ChrisL
Diamond Member
I'm not in favor of forcing women to do anything. What I do emphatically oppose is the sugar coating of abortion with descriptions like "pro choice" and desensitizing abortion like destroying a human life is no big deal, like having a mole removed.
Calling it "pro-choice" is not sugar-coating anything. It describes what it is. It isn't "pro-abortion" - it's supporting the pregnant woman's right to make choices.
Why not call "pro-life" - "anti-choice" or maybe "pro-some-life".
When it's literally nothing more than a microscopic clump of cells - what is so special about it? What makes it special?
100,000+ 2nd trimester abortions a year are just a microscopic clump of cells? Why don't you return when we can have an honest discussion which my guess will be never.
Who was talking about 2nd trimester abortions?
How about you stop injecting your own words into another person's statements and then maybe we can discuss things like adults.
Probably because of me. I was saying that I wouldn't have a problem with limiting abortion to the first trimester (except for cases like you mentioned, where the mother's life is in danger, baby is severely deformed, etc.)
I'm not quite willing to limit it to the first trimester only...but I would definately not agree with elective abortions in the third trimester.
Why not? Why not limit it to the first trimester (exceptions for problems)?