal government to decide and subsidize which they do under ROE vs. Wade. This should be a patient doctor decision not a governmental one.
 
I'm pro-keep your legs shut if you're not ready to accept what comes along with it.
 
I am for real choice, not coercion.

I've seen very small towns that preach abstinance only programs and have seen a 14 year old working on her second child.
 
"Pro life" is mainly a relic of religion. Funny that most "pro lifers" do not apply the same views when it comes to the death penalty.
It is also a "relic" of those who believe in the principle that government does have the responsibility to protect everyone's right to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness at ALL STAGES OF OUR EXISTENCE. (Conception until death)

BTW - I am a life long Pro-Lifer on the issue of abortion and I have always OPPOSED the death penalty as well as "pre-emptive" war.
 
pro-choice

You can't stop abortions. Outlawing abortions would be about as effective as outlawing drugs.
 
Atheist, Pro-life (in the original sense of the word) and anti death penalty. My judgement is not "clouded by religion", none of the pro-choice arguments have convinced me yet, many of them derive from modern feminism, the belief that a woman is more valuable and should have more freedoms than a man, or emotional, "She is poor and can't afford a child!". If your child had cancer and you couldn't afford treatment would you kill him also? It's purely selfish. Some "pro-choice" arguments in the thread...

"I don't want to tell a woman what to do with her body": I don't want to tell a woman what to do with her house either, but will I let her murder someone in her house without consequence? Absolutely not.

"Abortions are safer if they are legalized": So is rape or murder, but I don't value the life of a mother over her child's.
 
pro-choice

You can't stop abortions. Outlawing abortions would be about as effective as outlawing drugs.

The difference is when you when you use [most] recreational drugs, you are not infringing on the rights of another individual.
 
non-religious, anti-death penalty, pro-life as well.

If someone doesn't want a child, to the point they would rather kill the baby rather than raise it, then they shouldn't be having sex (or use birth control and condoms)
 
Female, non-religious, anti-death penalty, pro-life.

Actually, I am 100% in agreement with Dr. Paul on the Life issues. I'm personally pro-life but don't believe the Federal Gov't or I have the right to enforce that view on anyone else. Maybe that makes me poticially pro-choice?

I oppose the death penalty because the "justice" system makes mistakes and sometimes innocent people get convicted. You can't take back a death sentence after it's been carried out. Also opposed because it is not applied fairly - it's a racist penalty in that far more minorities get death sentences than whites.
 
Back
Top