[Abortion Thread] (YET ANOTHER POLL!) Taking measure.

[Hanafuridake]

Should sex selective abortion be illegal? I have a hard time seeing rational arguments for why a woman should be allowed to choose so long as she doesn't base her decision on things that we dislike. That seems really hypocritical on the part of some pro-choicers.

[Ifreann]

Someone's reasons for not wanting to be pregnant are entirely their own business and should not be subject to any kind of legislation.

[The New California Republic]

I want government policies that would reduce abortion, like comprehensive sex education and widely available contraception and free childcare and parental leave und so weiter, but I don't want them to be enacted to reduce abortion. I want them for other reasons. I don't actually care how many abortions there are except insofar as that number might indicate something about society.

I honestly believe that some kind of universal national healthcare system is a prerequisite for reducing abortion while keeping it legal; namely in the form of free contraceptives, free vasectomies/tubal ligation, free prescriptions for "The Pill" and/or the morning after pill, etc.

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

Let women choose whether or not to have an abortion. It's not the business of the government what someone does with their body, especially if the pregnancy is unwanted/a result of a rape and/or poses a risk to the mother's life.

Of course, you don't have to like it to support it. I for one do not like the idea of abortion, and the mental image of it does make me uncomfortable. It's not about my feelings, though. The right to choose trumps everything else, including outdated religious perspectives.

[Marxist Germany]

Let women choose whether or not to have an abortion. It's not the business of the government what someone does with their body, especially if the pregnancy is unwanted/a result of a rape and/or poses a risk to the mother's life.

Of course, you don't have to like it to support it. I for one do not like the idea of abortion, and the mental image of it does make me uncomfortable. It's not about my feelings, though. The right to choose trumps everything else, including outdated religious perspectives.

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

[The New California Republic]

Let women choose whether or not to have an abortion. It's not the business of the government what someone does with their body, especially if the pregnancy is unwanted/a result of a rape and/or poses a risk to the mother's life.

Of course, you don't have to like it to support it. I for one do not like the idea of abortion, and the mental image of it does make me uncomfortable. It's not about my feelings, though. The right to choose trumps everything else, including outdated religious perspectives.

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

It does if said life is occupying her body and leeching nutrients when she doesn't want it to be there, and there is no other way to remove it without killing it...

[Kernen]

Let women choose whether or not to have an abortion. It's not the business of the government what someone does with their body, especially if the pregnancy is unwanted/a result of a rape and/or poses a risk to the mother's life.

Of course, you don't have to like it to support it. I for one do not like the idea of abortion, and the mental image of it does make me uncomfortable. It's not about my feelings, though. The right to choose trumps everything else, including outdated religious perspectives.

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

Violating one's bodily sovereignty is way worse than terminating a non-person.

[Godular]

Let women choose whether or not to have an abortion. It's not the business of the government what someone does with their body, especially if the pregnancy is unwanted/a result of a rape and/or poses a risk to the mother's life.

Of course, you don't have to like it to support it. I for one do not like the idea of abortion, and the mental image of it does make me uncomfortable. It's not about my feelings, though. The right to choose trumps everything else, including outdated religious perspectives.

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

Insofar as it involves rectifying a situation in which a woman's body is being used without her consent.

[Katganistan]

Should sex selective abortion be illegal? I have a hard time seeing rational arguments for why a woman should be allowed to choose so long as she doesn't base her decision on things that we dislike. That seems really hypocritical on the part of some pro-choicers.

I don't recall anyone advocating for sex selection abortions?

[Katganistan]

Let women choose whether or not to have an abortion. It's not the business of the government what someone does with their body, especially if the pregnancy is unwanted/a result of a rape and/or poses a risk to the mother's life.

Of course, you don't have to like it to support it. I for one do not like the idea of abortion, and the mental image of it does make me uncomfortable. It's not about my feelings, though. The right to choose trumps everything else, including outdated religious perspectives.

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

Your kidney. I want it now. I need it or I'll die.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

Your kidney. I want it now. I need it or I'll die.

I one up it with this hypothetical. I need the guy's heart in 6 months or I'll have heart failure.

[Dogmeat]

Your kidney. I want it now. I need it or I'll die.

I one up it with this hypothetical. I need the guy's heart in 6 months or I'll have heart failure.

And I need his femur.

Not for any medical reason, I'm just out of chew toys.

[Genivaria]

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

Your kidney. I want it now. I need it or I'll die.

The next day no response at all.

[The Alma Mater]

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

Your kidney. I want it now. I need it or I'll die.

Now I have the monty python song in my head.
Though they wanted the liver.

[Kowani]

Ahh, Georgia...

[Aclion]

Does the right to choose involve being able to kill another life?

Your kidney. I want it now. I need it or I'll die.

Not applicable. Duty to act is not the same as duty to refrain.

[The New California Republic]

Ahh, Georgia...

Moronic heartbeat bills. Congrats Georgia, you have just reopened the coathanger clinics in the alleyways.

[The Alma Mater]

Your kidney. I want it now. I need it or I'll die.

Not applicable. Duty to act is not the same as duty to refrain.

How is refraining from giving a life-saving kidney different from refraining to give life-sustaining blood and nutrients ?

[Hakons]

Your kidney. I want it now. I need it or I'll die.

The next day no response at all.

Probably because an unborn child isn't a kidney.

If you didn't know, this thread is utterly dominated by radical pro-abortionists. It should be unsurprising that pro-lifers don't want to interact much with this thread at all. Comparing humans to organs would be laughable in public politics, but it is raised up as a shining example for the pro-choice position in this thread.

[The Alma Mater]

The next day no response at all.

Probably because an unborn child isn't a kidney.

A comparison noone has made.

[Estanglia]

The next day no response at all.

Probably because an unborn child isn't a kidney.

If you didn't know, this thread is utterly dominated by radical pro-abortionists.

Pro-abortionist? What, someone who supports abortionists?

Semi-sarcasm aside, it's pro-choice.

It should be unsurprising that pro-lifers don't want to interact much with this thread at all. Comparing humans to organs would be laughable in public politics, but it is raised up as a shining example for the pro-choice position in this thread.

What, we're not allowed to make analogies now? We're not allowed to take your principles and apply them in similar situations now?

[The New California Republic]

If you didn't know, this thread is utterly dominated by radical pro-abortionists.

Most of the pro-choice people on here actually have a fairly moderate view of it, with restrictions after a certain number of weeks etc.

It should be unsurprising that pro-lifers don't want to interact much with this thread at all.

Is it any wonder? Many of the pro-life folk that drop by can't seem to understand basic definitions...

Comparing humans to organs would be laughable in public politics, but it is raised up as a shining example for the pro-choice position in this thread.

It wasn't a comparison, it was an analogy. And it was hardly held up as a "shining example" for fuck's sake.

[Vassenor]

The next day no response at all.

Probably because an unborn child isn't a kidney.

If you didn't know, this thread is utterly dominated by radical pro-abortionists. It should be unsurprising that pro-lifers don't want to interact much with this thread at all. Comparing humans to organs would be laughable in public politics, but it is raised up as a shining example for the pro-choice position in this thread.

So when did McFall v. Shimp get overturned?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Should sex selective abortion be illegal? I have a hard time seeing rational arguments for why a woman should be allowed to choose so long as she doesn't base her decision on things that we dislike. That seems really hypocritical on the part of some pro-choicers.

I don't recall anyone advocating for sex selection abortions?

That's their point. The Pro-choice position can't account for the wrongness of sex-selective and eugenic abortions.

[Vassenor]

I don't recall anyone advocating for sex selection abortions?

That's their point. The Pro-choice position can't account for the wrongness of sex-selective and eugenic abortions.

So what is your point?