Sam, you'll NEVER be able to "play the victim" again and claim "Pro-choicers call what we believe names" now.
Is there any other way of ending harm to the woman who is being harmed by her pregnancy than to end it? Usually, in the latter stages of pregnancy that means early caesarian section
Now where do I say that? you can abide by what ever morals you see fit, it is when pro-lifers try to make their morals law is when it becomes a problem.
When you criticize people for following their morality, then you are trying to impose your morality upon them. What you deem a "problem", others deem "democracy". People are free to support or oppose whatever policies they want for whatever reason they want. Pro-Abortion law is no more "moral" than Anti-Abortion law.
Unless the method of debating has changed then as far as I know when you enter a debate and place your personal morals as evidence why you support, or don't support, something then the onus is on you to say why your opinion is that way, so as far as abortion is concerned the questions are why is abortion immoral and why should ALL females be subjected to the moral viewpoint of a minority, this then leads to further debate on those reasons with each person putting forward their evidence for or against something. So tell me have debating methods changed to the extent where someone can just say "I think it should be illegal because it is morally wrong", because if that's the case most, if not all debates, are going to be very short.
When you say "leave your morality out of it" you are not debating, you are trying to dictate what is right and wrong.
Bruce had the abortion in April 2008 at Hodari’s Feminine Health Care Clinic in Flint, Michigan. But she told ABC News she changed her mind at the very last second but was pinned down and had her mouth closed as she tried to protest. http://www.lifenews.com/2013/09/03/...igan-woman-was-forced-to-have-abortion-there/ http://www.allgirlsallowed.org/forced-abortion-statistics http://www.texasrighttolife.com/a/518/Forced-Abortion-in-the-United-States-A-Reality http://www.theunchoice.com/coerced.htm
So you are appalled by this alleged "forced abortion"? Why is a forced abortion any worse than a forced birth?
Even if I was pro-choice, I would still admit that a forced abortion is way worse than a forced birth.
Abortion is legal for women including those who have no qualms about killing a developing human life for convenience sake. Rather than trying to rescind Roe, we should be concentrating on teaching our children morals and values and the sanctity of human life which begins at conception. In the meantime, women who lack empathy for their own offspring may be doing society a favor by aborting their children as psychopathic behavior may be inherited.
Well, that IS inconvenient when you don't HAVE money, but I was talking about the risks to a woman's health and life, and permanent damage to her body. No one should be forced to undergo pregnancy and childbirth, any more than abortion.
Actually I have never said "leave your morality out of it" and I assume as you have placed that in quotes you can link to the post where I am supposed to have said it .. can you? What I have said is why should one persons morality override some one elses to the extent that laws are based on that minority viewpoint, morals, IMO, are purely subjective man made ideologies and TBH, again IMO, have little merit or place at the debating table .. but .. if your going to being them to that table then you should at least have an idea as to why you adhere to a specific set. It's how a debate goes forward, I say I believe abortion is acceptable, because ... You then dispute my reasons, I then dispute your reasons against mine etc etc Perhaps I should answer all comments with "Abortion is legal, get over it"
If this is found to be correct then the doctor should be prosecuted under the law, if it is not then the woman should face charges for declamation of character .. no one should be forced to either remain pregnant or to have an abortion, that is why it is called choice. What I find amazing is the constant pro-life agenda of highlighting these types of issues, which are clearly (if found to be correct) breaches of the law and in essence have little or nothing to do with the actually issue of abortion per se .. one can only assume it is done purely for sensationalism.
For the most I agree with you, but I'd add to that-that we should also be teaching comprehensive sex education and making sure that contraception is freely available as it is pretty well known that teaching abstinence only doesn't work. Parts I don't agree with are the usual ones - "No qualms" "convenience sake" "lack empathy" and the funniest one of all " psychopathic behavior"
There are those who have no qualms about aborting a human life for convenience. In fact, they don't consider a fetus a human life at all. Some have posted as much right here on this Forum. Generally, those who don't consider human life worth anything are thought to be at least bordering on psychopathy.
It is only a convenience in your opinion, you don't know the individual circumstances of each and every woman who has ever had, or will have, an abortion, and in the earliest stages of development it isn't a human life. You must consider a whole lot of people bordering on psychopathy then, what with the number of wars going on .. or is that different because "it's justified"
Unless it is life threatening then what else do you call it? The life process starts at conception. Abortion terminates that process. Psychopathy is a personality disorder among whose symptoms is a diminished capacity for empathy. This diminishes the value a psychopath gives to the life around them. It is easy for them to imagine another living being as nothing more than an inconvenience.
So this is really about sex. Because it's not as if the woman didn't have a choice to have sex. So basically, pro-choicers want there to be no biological consequences to sex. Ofc, nature has developed mechanisms to ensure there are biological consequences to the act of sex. Pro-choicers argument is that we have the ability to avoid these natural consequences of sex. So if someone wants to avoid them, they should be able to. As stated in other threads, I strongly disagree that humans have developed a means to avoid the natural consequences of sex. They may "think" they have, but I doubt in their confidence that nature won't respond to the avoidance of these consequences.
Do "pro-lifers" typically show empathy....for the woman? - - - Updated - - - So basically, "pro-lifers" are not only going to try to ban abortion...but contraceptiion as well? So that there are "biological consequences for sex"???
