Pro-Choice Supporters?
- Thread starter G-Wohl
- Start date
o/' me
ghemminger
Banned
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 4,623
yeah I'm pro-choice for baby to decide to live
jeffersonT
Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2008
- Messages
- 68
I'm indifferent.
billyjoeallen
Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2007
- Messages
- 921
I am pro-choice. It's not that I don't think the unborn have rights, they do. BUT the protector of those rights should be the parents, not the state, IMHO. Abortion bans are also difficult to enforce. I'm not a woman so I'll just have to take you ladies on your word that this is a deeply personal and important issue.
Of course I am against all state funding of abortions on libertarian grounds.
It's a silly presidential issue. A president has very little say except to possibly appoint a supreme court justice or two. The vast majority of federal judges are prochoice. That makes overturning roe v wade extremely difficult. A constitutional amendment would require ratification by 3/4th of the states and so is effectively unachievable.
I think RP has the correct legal view that this is a 10th amendment issue that should get kicked back to the states.
Of course I am against all state funding of abortions on libertarian grounds.
It's a silly presidential issue. A president has very little say except to possibly appoint a supreme court justice or two. The vast majority of federal judges are prochoice. That makes overturning roe v wade extremely difficult. A constitutional amendment would require ratification by 3/4th of the states and so is effectively unachievable.
I think RP has the correct legal view that this is a 10th amendment issue that should get kicked back to the states.
JeffSchulman
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 117
Viability
I lean towards the test of viability; anything under 18 weeks is not (imo) arguably a natural person. I do, however, believe that it is not within the jurisdiction of the federal government to legislate abortion.
A major contributor to my opinion is the fact that a significant percentage of fertalized ovums never attach to the uterus wall.
Once a fetus is able to survive on its own (the earliest documented case is around 21 weeks, IIRC) it is absolutely a murderous act to terminate that life.
Ultimately, I agree with the Paulian position to leave it to the States.
I lean towards the test of viability; anything under 18 weeks is not (imo) arguably a natural person. I do, however, believe that it is not within the jurisdiction of the federal government to legislate abortion.
A major contributor to my opinion is the fact that a significant percentage of fertalized ovums never attach to the uterus wall.
Once a fetus is able to survive on its own (the earliest documented case is around 21 weeks, IIRC) it is absolutely a murderous act to terminate that life.
Ultimately, I agree with the Paulian position to leave it to the States.
Technics2000
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2008
- Messages
- 292
My views on this issue is exactly the same, except unborn is a little vague. I don't think I can support any decision to abort a pregnancy in its later stages of development.
After reading your post again i'm a little confused about this "It's not that I don't think the unborn have rights, they do. BUT the protector of those rights should be the parents, not the state, IMHO" Do you also believe parents should be protector of the childs right to life once it is born? And how do you feel about late abortions? ( Just curious
)And to answer the OP, yes I am pro-choice and I whole-heartedly support Ron Paul. The abortion issue is nowhere near the top of the list for me, unfortunately I believe it is a huge issue for females and I think most females are pro-choice.
Technics2000
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2008
- Messages
- 292
I can relate to that statement since I don't feel like like i'm anywhere near the age to start having kids (even though all my friends are) but I do plan on having children someday and I would hope my opinion mattered when that time comes.
Smiley Gladhands
Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2007
- Messages
- 497
Personally I'm more pro-choice, but I can understand RP's point of view entirely, and I certainly agree that the fed gov't should stay out of it.
It's difficult to figure out where the line should be drawn, and there are so many exceptions and specific circumstances that the fed gov't needs to leave those decisions to the states. Then the individual citizens can choose to live in a state that agrees with their perspective.
I also agree that it's overblown as a presidential issue. There's not much a president can do about it, but it's used by the media to divide and conquer. So I'm kind of anti-the-entire-issue-being-discussed since it's a giant waste of time like the congressional steroid investigations.
It's difficult to figure out where the line should be drawn, and there are so many exceptions and specific circumstances that the fed gov't needs to leave those decisions to the states. Then the individual citizens can choose to live in a state that agrees with their perspective.
I also agree that it's overblown as a presidential issue. There's not much a president can do about it, but it's used by the media to divide and conquer. So I'm kind of anti-the-entire-issue-being-discussed since it's a giant waste of time like the congressional steroid investigations.
Technics2000
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2008
- Messages
- 292
Yes its definitely overblown. We have the war, economy, civil liberties, etc on the table.
Looking at the past exit polls it looks like not as many women support the Dr. and I think this may be one of the main issues.
Looking at the past exit polls it looks like not as many women support the Dr. and I think this may be one of the main issues.
NoxTwilight
Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2007
- Messages
- 454
Pro-Choice and probably always will be. While I understand and support the Pro-Life view, I cannot reconcile that we should go back to the way it was. Women will always need abortions for a variety of reasons, some of them good, some of the horrible and those in between. I just don't feel anyone has the right to decide that for her.
I think that this issue as well as racism and the environment are used by politicians as dividing issues, meant to sway people to voting for someone they might otherwise never consider worthy of a vote. See Huckabee *roll eyes*
Dr. Paul is one of the only politicians who's views don't offend me and that has helped a great deal in allowing me to set this issue aside as far as it's importance in making my decision. Let's face it, we have much larger problems!
I think that this issue as well as racism and the environment are used by politicians as dividing issues, meant to sway people to voting for someone they might otherwise never consider worthy of a vote. See Huckabee *roll eyes*
Dr. Paul is one of the only politicians who's views don't offend me and that has helped a great deal in allowing me to set this issue aside as far as it's importance in making my decision. Let's face it, we have much larger problems!
mustard gas and roses
Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2007
- Messages
- 11
pro-choice supporter here.
Fields
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 2,007
Many. I'm not one of them though.
Fields
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 2,007
Pro-life/Pro-Prevention-of-Unwanted-Pregancies here. Even moreso after hearing Dr. Paul's witnessing a baby-in-a-bucket story.
Where did you read that story?
Fields
Member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 2,007
WilliamC
Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2007
- Messages
- 6,682
hahahahahhaha
Get a girl pregnant and tell the judge that.
What, tell a judge that I think a girl should get an abortion because I impregnated her?
Obviously it take two to tango, but since a woman can choose to have or not have an abortion sans partner, where does my opinion come into play?
Similar threads
