NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm sorry to bring up a topic that has been debated so, so, so much, but I have a few specific questions for the pro-life group...I'll ask that people keep the inflammatory rhetoric to a minimum, though I don't expect everyone will listen, but:

Those of you who want to make abortions illegal:

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?

I apologize if these points seem slanted in favour of pro-choice...they are, because I am pro-choice. However, I'm genuinely open to your ideas on these 4 points.

Thanks!

They are anti-abortion, not pro-life.

EDIT: FOR THE MOST PART, DON'T GET PISSED

They are anti-abortion, not pro-life.


I am calling them by what they prefer to be called:). I'm playing nice.

I'm pro-abortion. The more killed the better.

I'm pro-abortion. The more killed the better.
Please don't be flippant. Instead, please try to answer the questions.

1. I fully encourage such 'back alley' abortions.

2. They should be killed. To prevent their own suffering later in life.

3. Contraception is a personal choice.

4. The only problem is the lack of abortions.

1. I fully encourage such 'back alley' abortions.

2. They should be killed. To prevent their own suffering later in life.

3. Contraception is a personal choice.

4. The only problem is the lack of abortions.
Nice. Thank you for being so mature. *hits IGNORE*

I'm pro-choice, but I'll give my answers to 3 and 4.

3) The more education, the better. The easier the access to contraceptives, the better.

4) The widespread of use of abortion is definitley indicitive of another problem. In our country, it is largely a lack of education combined with social concepts. Many are unaware of the contraceptives available to them, how to use them, or their relative effectiveness. Some are unaware of the basic biology involved - and have heard rumors which they believe to be true, such as "You can't get pregnant when you're on the rag."

On top of this, depending on the area of the country and socioeconomic status - many women don't feel that they can say no to a guy who doesn't want to use contraception. Especially in urban areas, a woman often doesn't feel that she has the upper hand and will give in to a man who says it "just doesn't feel good" in order to keep her boyfriend. A friend of mine was actually involved in a more creative sex-ed type of class where they actually taught such women how to put on condoms with their mouths - so that it would be easier to persuade the man to wear one.

In other countries, there are further issues - such as pressure to have a male child.

In an ideal system, abortions would be available, but *very* rare - used only in cases where someone used protection and it failed, or in cases of medical problems.

I'm pro-choice, but I'll give my answers to 2 and 3.

3) The more education, the better. The easier the access to contraceptives, the better.

4) The widespread of use of abortion is definitley indicitive of another problem. In our country, it is largely a lack of education combined with social concepts. Many are unaware of the contraceptives available to them, how to use them, or their relative effectiveness. Some are unaware of the basic biology involved - and have heard rumors which they believe to be true, such as "You can't get pregnant when you're on the rag."
:confused:

:confused:
I'm confused by your confusion...I understood her post...

I'm confused by your confusion...I understood her post...
No, I understood what she meant.
But did you look at what I put in bold?

No, I understood what she meant.
But did you look at what I put in bold?
Okay:) Funny.

No, I understood what she meant.
But did you look at what I put in bold?

Yeah, yeah, I can't count. =)

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?
1) I don't have an immediate answer to this.

2) I don't have an immediate answer to this, except to refer to Point #3, below, and say that prevention is better than a cure.

3) I am in favor of increasing reproductive education (or sex education, whichever you want to call it). I am also in favor of allowing the use of contraception (so long as said contraception prevents egg fertilization and doesn't terminate already-fertilized eggs).

4) In brief, I see abortion as a symptom of at least two problems: 1) a general tendency to seek the "easy way" out of a problem and 2) a general disregard for the consequences of pregnancy. Problems with romantic/sexual relationships in the United States is probably also connected; people rush into "serious" relationships without thinking these things through. Rushing into a physical relationship results in unwanted pregnancies. Rushing into a marraige results in divorce.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."

...


I'm pro-abortion. The more killed the better.
1. I fully encourage such 'back alley' abortions.

2. They should be killed. To prevent their own suffering later in life.

3. Contraception is a personal choice.

4. The only problem is the lack of abortions.
Fimble loving parties: Official Warning - Trolling

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

3) I am in favor of increasing reproductive education (or sex education, whichever you want to call it). I am also in favor of allowing the use of contraception (so long as said contraception prevents egg fertilization and doesn't terminate already-fertilized eggs).

If you are in favour of more education, how do you feel about the push by the Bush administration to tie aid money in Africa to abstinence programs rather than education and contraception?

Do you support mandatory sex education in schools? Or should parents be able to keep their children from learning these things formally?

(I hate that these questions automatically sound a little baiting...I assure you, I don't mean them to...it's just such a hot topic I guess...)

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?
Ignore it. Just as some people will die in car accidents because they choose not to use seatbelts, some people will die because they choose to stab a coat hanger into their reproductive tract. Poor judgment on your part does not constitute a crisis on my part.

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?
Increase the funding for adoption services and large tax breaks for couples who adopt, rather than conceive. Create a parenting test for this situtation to determine fitness.

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?
I am against contraception through any methods other than surgical. I feel that contraception encourages people to have sex because there's an easy way out, rather than trying to attach value and thought to the act. Education should be about what to do if you're raped, childbirthing procedures, and adoption procedures. Not how best to kill a fetus.

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?
The wider issue would be that there is an extreme lack of gravity in sexual acts. From making out with drunken strangers at parties to scoring on prom night, very little value and committment is attached to sex.

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?



1. This is the best point in favour of legal abortion of which I know. Backstreet abortion is a crime. If abortion were to be illegal, I would hope that backstreet abortion would be treated in the same way as any other crimes: with police investigations and prosecutions. In any case, the fact that it wuold be illegal would dissuade many women who are unsure as to whether or not to have an abortion from going through with it.

2. I prefer to have children grow up in the foster care system than be killed, and I do consider foetuses older than 21* days (when they have the rudiments of a nervous system) or 48* days (when the first brain waves can be detected) to be possessed of personhood.

3. I am in favour of contraception and education. The fewer unwanted pregnancies the better. If abortion is legal, there are fewer foetuses killed; if abortion is illegal, there are fewer unwanted children.

4. Abortion is a sympton of a wider issue, which is the desire to do everything that we are capable of doing. Just because we have the ability to kill foetuses quickly and easily doesn't mean that we should. Just because we have the ability to prolong the life of a baby that is blind, deaf and in pain doesn't mean that we should. Just because we have the ability to destroy the world with nuclear, chemical and biological weapons doesn't mean that we should build huge arsenals of them.

* I'm fairly sure of these dates, but not certain, so don't kill me if they're wrong. What is important is that they arrive long before the upper limit for abortion: in this country, 168 days.

Ignore it. Just as some people will die in car accidents because they choose not to use seatbelts, some people will die because they choose to stab a coat hanger into their reproductive tract. Poor judgment on your part does not constitute a crisis on my part.
How do you feel about the fact that men do not have to deal with the consequences of unwanted pregnancies?

Would you not propose any punishments for the shady doctors (or other practicioners) who perform these procedures? (Very few illegal abortions are self-administered)

I am against contraception through any methods other than surgical. I feel that contraception encourages people to have sex because there's an easy way out, rather than trying to attach value and thought to the act. Education should be about what to do if you're raped, childbirthing procedures, and adoption procedures. Not how best to kill a fetus.
So you do not support the birth control pill, condoms or IUDs? You only support contraception that is permanent? It's abstinence or nothing? Is sex only for reproduction? (Trying to clarify here.)


The wider issue would be that there is an extreme lack of gravity in sexual acts. From making out with drunken strangers at parties to scoring on prom night, very little value and committment is attached to sex.
Perhaps in Western culture this is so...what about countries that use abortion to 'weed out' unwanted female children? How would you deal with this widespread problem? Especially since many of these women are pressured by family members or spouses to abort female foetuses?

How do you make sex more 'grave' in Western culture? By outlawing contraception other than surgical contraception?

How do you feel about the fact that men do not have to deal with the consequences of unwanted pregnancies?
Through child support they are already liable for financial expenses. As far as the pregnancy issue goes, well, nuts to women. Sorry, but that's the way biology works. To be fair, they get to live five years longer, so 9 months of inconvenience shouldn't be too bad a problem. I do wish there was a better solution, but at this point in scientific advancement there isn't.

So you do not support the birth control pill, condoms or IUDs? You only support contraception that is permanent? It's abstinence or nothing? Is sex only for reproduction? (Trying to clarify here.)
I don't support the pill, condoms, or IUD's in the capacity presented here. I don't believe in outlawing them, but I don't believe they should be encouraged and presented in the educational system. Similarly, alcohol, marijuana, and driving without a seatbelt should all be legal, but I don't feel that encouraging those practices is good for the public school system. Sex is for reproduction first and an incentive for committing to someone second. It should have value beyond the dopamine it releases.

Perhaps in Western culture this is so...what about countries that use abortion to 'weed out' unwanted female children? How would you deal with this widespread problem? Especially since many of these women are pressured by family members or spouses to abort female foetuses?
I don't live in or have great knowledge of Eastern cultures. I would be against abortion, as I think it is murder, but I would not pretend to know how best to run their society.

How do you make sex more 'grave' in Western culture? By outlawing contraception other than surgical contraception?
That's the responsibility of the parents, not of the school or the lawmakers.

*snip*


Okay, you don't support contraception in the sense that you don't think it should be the main focus of sex ed, but you don't think contraception is inherently evil. Fair enough.

Okay, you don't support contraception in the sense that you don't think it should be the main focus of sex ed, but you don't think contraception is inherently evil. Fair enough.
I don't believe it's the government's place to regulate contraception when it's preventative, and not abortive.

I am against contraception through any methods other than surgical. I feel that contraception encourages people to have sex because there's an easy way out, rather than trying to attach value and thought to the act. Education should be about what to do if you're raped, childbirthing procedures, and adoption procedures. Not how best to kill a fetus.

The wider issue would be that there is an extreme lack of gravity in sexual acts. From making out with drunken strangers at parties to scoring on prom night, very little value and committment is attached to sex.I agree on your views on the casual-ness of sex. I am in the middle, I think sex is best saved for long-term loving relationships (Not neccasarily marriage).

I don't think your solutions will work though. Casual sex, promiscuity, teen pregnancies; they aren't caused by contraception. There is something about our culture that makes it acceptable, and even desirable for people to hop into bed with strangers for physical pleasure, without any emotional closeness or love. Take away contraception and you'll make the problem worse, not better.

I'm sorry to bring up a topic that has been debated so, so, so much, but I have a few specific questions for the pro-life group...I'll ask that people keep the inflammatory rhetoric to a minimum, though I don't expect everyone will listen, but:

Those of you who want to make abortions illegal:

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?

I apologize if these points seem slanted in favour of pro-choice...they are, because I am pro-choice. However, I'm genuinely open to your ideas on these 4 points.

Thanks!

1) I dont support abortion by any means and think of it as nothing more than murder, however, I'm glad there are places like planned parenthood to prevent "back alley" abortions as that has the potential to kill two people.
2) For a child to grow up in foster care is still better then being robbed of the chance to live at all. I attempted suicide which made me realize just how important life is, and no one has the right to deprive any being of that.
3)I am a full supporter of contraception an believe that if you're going to have sex then you should use contraception unless you feel mature and responsible enough to raise a child.
4) The real problem is people having sex before they're metally or physically mature enough. If you're 'mature' enough to have sex then you're mature enough to have a baby and if youre not you shouldnt be having sex.

One little point, and sorry if this sounds like baiting, but we are talking about abortion here...

The rhetoric of "depriving people of life" is so frequently thrown around in this debate. Surely the only pragmatic alternative to this would be to ensure the impregnation of as many healthy human eggs as possible with the highest possible proportion of healthy human sperm... Would anything less not surely constitute a waste and therefore the deprivation of some poor potential human of the right to life? Should the population of the world be allowed to continue to grow unabated, free from the sins of contraception and abortion, then we're all going to be depriving future generations of more species than simply our own this beloved right to life.

If you are in favour of more education, how do you feel about the push by the Bush administration to tie aid money in Africa to abstinence programs rather than education and contraception?
First, I'm not aware of this push by the Bush administration that you speak of, so I'm taking your word for it that it exists (though based on what I know of President Bush, I am not surprised).

That said, I am against the aid money being tied specifically to abstinence programs. Abstinence should be encouraged, but not to the exclusion of education* and contraception.

* ...and I mean education beyond "sex has consequences; don't do it". I oversimplify.

Do you support mandatory sex education in schools? Or should parents be able to keep their children from learning these things formally?
Difficult question. I'm not sure what my answer is.

My parents made it a point to talk to me about sex and sexual issues in my early teen years. I, in turn, plan to talk to my children about sex, starting with the biology and moving on to the social issues surrounding sex. I'm not leaving such an important aspect of their education to the trust of others, but neither do I plan on trying to block them from open discussions of sex that are conducted outside my presence.

You may have noticed that I tend to have an analytical mind and that I try to be careful about how I process information. I'd like to think that I can pass those tendencies on to my children, whether through nature or nurture. I expect my children to listen to me and to heed my word, but I also expect them to learn how to think for themselves.

This is all assuming that I ever have children, which I do not at present.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

...

(I hate that these questions automatically sound a little baiting...I assure you, I don't mean them to...it's just such a hot topic I guess...)
Discussions of controversial issues are going to get heated at times. This is inevitable. What's expected of everyone is to remain civil and to not attack or deliberately provoke other NationStates players.

You're doing fine, though your assurance that you're not trying to bait anyone does help a bit.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
NationStates Game Moderator

[QUOTE=Arammanar]*snip*QUOTE]
I feel the following song best represents how you feel:
There are Jews in the world, there are Buddists,
There are Hindus and Mormons and then
There are those that follow Mohammad, but
I've never been one of them.

I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.

You don't have to be a six footer,
You don't have to have a great brain,
You don't have to have any clothes on,
You're a Catholic the moment Dad came, because

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Let the heathen spill theirs,
On the dusty ground,
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.

Every sperm is wanted,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Hindu, Taoist, Morman,
Spill theirs just anywhere,
But God loves those who treat their
Semen with more care.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Every sperm is useful,
Every sperm is fine,
God needs everybody's,
Mine, and mine, and mine.

Let the pagans spill theirs,
O'er mountain, hill and plain.
God shall strike them down for
Each sperm that's spilt in vain.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

But frankly, I think contrareception should be encouraged as much as possible. Let's look at the facts:
1. People like to have sex
If people are going to have sex, don't you think we should be working to eliminate one of the big problems that comes with it? I also want to address the "abortion is murder" thing. I don't see it as such. I would say a lump of protons and neutrons is a person when the intrinsical KI field known as the "soul" enters the body. Therefore the debate rests solely on when this happens. Some say it occurs at conception. They are wrong. If you were a soul, would you enter a body if it hadn't been finished yet? That would be like living in a house when the construction materials had just arrived. It's just silly.

I have a couple of questions for all of you pro-lifers out there.

First, I haven't heard a single answer addressing the problem of unwanted children. These kids won't have healthy lives. Their parents may very well treat them horribly, and just because they're in foster care or adopted doesn't mean that they're going to be part of nice, happy, healthy families. Even if you give insentives, there probably isn't going to be any emotional attachment to the child. When the child grows up, they will probably have emotional difficulties as a result of their cold childhood. What would be done to fix this?

Second, we already have more humans than our planet can hold. If abortion, and contraception for those of you out there who want to make it illegal are illegal, our population would grow much more rapidly. What happens then?

Pick up a book called Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments

I disagree with pretty much everything in the book and in the space of five minutes was able to poke some pretty big holes in the logic, but it may still help to answer some questions of the 'pro-life' stance.

How do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?
This is why I hate the "lesser of two evils" thing - I'm against abortion but know better than to illegalize it

Ignore it. Just as some people will die in car accidents because they choose not to use seatbelts, some people will die because they choose to stab a coat hanger into their reproductive tract. Poor judgment on your part does not constitute a crisis on my part.

So then what is your worry about abortion? Whether it's illegal or not, it has nothing to do with you (not your poor judgment, after all)...so then why DOES it constitute a crisis on your part?

Increase the funding for adoption services and large tax breaks for couples who adopt, rather than conceive. Create a parenting test for this situtation to determine fitness.

I have to admit, this seems like a pretty good idea to me.

...

One last thing...I'm not entirely sure how abortion could be seen as murder. I understand that after a certain amount of days a fetus receives nerve impulses, etc. etc...but unless it really understand the concept of living, how can it affect it if it is killed? If it doesn't even understand that it's alive, then it doesn't know what it's missing. If you've never tasted chocolate, how can you miss it? I understand that people might want to give these fetuses a chance to "taste the chocolate," if you will, but how CAN you ascertain that their life will be worth experiencing? Even children who were planned can still end up wishing they were never born.

The world is kind of overpopulated anyhow. I am NOT trying to be flippant, but resources are being drained and there are so many people who are going hungry, dying of disease, etc. etc., you've heard it all before--is it really necessary to make sure every POTENTIAL human in countries of privilege has a crack at a nice life when there are already-existing humans that know what it's like to be miserable and who would truly appreciate such a chance at life?

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?The same thing we do about drug addicts who use dirty needles...nothing.
2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?Actually your facts are not entirely right here. There are lots of adoptive families willing to do so, it is just the legal red tape involved with adoption has made it very difficult to adopt children born here. Hence it is easier and cheaper to adopt kids from foreign countries. Sad but true. Kids with serious complications always have a hard time, and though we should do everything we can to make life easier for them (it is only common decency) we shouldn't be going out of our way to kill kids who are mildly disabled. When you get to more serious disabilities, it is harder for me to keep that line.3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?I am not against education, but it has to be done in the correct light. Too often sex and reproductive education has more of a "this is really fun, here's how not to have kids with it" attitude, where I think the attitude should be more "this is fun, but it is intended to produce children, don't do it till you are ready for that." Maybe that is a pipe dream in our culture.
4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?Thank you for asking this one. I see abortion as a symptom of a wider problem, a society-wide unwillingness to take responsibility for actions. People want everything they want to be without consequences, but life isn't like that. Having sex, making friends, making enemies, sleeping in...everything we do has consequences, and we need as a society to come to grips with that and learn to deal with consequences, not provide ways for people to avoid them. Sometimes, with the proverbial rape or incest, those consequences are not the fault of the victim, and I would have a hard time saying that abortion is absolutely not allowed in those circumstances. However, those circumstances are a vanishingly small percentage of abortions performed in the US. Most of them are Americans worshipping the great god Convenience.

I hope that doesn't sound too confrontational, I am pro-life obviously, but I'd rather discuss than flame.

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

For someone who really believes that the unborn child is a person, the need to protect it outweighs the need to protect the mother trying to kill it. It's a logical consequence of a stance opposing elective abortion.

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

Do I want an overburdened foster-care system? Of course not. Ideally, as few unwanted children as possibly should be conceived (see below). But if I have to choose between having them put up for adoption and letting them die, I prefer the former.

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

I absolutely advocate increased education and use of contraceptives. To do otherwise would essentially be to say "You can't have abortions, and you can't take steps to avoid getting pregnant either. Tough luck." People who take this stance frustrate me to no end.

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?

I see abortion as a problem in its own right that's exacerbated by other, wider problems, among them inadequate education and a shrinking sense of personal responsibility.

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?

1) Yeah, back-alley abortions are risky. But abortion should be relegated to the back-alley with the rest of the murders. We shouldn't put in it a clinic just to make it easier on the perps.

2) There is a shortage of people waiting to adopt? Since when? Why else do American parents go through the arduous process to adopt children from other countries? Last I heard, there are far more people trying to adopt than kids to be adopted.

3)The jury's still out on this one.

4) Not sure on this one either, as I don't have the cause and effect relationship down yet. The over-all problem would be a lack of respect for human life, but I'm not sure if that caused abortion or it abortion caused it.

They are anti-abortion, not pro-life.

EDIT: FOR THE MOST PART, DON'T GET PISSED

I prefer to call them anti-choice.

2) There is a shortage of people waiting to adopt? Since when? Why else do American parents go through the arduous process to adopt children from other countries? Last I heard, there are far more people trying to adopt than kids to be adopted.

There are far more people waiting to adopt healthy, white infants than there are healthy, white infants. However, there are many more children who need to be adopted than there are parents willing to take them.

I am not against education, but it has to be done in the correct light. Too often sex and reproductive education has more of a "this is really fun, here's how not to have kids with it" attitude, where I think the attitude should be more "this is fun, but it is intended to produce children, don't do it till you are ready for that." Maybe that is a pipe dream in our culture.

I have to be honest. I was in sex-ed classes from the time I was in, what, 4th grade? I read the books they write for children about this stuff. No one other than teenagers ever said anything even remotely along the lines of "This is really fun, you should do it."

Actually your facts are not entirely right here. There are lots of adoptive families willing to do so, it is just the legal red tape involved with adoption has made it very difficult to adopt children born here. Hence it is easier and cheaper to adopt kids from foreign countries. Sad but true.

I did mention that it is an expensive and arduous process, but just to be finicky, I'd like to point out that it is NOT easier to adopt children from other countries. My husband and I are currently going through that process in order to adopt two children (siblings) from his native county of Chile. If the nation you wish to adopt from has signed the Hague Convention, then no private adoptions are possible. Adoptions must be processed through the states of the two nations in question. That means, criminal and home checks must be done through our government agency in our home, at our expense, just as they would be for domestic adoptions. In a domestic adoption (I'm talking about Canada here), once that process was completed, it would then move to the courts. Since we are doing an international adoption, the process is much more convoluted....legal translations (we can't do them even though we speak Spanish), security checks IN Chile (as my husband was born there), then the flights to Chile for the three month waiting period (for which we will also be paying for our two daughters, as we're not about to leave them behind), and additional legal costs....scary. THEN, despite the fact that once we adopt these children they will be OUR children, we still have to go through the immigration process to make them legal residents of Canada. We're looking at about $25,000 US for the entire thing, and there are NO guarantees about children involved in international adoptions. Our agency here has warned us that all international adoptions are considered 'special needs'. Domestic adoptions are a lot less difficult (with the process being sped up for those who adopt 3 or more siblings, or children with special needs), but certainly more expensive than just 'having your own kids'. I understand the need to have security checks, and try to avoid conditions that encourage child-trafficking, but I've also seen too many kids who grow up in the system, never having a stable home environment. The foster system is underfunded, undermanned, and under regulated, and it's gotten a lot worse with cuts to social programs. Kids over four or five are rarely adopted, and the chances lesson with each passing year. Boys are less likeley to be adopted than girls, and it is extremely difficult to keep siblings together. If pro-lifers really want those children born, there needs to be a bigger commitment on their part to funding programs that in essence raise and nurture those children.

.

2) There is a shortage of people waiting to adopt? Since when? Why else do American parents go through the arduous process to adopt children from other countries? Last I heard, there are far more people trying to adopt than kids to be adopted.

Since the majority of people wanting to adopt want healthy, young children, not children over the age of four, not children with physical, mental or behavioural problems, not children in sibling groups over the number of 3. These are the majority of children waiting to be adopted. There is a narrow window of opportunity for children to be adopted, and once that opportunity passes, the chance gets smaller and smaller. Why do people choose to adopt internationally? I can speak for my own case: despite all the problems with the foster system, children abandoned or orphaned in Canada will STILL have free health-care, free education, and a chance at making a life for themselves. Children born into poverty in many countries do not have those options, because their governments do not have adequate social services. Sometimes I feel guilty about adopting international rather than domestically, but it was a choice my husband and I made based on knowledge of the situation of these particular children in Chile.

They are anti-abortion, not pro-life.

EDIT: FOR THE MOST PART, DON'T GET PISSED

I agree 100% what is really funny too me is that most of these deluded idiots actually think that execution is perfectly legitimate. Thus making them pro-death. Peculiar stance on things indeed. SO one may ask why the other side is pro=abortion anti death penalty? Its simple making abortion illegal will not stop abortion. So we are for the woman right too decide what too do with her body since she could die during child birth. Too those who think the potential father should ahve a say so i ahve two points.
1. the potential father has no chance of dying because of the baby ( unless it drives him insane and he commits suicide that is...)

2. There is an old saying " Mommas baby daddy's maybe" . THe point of this is clear just because the woman decides too stay with you during her pregnancy does not mean that the baby is yours. The potential that she was impregnated by some 1 else is very real. Not too mention DnA proof cannot be established until after birth. Thus negating the ability to have the abortion if males are allowed to protest it.


I know some of you sorry dream world dwellers might find my words cold and harsh. Realize that the days of mankind holding themselves back by mixing morality with policy are nearly over. I am all for scrupils but morality is a bad word in my book. Stick morality up all fo your respective asses. People should be empowered not denied rights. We must trust people too make their own decisions not dictate them too them. So being pro-choice simply means you are giving them an option other than carrying the fetus too term. It is not an order telling them too ahve an abortion.

by making abortion illegal you are telling them what they can and cannot do not very free or empowering is it?

speaking of this sad sort of absurdity that is rempant in my country (USA) why hasn't the "morning after" pill been approved by the FDA? Probably because of fascist shitbags who think they are doing every 1 a favor by forcing their hate driven beleifs on us all. So thank you pro lifers for reading
and FUCK OFF!!! :)

*snip*
Ahem.

Let's try to be reasonable, shall we?

They are anti-abortion, not pro-life.

EDIT: FOR THE MOST PART, DON'T GET PISSED

I agree, and I've always rejected the label "pro-life" because, as with "pro-choice," the label obscures the real issue. If the argument is really about "life," the anti-abortion side wins. If it's really about "choice," the pro-abortion side wins. But thanks to these wonderful "pro-life" and "pro-choice" labels, each side feels free to assume that the argument is about what they want it to be about. This is what makes the abortion debate so frustrating. Most people on both sides would rather shout "pro-life" or "pro-choice" slogans than be reasonable and actually listen to what the other side is saying.

Ok, so we call it:

Pro-abortion vs. Anti-abortion.

I can live with that.

Ok, so we call it:

Pro-abortion vs. Anti-abortion.

I can live with that.

Thank you. I really appreciate it.

And just as a side note, to anyone who may say, "I'm not pro-abortion, I just think that making it legal is better than the alternative," I use "pro-abortion" in the same way I use "pro-gun." Someone who is pro-gun generally does not believe that every man, woman and child ought to own a gun, but that, for any number of reasons, gun ownership ought to be legal.

Pro-choice.

Ok, so we call it:

Pro-abortion vs. Anti-abortion.

I can live with that.

Wrong again. I am pro-choice, but certainly not pro-abortion.

I'm sorry to bring up a topic that has been debated so, so, so much, but I have a few specific questions for the pro-life group...I'll ask that people keep the inflammatory rhetoric to a minimum, though I don't expect everyone will listen, but:

Those of you who want to make abortions illegal:

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?

I apologize if these points seem slanted in favour of pro-choice...they are, because I am pro-choice. However, I'm genuinely open to your ideas on these 4 points.

Thanks!


1. Reform sexual education programs, emphasise abstiance while teaching controception as a support issue.. not vice versa. Also, there will always be people out there doing what they want not matter what the laws say. Drugs such as cocaine and E are dangerous, yet we arn't running to legalize these even though the blackmarket is ripe with them.

2. Simple, reform the adoption programs, and fostercare programs.. they are travesty to begin with, but if stream lined and regulated they could be quite successful. But the sad state of affairs is, that over 95% of abortions are abortions of convience not complication or extreme circumstance. How can the only solution be kill the child since the system is flawed ? What if our criminal processing system worked this way.. of course the system is flawed.. should we run out and kill the criminals then ?

3. Simply said yes... it is only the most radical of religious groups unwilling to face facts that still oppose controception. Even the Pope has now seen the reality in the face of the AIDS epidemic in Africa.

4. A wider problem, in that people especially women feel their own personal rights could override those rights of the child they carry within them.. and as a defintion of a child in my mind it is simply the potential for personhood. If there is the potential there for a being to be a person then "for me" they are a person by default. (adhering to the belife that only Humans maybe people)

2) There is a shortage of people waiting to adopt? Since when? Why else do American parents go through the arduous process to adopt children from other countries? Last I heard, there are far more people trying to adopt than kids to be adopted.

This is incorrect. There are a lot more people who are looking for a newborn, healthy, low-risk of disease, non-addict, of the right sex than there are those available. There are an estimated 100 million children (UNICEF estimates 210 Million), who are orphans living on the charity of others in foster programs, orphanages, or as wards of the state.

Some of the discrepency is due to regulations on adoption in the US (and the threat that the mother could renig on the deal scares many potential adopters away). But also, it's that the people looking to adopt want the child on their own terms and not on anyone elses. This is what causes people to go to other countries.

The waiting lines of adopters only exist in very specific circumstances. Outside of those circumstances are millions of children asking, "what about me?"

I'm sorry to bring up a topic that has been debated so, so, so much, but I have a few specific questions for the pro-life group...

I would like to add a few. I already asked them in another of the many topics about abortion, but didn't see a reply (could have missed it though):

5) If you are against the termination of a fertilised egg, why are you not protesting against procedures like medically assisted pregnancy (IVF and the like) - where disposing of them is routine (most methods require multiple eggs to guarantee succes, and only the best one(s) are replaced into the females body) ?

6) Are there cases in which 'never being born' is preferable to live ? E.g. if it is clear the child will be born with a serious illness, that would cause permanent excruciating pain and result in an early death. Or is life always better than non-life ?

Wrong again. I am pro-choice, but certainly not pro-abortion.
Pro-choice in what sense? The issue here is abortion. I'm pro-gun control, but that doesn't mean I think all guns should be seized...just that they should be registered and tracked. Do you support abortion in some cases?

In any case, just as I don't think we need to change the name "feminist" to "unisexist", I don't think pro-choice or pro-life need name changes. However, I can understand the desire to call a spade, a spade.

I'm sorry to bring up a topic that has been debated so, so, so much, but I have a few specific questions for the pro-life group...I'll ask that people keep the inflammatory rhetoric to a minimum, though I don't expect everyone will listen, but:

Those of you who want to make abortions illegal:

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?

I apologize if these points seem slanted in favour of pro-choice...they are, because I am pro-choice. However, I'm genuinely open to your ideas on these 4 points.

Thanks!

1) I could explain my whole social welfare desire, but that'd take too long. You're right: expecting them to just fend for themselves is wrong, and therefore support must be given. However, abortion shouldn't be allowed JUST because of this. Murder is banned, but America still has many many "backstreet" murders.

2) Ignoring this problem is evading responsibility. I'm not sure how to deal with this yet, but I do believe that living is better than dying… I'm in favour of social equality and welfare, so my ideal society would actually be able to deal with these things.

3) In my experience, neither contraceptive nor abstinence education work :( . I am in favour of actually encouraging young people like me NOT to screw each other. Actually giving reasons rather than just saying "it's wrong".

4) Wider issues: disregard of responsibility (compensation culture ring bell?) and disrespect for human life.

Thank you for actually trying to introduce a debate where everyone is relieved of their flamethrowers upon entering!

1) I understand your desire to want those children born, but how do you address all the dangerous, and illegal abortions that will happen anyway? Both the child and mother are put at risk in these 'back alley' abortion clinics. The risk of infection and complications is much higher. What to do?

I personally feel that if one decides to have a "back-alley" abortion performed one is by definition responsible for any complications which come about from this--just as a drug user is responsible for a bad case of drugs, or an overdose of a drug. It isn't the government's responsibility to keep its citizens from making decisions that will compromise their health. It is the government's responsibility to encourage its citizens to choose wisely, but there's a big difference between requiring nutritional facts on food products (encouraging) and outlawing Twinkies (forcing)

I disagree with the commonly argued idea "if we de-legalize something it will just happen anyway". People have agency, the ability to choose, and they can decide to abort a fetus (or speed, or jaywalk, or commit first-degree murder) regardless of how illegal it is. But that doesn't mean that a nation should encourage it. Child pornography is very illegal in most western countries and frowned upon across the world. However, it still occurs. Should the western world legalize it because there are times it can be a safety hazard for the kids? To make certain there are regulations for the safety of children involved?

2) How do you address the problem of the unwanted children throughout their lives? As it stands, the adoption process is extremely expensive and arduous, and there are never enough families for each child who needs a home...especially the ones born with serious complications. How do you propose caring for those children, or do they cease to become your responsibility once born? I doubt you would place your own children in the foster-care system...do you really want all those children growing up in it?

If there's a problem with the adoption and foster-care system it needs to be fixed regardless of where "unwanted" babies go. I think the focus of those afraid of "unwanted" babies being lost in a 'corrupt and bureaucratic' system should be placed on improving the system.

3) Do you plan on increasing reproductive education to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Education has been proven to cut down the birth rate, and access to contraceptives are essential. Do you support these methods, or are you also against contraception and education (perhaps feeling it is too expensive)?

If I were the leader of a nation (outside of nation-simulation), I would be interested in an increase in reproductive education. I think I'd attack it on several fronts: in the home, in the school, and in the marketplace. There would be initiatives and programs to encourage parents to educate their children about healthy and correct sexual practices, as well as possible dangers. The home is a child's first classroom. I would mandate that schools have classes, biology oriented probably, to cover the risks and effects of STDs and the responsibilities of sexual activity. In the marketplace, there would be strict rules regarding the dramatization of unprotected sex and some clear guidelines about selling sex in general...

I think to answer the question: yes, if I were to make abortion illegal, I would make an effort to tackle the roots of the problem as well.


4) Do you see abortion as the problem, or simply a symptom of a wider problem? If so, what is that wider issue?

Well, yes and no. I think abortion is tied integrally to many issues: sex in advertising, disintegration of the family, capitalist immorality, irresponsibility of youth, and general moral laziness. However, I'm not sure there's a hierarchy between these issues and abortion, in that abortion is a symptom of one of them or that one of them is caused by abortion. The only uniting thing among them, in my eyes, is that there's a tendency towards moral erosion. I'm not sure if the government is at fault or should play a major role in this.

I apologize if these points seem slanted in favour of pro-choice...they are, because I am pro-choice. However, I'm genuinely open to your ideas on these 4 points.

It's understandable if the questions came out from your point of view, because they are, well, from your point of view. I think you did a good job of being open and fairly unbiased in them, though. I enjoyed answering and I hope my answers have been helpful in showing how I feel, me being generally pro-life, and why I feel that way.

Pro-choice in what sense? The issue here is abortion. I'm pro-gun control, but that doesn't mean I think all guns should be seized...just that they should be registered and tracked. Do you support abortion in some cases?

In any case, just as I don't think we need to change the name "feminist" to "unisexist", I don't think pro-choice or pro-life need name changes. However, I can understand the desire to call a spade, a spade.

I support abortion in the same cases that those who would be labeled pro-life or anti-abortion generally do - health risks to the mother, already dead fetuses, etc.

However, the issue here isn't whether abortion is right or wrong, whether someone likes it or not, etc. The issue is whether or not there is an objective reason to illegalize it.

The person who talked about "legalizing abortion" was using a non sequitur. In all countries whose government I know of, criminal law is restrictive. That is, the laws are written to tell you want you *cannot* do - and all else is considered to be permissable. This is good, as a prescriptive system would require a law for everything we *can* do, and all else would be considered illegal. It would get pretty hairy when you would have to have a law allowing you to cut your fingernails, walk, run, jump, smile, etc.

Now, that said, any government which wishes to make even the pretense of having civil rights must provide a valid, objective reason to illegalize a particular act. There are no such reasons to illegalize early-term abortions. The reasons people put forth against such abortions (including mine) are "My religion says...." and "In my personal philosophy, personhood is..." These are all well and fine for personal decisions, but are far from objective. As such, they cannot be forceably applied to others.

Since your question was directed at those that consider themselves "pro-life", and not just "anti-abortion", i'll include my thoughts on the death penalty (don't worry, it's related, so it won't seem off topic.):

There's nothing "wrong" with abortion, or the death penalty, in the same sense that there's nothing wrong with murder, rape, stealing, lying, etc. If you do it, it won't hurt the universe, the grand scheme of things will not be comprimised. But the fact is, we are not divine minds trapped in an ape's body, we are apes. apes that live together, related. that is our world, you cannot reform biology, we are as we are. fortunately, what we are allows for intelligence and a sense of right and wrong. so in order to live together in the best, most progressive and intelligent way, we have to have ethics and morals, that we all hold. and i think we've got some good ones now, in principle: violence is not the answer, be kind to one another, things like this we know of, but don't truly know about. it's not self-knowledge, as it should be, it's just words out there floating.

With that said (and understood) I think that if you want to abort your child, or murder a prisoner, that's fine. The world won't stop turning, and time won't stutter. but you will have denied yourself those certain rights that you would deserve had you really understood and respected them. the only reason you are able to have a sense of deserving rights for yourself, is because you live in cooperation with others that are the same as you.

This way, someone that kills another, has another killed, kills their unborn child, etc. deserves the same amount of rights that they gave those they killed. that is the order, the relationship, of a natural human society.

Basically, we aint nothin but mammals, you and me. Most of the ethical, political, or philosophical issues we face can be solved by simply observing what a human being is

This is my first post in the forums by the way, how did I do?

~Mr Popular