Abortions: Should Women be Allowed to Choose?

[whitehall]

Great. So you want to punish the woman for getting pregnant by forcing her to have a baby she doesn't want.
Not to mention your rotten views on rape.

GTFO of a woman's body. Abortion is HER decision, not yours.

The funny thing is that the law considers the termination of her pregnancy during the commission of a felony as manslaughter but radicals say she has the right to terminate the life of her unborn child at a whim. The anti-execution bunch surreptitiously film executions and the videos are often shown as evidence of "cruel and unusual punishment" and it isn't hard to find shadowy victims of executions.It must be easy to video the killing of a full term baby by stabbing it in the back of the neck and sucking out it's brains but no video of the horrific procedure, which has been estimated at several million times, has ever been shown. The fix is in. Hitler's eugenics is a success story.

 

[Pete7469]

Should women be allowed to choose what they do with their bodies? Absolutely.

And they have plenty of options to choose from. Birth control pills, condoms, abstinence and natural sex.

Those are all choices.

Pregnancy isn't a choice; it's the outcome of a decision that had a choice.

And abortions aren't about a woman's body; they're about another body, very much alive, forming within the woman's body. So a woman's "right-to-choose" should be about what the woman does with her body; not the body of an infant she chose to have.

And if we can all agree that every human being is born with the inherent right to live, then abortions are clear violations of this right. As the baby is never consulted with when abortions are decided.

While I agree with everything you said, except I wouldn't have a problem with abortion after a rape.

The problem I have is, conservative Christian women generally do not get abortions. Liberal women do. I want there to be more conservative Christians than liberals. Liberals are solving that problem for me at their own expense, and slowing down the decline of mankind's collective intelligence.

So while I find abortion to be a criminal act, I wouldn't go out of my way to vote for enforcement against it. There are a whole lot of people walking around who shouldn't be, and the prisons are full of 'em. We should be doing more retroactive aborts on some of those sociopaths.

 

[Dragonlady]

In Canada abortion is a matter between a woman and her doctor. For women who are underage, the choice is hers and there is no parental consent involved.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. The fact that you think a woman's choice ends when she has sex shows that your real agenda is to enforce chastity.

Half the women who have abortions are married with one or more children. Are you seriously suggesting married women abstain from sex with their husbands unless it's for procreation? You knows that's grounds for divorce in some jurisdictions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Should women be allowed to choose what they do with their bodies? Absolutely.

And they have plenty of options to choose from. Birth control pills, condoms, abstinence and natural sex.

Those are all choices.

Pregnancy isn't a choice; it's the outcome of a decision that had a choice.

And abortions aren't about a woman's body; they're about another body, very much alive, forming within the woman's body. So a woman's "right-to-choose" should be about what the woman does with her body; not the body of an infant she chose to have.

And if we can all agree that every human being is born with the inherent right to live, then abortions are clear violations of this right. As the baby is never consulted with when abortions are decided.

So which is it, are you advocating placing women and their doctors in prison, or are you making a philosophical argument only.

As we know, the right to privacy prohibits the state from interfering with what a woman elects to do, as the Constitution makes paramount the woman’s liberty.

Assuming you accept the right to privacy with regard to abortion, what are your proposals to end the practice that don't involve a privacy rights violation?

Whoa, hold on there. Who said anything about prison?

I'm just against abortions. If a woman gets pregnant then she has the baby. It's as simple that.

If she doesn't want the baby she can give him or her up for adoption. She should have thought of that before she chose to have sex.

I’m opposed to abortion as well – I know of no one who ‘supports’ abortion.

But:

“And if we can all agree that every human being is born with the inherent right to live, then abortions are clear violations of this right. As the baby is never consulted with when abortions are decided.”

It’s logical to infer you seek to have the practice banned, when you talk of rights being ‘violated.’

So again: do you accept settled law concerning privacy rights, and what are your proposals to end abortion that don’t include violating those rights.

 

[JustSomeGuy]

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. The fact that you think a woman's choice ends when she has sex shows that your real agenda is to enforce chastity.

Yet that's the same standard that men are held to ("Don't want a kid? Don't have sex"). What's wrong with holding men and women to equal standards?

So which is it, are you advocating placing women and their doctors in prison, or are you making a philosophical argument only.

As we know, the right to privacy prohibits the state from interfering with what a woman elects to do, as the Constitution makes paramount the woman’s liberty.

Assuming you accept the right to privacy with regard to abortion, what are your proposals to end the practice that don't involve a privacy rights violation?

Whoa, hold on there. Who said anything about prison?

I'm just against abortions. If a woman gets pregnant then she has the baby. It's as simple that.

If she doesn't want the baby she can give him or her up for adoption. She should have thought of that before she chose to have sex.

I’m opposed to abortion as well – I know of no one who ‘supports’ abortion.

But:

“And if we can all agree that every human being is born with the inherent right to live, then abortions are clear violations of this right. As the baby is never consulted with when abortions are decided.”

It’s logical to infer you seek to have the practice banned, when you talk of rights being ‘violated.’

So again: do you accept settled law concerning privacy rights, and what are your proposals to end abortion that don’t include violating those rights.

When did this happen?

 

[tooAlive]

In Canada abortion is a matter between a woman and her doctor. For women who are underage, the choice is hers and there is no parental consent involved.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. The fact that you think a woman's choice ends when she has sex shows that your real agenda is to enforce chastity.

Half the women who have abortions are married with one or more children. Are you seriously suggesting married women abstain from sex with their husbands unless it's for procreation? You knows that's grounds for divorce in some jurisdictions.

Have you not heard of contraceptives? They allow you to have sex without getting pregnant.

If you don't want a baby, use them. They're not just for single people you know.

 

[tooAlive]

So which is it, are you advocating placing women and their doctors in prison, or are you making a philosophical argument only.

As we know, the right to privacy prohibits the state from interfering with what a woman elects to do, as the Constitution makes paramount the woman’s liberty.

Assuming you accept the right to privacy with regard to abortion, what are your proposals to end the practice that don't involve a privacy rights violation?

Whoa, hold on there. Who said anything about prison?

I'm just against abortions. If a woman gets pregnant then she has the baby. It's as simple that.

If she doesn't want the baby she can give him or her up for adoption. She should have thought of that before she chose to have sex.

I’m opposed to abortion as well – I know of no one who ‘supports’ abortion.

But:

“And if we can all agree that every human being is born with the inherent right to live, then abortions are clear violations of this right. As the baby is never consulted with when abortions are decided.”

It’s logical to infer you seek to have the practice banned, when you talk of rights being ‘violated.’

So again: do you accept settled law concerning privacy rights, and what are your proposals to end abortion that don’t include violating those rights.

To me, the right to live of any human being comes before anyones "right to privacy."

 

[tooAlive]

Should women be allowed to choose what they do with their bodies? Absolutely.

And they have plenty of options to choose from. Birth control pills, condoms, abstinence and natural sex.

Those are all choices.

Pregnancy isn't a choice; it's the outcome of a decision that had a choice.

And abortions aren't about a woman's body; they're about another body, very much alive, forming within the woman's body. So a woman's "right-to-choose" should be about what the woman does with her body; not the body of an infant she chose to have.

And if we can all agree that every human being is born with the inherent right to live, then abortions are clear violations of this right. As the baby is never consulted with when abortions are decided.

While I agree with everything you said, except I wouldn't have a problem with abortion after a rape.

The problem I have is, conservative Christian women generally do not get abortions. Liberal women do. I want there to be more conservative Christians than liberals. Liberals are solving that problem for me at their own expense, and slowing down the decline of mankind's collective intelligence.

So while I find abortion to be a criminal act, I wouldn't go out of my way to vote for enforcement against it. There are a whole lot of people walking around who shouldn't be, and the prisons are full of 'em. We should be doing more retroactive aborts on some of those sociopaths.

Understandably.

But what would justify an abortion even when the cause was rape?

I can't even imagine what being raped must be like, and I'm sure it's a horrible experience for women that are victims. But is that a reason to prematurely end an innocent life? To me, an abortion in this case would still be murder.

 

[Political Junky]

It's the law for 40 years .. talk to the Supreme Court.

 

[Noomi]

In Canada abortion is a matter between a woman and her doctor. For women who are underage, the choice is hers and there is no parental consent involved.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. The fact that you think a woman's choice ends when she has sex shows that your real agenda is to enforce chastity.

Half the women who have abortions are married with one or more children. Are you seriously suggesting married women abstain from sex with their husbands unless it's for procreation? You knows that's grounds for divorce in some jurisdictions.

Have you not heard of contraceptives? They allow you to have sex without getting pregnant.

If you don't want a baby, use them. They're not just for single people you know.

Contraception fails. You want to punish women for having sex because you hate women. You are a male, chauvinist pig. Admit it.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Great. So you want to punish the woman for getting pregnant by forcing her to have a baby she doesn't want. Not to mention your rotten views on rape.

GTFO of a woman's body. Abortion is HER decision, not yours.

I'll just restate what I said to you in the other thread (that you conveniently disappeared from). It's intellectual dishonesty to argue that abortion is about a "woman's body", since an abortion directly targets the body of another.

Not the point. That fetus is inside the woman's body, and she has the authority to dispose of it if she wishes.

"dispose of IT"

You seriously are a sick, twisted fuckin' human being.

Every time you show up in threads dealing with abortion, you fully prove just how demented you truly are....Just like in that other thread where you emphatically stated you would have killed the twin girls who were born conjoined, after they were born alive, because as you stated they were a "monstrocity," you fully prove just how cold and heartless some human beings can be.....As the father of beautiful twin girls, and an amazing adopted special needs boy (May he R.I.P. in Gods arms), you are offensive, sick, disgusting, and the epitomy of pure evil....I pray you rot in Hell, FREAK.

And, if that is you in that picture in your avatar, then those cold, vacant, black eyes are no surprise....They're reminiscent of the eyes of Richard Ramirez (The Night Stalker), and we all know what that evil SOB was all about.

Bottom line, SEEK HELP!....you obviously need it.

 

[Esmeralda]

Should women be allowed to choose what they do with their bodies? Absolutely.

And they have plenty of options to choose from. Birth control pills, condoms, abstinence and natural sex.
Those are all choices.

Pregnancy isn't a choice; it's the outcome of a decision that had a choice.

And abortions aren't about a woman's body; they're about another body, very much alive, forming within the woman's body. So a woman's "right-to-choose" should be about what the woman does with her body; not the body of an infant she chose to have.

And if we can all agree that every human being is born with the inherent right to live, then abortions are clear violations of this right. As the baby is never consulted with when abortions are decided.

Why is it still, after all this time, still the woman's responsibility to prevent pregnancy? Why isn't it the man's responsibility just as much as the woman's?

If a man wants to insure there is no pregnancy, so he doesn't have to take responsibility to raise a child, so there is never a question for him of abortion, it is really simple: he can abstain from sex or he can get a vasectomy. Condoms are not an effective method of birth control. And he should not rely on the woman to take birth control pills. He should take responsibility for his own part in the possibility of pregnancy.

Men who are afraid to get a vasectomy are men who have no right at all to say anything about abortion or about their having to pay to raise a child they didn't want. If a man leaves birth control up to the woman, he has no right to have any say if a pregnancy occurs.

I don't think men in general have any right to say anything about abortion. When you can get pregnant, then you can have a say in abortion. Until then, as being pregnant is not something you will ever have to deal with, it is not up to you on any level to dictate what a woman does with her body.

And the IRONY is so extreme: those who have so many issues with the government interfering in their personal lives have no problem dictating to a woman possibly the most private, intimate and sensitive issue in a woman's life. How dare you? You bitch to high heaven if someone tries to tell you what kind of food to eat, but you have no problem dictating to others personal choices that are far more important, personal and intimate than what one eats. Hypocrites.

 

[NoNukes]

In Canada abortion is a matter between a woman and her doctor. For women who are underage, the choice is hers and there is no parental consent involved.

If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. The fact that you think a woman's choice ends when she has sex shows that your real agenda is to enforce chastity.

Half the women who have abortions are married with one or more children. Are you seriously suggesting married women abstain from sex with their husbands unless it's for procreation? You knows that's grounds for divorce in some jurisdictions.

Have you not heard of contraceptives? They allow you to have sex without getting pregnant.

If you don't want a baby, use them. They're not just for single people you know.

Have you never heard of contraceptives not working? The pill is not good for women's bodies. I know a woman who would like to have a kid but cannot because she was damaged by using the pill.

 

[NoNukes]

I'll just restate what I said to you in the other thread (that you conveniently disappeared from). It's intellectual dishonesty to argue that abortion is about a "woman's body", since an abortion directly targets the body of another.

Not the point. That fetus is inside the woman's body, and she has the authority to dispose of it if she wishes.

"dispose of IT"

You seriously are a sick, twisted fuckin' human being.

Every time you show up in threads dealing with abortion, you fully prove just how demented you truly are....Just like in that other thread where you emphatically stated you would have killed the twin girls who were born conjoined, because as you stated they were a "monstrocity," you fully prove just how cold and heartless some human beings can be.....As the father of beautiful twin girls, and an amazing adopted special needs boy (May he R.I.P. in Gods arms), you are offensive, sick, disgusting, and the epitomy of pure evil....I pray you rot in Hell, FREAK.

And, if that is you in that picture in your avatar, then those cold, vacant, black eyes are no surprise....They're reminiscent of the eyes of Richard Ramirez (The Night Stalker), and we all know what that evil SOB was all about.

Bottom line, SEEK HELP!....you obviously need it.

No one has a right to an opinion except for you.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Should women be allowed to choose what they do with their bodies? Absolutely.

And they have plenty of options to choose from. Birth control pills, condoms, abstinence and natural sex.
Those are all choices.

Pregnancy isn't a choice; it's the outcome of a decision that had a choice.

And abortions aren't about a woman's body; they're about another body, very much alive, forming within the woman's body. So a woman's "right-to-choose" should be about what the woman does with her body; not the body of an infant she chose to have.

And if we can all agree that every human being is born with the inherent right to live, then abortions are clear violations of this right. As the baby is never consulted with when abortions are decided.

Why is it still, after all this time, still the woman's responsibility to prevent pregnancy? Why isn't it the man's responsibility just as much as the woman's?

If a man wants to insure there is no pregnancy, so he doesn't have to take responsibility to raise a child, so there is never a question for him of abortion, it is really simple: he can abstain from sex or he can get a vasectomy. Condoms are not an effective method of birth control. And he should not rely on the woman to take birth control pills. He should take responsibility for his own part in the possibility of pregnancy.

Men who are afraid to get a vasectomy are men who have no right at all to say anything about abortion or about their having to pay to raise a child they didn't want. If a man leaves birth control up to the woman, he has no right to have any say if a pregnancy occurs.

I don't think men in general have any right to say anything about abortion. When you can get pregnant, then you can have a say in abortion. Until then, as being pregnant is not something you will ever have to deal with, it is not up to you on any level to dictate what a woman does with her body.

And the IRONY is so extreme: those who have so many issues with the government interfering in their personal lives have no problem dictating to a woman possibly the most private, intimate and sensitive issue in a woman's life. How dare you? You bitch to high heaven if someone tries to tell you what kind of food to eat, but you have no problem dictating to others personal choices that are far more important, personal and intimate than what one eats. Hypocrites.

^^That's about a big ol' huge bunch of fucking hogwash.^^

 

[Wicked Jester]

Not the point. That fetus is inside the woman's body, and she has the authority to dispose of it if she wishes.

"dispose of IT"

You seriously are a sick, twisted fuckin' human being.

Every time you show up in threads dealing with abortion, you fully prove just how demented you truly are....Just like in that other thread where you emphatically stated you would have killed the twin girls who were born conjoined, because as you stated they were a "monstrocity," you fully prove just how cold and heartless some human beings can be.....As the father of beautiful twin girls, and an amazing adopted special needs boy (May he R.I.P. in Gods arms), you are offensive, sick, disgusting, and the epitomy of pure evil....I pray you rot in Hell, FREAK.

And, if that is you in that picture in your avatar, then those cold, vacant, black eyes are no surprise....They're reminiscent of the eyes of Richard Ramirez (The Night Stalker), and we all know what that evil SOB was all about.

Bottom line, SEEK HELP!....you obviously need it.

No one has a right to an opinion except for you.

WTF are you babbling about, lib?

Maybe you need to go read through just about every abortion thread on this board, and see exactly how sick in the head and ghoulish Noomi truly is......That's a woman who flat out stated she would have killled conjoined twins AFTER they were born, ALIVE.

Sooooo, yeah,......she's a sick, demented, twisted, ghoulish, heartless human being, period!

 

[NoNukes]

"dispose of IT"

You seriously are a sick, twisted fuckin' human being.

Every time you show up in threads dealing with abortion, you fully prove just how demented you truly are....Just like in that other thread where you emphatically stated you would have killed the twin girls who were born conjoined, because as you stated they were a "monstrocity," you fully prove just how cold and heartless some human beings can be.....As the father of beautiful twin girls, and an amazing adopted special needs boy (May he R.I.P. in Gods arms), you are offensive, sick, disgusting, and the epitomy of pure evil....I pray you rot in Hell, FREAK.

And, if that is you in that picture in your avatar, then those cold, vacant, black eyes are no surprise....They're reminiscent of the eyes of Richard Ramirez (The Night Stalker), and we all know what that evil SOB was all about.

Bottom line, SEEK HELP!....you obviously need it.

No one has a right to an opinion except for you.

WTF are you babbling about, lib?

Maybe you need to go read through just about every abortion thread on this board, and see exactly how sick in the head and ghoulish Noomi truly is......That's a woman who flat out stated she would have killled conjoined twins AFTER they were born, ALIVE.

Sooooo, yeah,......she's a sick, demented, twisted, ghoulish, heartless human being, period!

I have read her threads and agree with most of them. If I do not agree, I do not stoop to calling her names.

 

[JoeB131]

Now, you may argue about instances of rape where women really have no choice.

This is a very valid argument. Rapes are terribly unfortunate events, and in those cases the possibility of adoption exists. Although it must be a horrible experience for the mother, she may be the blessing a family that can't have children has been waiting for.

You totally go with that, dude.

I think this should be at the top of the GOP Platform.

Oh, wait, you tried the Gift From God Rape angle in 2012. How'd that work out for you again. I seem to recall "not well".

 

[JoeB131]

Great. So you want to punish the woman for getting pregnant by forcing her to have a baby she doesn't want.
Not to mention your rotten views on rape.

GTFO of a woman's body. Abortion is HER decision, not yours.

And no sweetie, I don't want to punish women. I don't want to punish anyone.

Pregnancy is their decision; not mine.

You however seem to want to punish an innocent fetus for something they have nothing to do with.

It's not a matter of punishing the fetus.

When most abortions are performed, the fetus is the size of a kidney bean and looks like a cocktail shrimp.

It certainly isn't aware of its existence, much less whether it's being "punished".

Here's the pure, pragmatic reality of abortion.

Women are going to get them no matter what the law is, and society is going to turn a blind eye to it. The wealthy will be able to get safe abortions and the poor with be on their own.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Whoa, hold on there. Who said anything about prison?

I'm just against abortions. If a woman gets pregnant then she has the baby. It's as simple that.

If she doesn't want the baby she can give him or her up for adoption. She should have thought of that before she chose to have sex.

So by that logic...

People who smoke, drink, eat fatty foods, don't excercise should be denied medical treatment and just be made to suffer the consequences of their bad choices because, hey, they aren't all as fucking perfect as you are, eh?