Forums | MacLife

Tallgeese wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

resedit wrote:

Pro Choice = For the right to cause an innocent life to cease.

Pro Choice is for the elimination of Abortions, but by use of proper birth control, not government sanction.

That really depends on who you talk to.

Really?

I haven't met a pro-choice person yet who does not think that an abortion is a necessary measure which should never need to be used.

Chickenhawk wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

Pro Choice is for the elimination of Abortions, but by use of proper birth control, not government sanction.

That really depends on who you talk to.

Really?

I haven't met a pro-choice person yet who does not think that an abortion is a necessary measure which should never need to be used.

You didn't go to the right protests in college, then.

There are plenty of radical liberals and feminists who think that any desire to eliminate abortions is a back-door pro-life attempt, that attempts to reduce it are a way of saying that abortion is necessarily bad.

bedstuy wrote:

Hank Rearden wrote:

I think that most folks' views are pretty nuanced on this. Me... abortion for birth control is repugnant. Abortion, when the woman's life/health is in danger is a sad, but necessary procedure.

I suspect that most people - other than the fringes of both positions - sit somewhere in the mushy middle like that.

Odd that neither Saint Augustine nor St. Thomas Aquinas believed that early (pre-quickening, pre-ensoulment) abortions were anything more than a sexual sin.

I think it's even more nuanced than what you just present, though it gets less and less so after the first trimester.  THAT is what I think most Americans view the subject like. 

Unfortunately they don't ever seem to get a voice in the debate.

Nope, it's always strict binary, one or zero.

And for what it's worth I tend to think "pro choice" is best described as leaving the decision up to the individual.

While I'm not a fan of abortion, I don't think there's much legal basis for outlawing it.

Chickenhawk wrote:

resedit wrote:

ScifiterX wrote:

It bears repeating...
Pro Choice ≠ Pro Abortion
Pro Choice = For the right to choose for one's self

Pro Choice = For the right to cause an innocent life to cease.

Pro Choice is for the elimination of Abortions, but by use of proper birth control, not government sanction.

Such is part of choosing for one's self

Hank Rearden wrote:

I think that most folks' views are pretty nuanced on this. Me... abortion for birth control is repugnant. Abortion, when the woman's life/health is in danger is a sad, but necessary procedure.

That's where I am.
I do not want it to be illegal in those situations.

However, those situations are a minority of abortions.

-=-

From what I heard on Fox - their own polling on the topic did show a change but not to the degree of the Gallup report.
Their own polling also showed that the change was due to people on the right who were pro-choice changing their stance to pro-life, and it was speculated the change may just be defiance of Obama and not genuine, which is sad if true.

Last edited by resedit (2009-05-18 10:15 pm)

ShnickyShnack wrote:

While I'm not a fan of abortion, I don't think there's much legal basis for outlawing it.

Well, I'd say that most people find it extremely repugnant at some point or another. Partial birth is really, really sketchy... for instance.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

That's not very nuanced, it means you're telling the vast majority of women who get abortions that you know better what they should be doing.

No, it's recognizing that, at some point, a fetus is a human life. That point might be debated, but it's sort of odd to say that once a fetus is "wanted" it's human. Or that one minute before it's out of the birth canal, it isn't.

But, frankly, it should never even get to that point. It's not a 100% safe procedure. It has emotional consequences as well. Better to provide ways for women (and men) to avoid creating/carrying unintended pregnancies in the first place.

Basically, it's a complex problem. Education, and attitude shifts are the real solution. Legislation would just be a useless, and dangerous idea.

Hank Rearden wrote:

ShnickyShnack wrote:

While I'm not a fan of abortion, I don't think there's much legal basis for outlawing it.

Well, I'd say that most people find it extremely repugnant at some point or another. Partial birth is really, really sketchy... for instance.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

That's not very nuanced, it means you're telling the vast majority of women who get abortions that you know better what they should be doing.

No, it's recognizing that, at some point, a fetus is a human life. That point might be debated, but it's sort of odd to say that once a fetus is "wanted" it's human. Or that one minute before it's out of the birth canal, it isn't.

But, frankly, it should never even get to that point. It's not a 100% safe procedure. It has emotional consequences as well. Better to provide ways for women (and men) to avoid creating/carrying unintended pregnancies in the first place.

Basically, it's a complex problem. Education, and attitude shifts are the real solution. Legislation would just be a useless, and dangerous idea.

Yes, fine, I agree, trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies is good. But unwanted pregnancies happen. I note for example you didn't make exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

Tallgeese wrote:

If one believes that a fetus is human life, why would there be a rape exception?

Indeed.

God forbid the woman have a say in the matter.

Well, am I wrong? You advocate removing the decision from women. It won't even be a decision. Do please correct me if I'm mistaken.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

Hank Rearden wrote:

ShnickyShnack wrote:

While I'm not a fan of abortion, I don't think there's much legal basis for outlawing it.

Well, I'd say that most people find it extremely repugnant at some point or another. Partial birth is really, really sketchy... for instance.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

That's not very nuanced, it means you're telling the vast majority of women who get abortions that you know better what they should be doing.

No, it's recognizing that, at some point, a fetus is a human life. That point might be debated, but it's sort of odd to say that once a fetus is "wanted" it's human. Or that one minute before it's out of the birth canal, it isn't.

But, frankly, it should never even get to that point. It's not a 100% safe procedure. It has emotional consequences as well. Better to provide ways for women (and men) to avoid creating/carrying unintended pregnancies in the first place.

Basically, it's a complex problem. Education, and attitude shifts are the real solution. Legislation would just be a useless, and dangerous idea.

Yes, fine, I agree, trying to prevent unwanted pregnancies is good. But unwanted pregnancies happen. I note for example you didn't make exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

So, we fuss about 1% (or less?) of cases? If those were the only abortions going on, the pro-life movement would be very minimal indeed.

The vast majority of unwanted pregnancies are via consensual sex. So, that means that the vast majority of the argumentation takes place on different territory than you just outlined.

You're bad at this "discussion" thing.

Last edited by Tallgeese (2009-05-18 11:11 pm)

Tallgeese wrote:

You're bad at this "discussion" thing.

Cool. Feel free to join in when you're ready.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

You're bad at this "discussion" thing.

Cool. Feel free to join in when you're ready.

How very clever of you.

I'm not sure what kind of discussion you think you're having when you blatantly ignore what everyone else says.