Should abortion be legal?

[Ron Paul Vermont]

I know this is a split issue in the Libertarian party and I wanted to see roughly where it is split down the lines.

 

[Hiki]

Yes. Of course you should have a good reason for it and if the mother is in danger, thats why "until a certain point".

 

[UnReconstructed]

Hmmm... should the question be "Should their be a government law?" I believe abortion is murder but I don't believe that at any time anywhere that the Government should be making laws... any laws.

They suck at everything they do.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Yes, you're sexist if you think it should be illegal. Don't forget that.

 

[Roxi]

im a female and dead against the morality of abortion. i don't really understand the cases of "medical necessity" because generally that means the baby had spina bifida or downs syndrome and the mother "didn't want her baby to go through that" but after years of being around kids with these same types of ailments i don't see these ailments as ailments anymore.... most of these kids are happy, bright, and super great kids, and everytime i meet one i have huge respects for their parents for doing the right thing and giving them a chance.

i can't say how i would feel in the rape scenario so i don't know.

I was pro-choice for many years, and now im staunchly pro-life.... but i don't think it should be illegal because i don't think it should be up to the government to regulate this. it should be left up to the moral principals of the person involved

i might however support requiring women to go through a few things before recieving an abortion..... for example

1. spend 3 hours with a newborn baby at the hospitals
2. watch a video of an abortion
3. going through several hours of counsiling and a class


i don't think any woman could watch the abortion video they show you in nursing school and still go through with it...

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Being prolife is the same as saying you want to stick your nose in other people's business.

 

[Roxi]

Being prolife is the same as saying you want to stick your nose in other people's business.

if your referring to my post, thats BS, reread it.... if your referring to the avg prolife politician your dead on

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

if your referring to my post, thats BS, reread it.... if your referring to the avg prolife politician your dead on

ok. lol. yeah, politicians. So you're prolife, but you don't think it's a government issue? I guess I agree with that. I know I wouldn't want my gf or wife having one, but I know I couldn't stop her from doing so. hmm. I think of it as a non-government issue, which is why I always say I'm prochoice, but I think the procedure itself is...very disguisting, I believe the only time is should morally be performed is when the woman's life is in danger. But I just will not support government regulation of abortion, it won't work.

 

[UnReconstructed]

ok. lol. yeah, politicians. So you're prolife, but you don't think it's a government issue? I guess I agree with that. I know I wouldn't want my gf or wife having one, but I know I couldn't stop her from doing so. hmm. I think of it as a non-government issue, which is why I always say I'm prochoice, but I think the procedure itself is...very disguisting, I believe the only time is should morally be performed is when the woman's life is in danger. But I just will not support government regulation of abortion, it won't work.

Same thing here. I don't like labels but I would say that I'm pro-life but don't think that it's a government issue.

 

[micahnelson]

Yes, you're sexist if you think it should be illegal. Don't forget that.

What kind of attitude is that, only women have a say in the development of a child? Are men not as responsible? For 9 months the woman has to carry the child, but for 18 years they are equally as responsible. I suppose biology is sexist too, forcing a woman to have to go through labor to produce a child. A man becomes sexist if he tries to be involved before birth, but is a chauvinist if he isn't involved after birth. Interesting.

I am completely against abortion and believe it should be illegal. It should be handled at a state level, but I'm not entirely opposed to a national ban. Human rights must be protected at all stages, from prenatal to geriatric. If we decide that the government should not be involved with protecting life, then it doesn't make much sense for a government to even exist.

A person has rights to act as they want with their own body, but not with another persons body. If the government, for the sake of convenience, wants to allow a person to destroy the child living inside them- then we have given them the ultimate right to decide who is and is not protected.

I am consistent in my beliefs here, being against the death penalty and wars not fought in self defense. The only definition the government can make regarding human life must be in the broadest possible terms. To do otherwise is to give government the power of eugenics.

Possibly someone can give me an argument where the right to terminate a life is not based on convenience or eugenics. I have never heard any.

 

[TastyWheat]

Personally I think life should be protected as mentioned in the Declaration of Independence and a fertilized embryo is a life. However this issue will never be cut and dry. At the very least no tax dollars should fund abortion and performing one should be at the doctor's discretion (i.e. doctors can refuse an abortion at any time). Still, I think the best way to handle the situation is by initiative.

 

[asgardshill]

Another noob data-mining expedition.

(But at least this one isn't identifying who answered how).

Pass.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

Another noob data-mining expedition.

(But at least this one isn't identifying who answered how).

Pass.

I guess you're a noob then.

 

[asgardshill]

I guess you're a noob then.

No, I am not. I have 2,755 posts. And moreover, I am not making up polls.

 

[Kludge]

If the mother's life is at risk/resulted from rape, incest.

 

[micahnelson]

If the mother's life is at risk/resulted from rape, incest.

I would somewhat agree here. If a woman had no option of preventing the pregnancy, ie rape, then it may be over reaching to force her to carry it to term.

I do think that should get factored in though when the rapist goes to trial. Not just a rape, but a reckless creation and destruction of life.

If the mothers life is at risk, then it is no longer a matter of "I don't think I want this baby", its a matter of maximizing survival.

 

[Nirvikalpa]

No.

It defies science to believe the baby is not a human within the first seconds of conception.

The only case I would be somewhat lenient would be in cases of rape or incest, but even then... adoption.

 

[BudhaStalin]

Abortion should be legal under all circumstance so long as the procedure used to abort the baby is done carefully, humanely, and within weeks, not months when they baby is almost fully developed. And I agree, it would be at the doctor's discretion whether he chooses or not to undergo such a procedure. It's the woman's burden to bear and she knows what's best for her.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

I think we should stop being sexist, ok?

 

[Nirvikalpa]

Oh. So now it's sexist if you don't support murder? A man has every right to his child just as much as the woman does.