Why do most people who do not favor legalized abortion as an option...

ILLEGAL ABORTIONS WERE COMMON

Estimates of the number of illegal abortions in the 1950s and 1960s ranged from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year. One analysis, extrapolating from data from North Carolina, concluded that an estimated 829,000 illegal or self-induced abortions occurred in 1967.

https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2003/03/lessons-roe-will-past-be-prologue

Click to expand...

.............

Don't forget that the population in the 50s and 60s were a lot less than now.

And of course during the same period there were a hell of a lot of out-of-wedlock pregnancies, which the women were sent to "shame houses" to give birth and put the kids of for adoption. Post WWII there was an unusual amount of sterile couples who wanted to adopt. Same in Europe. By 2003 only 14,000 babies were put up for adoption and the rate seems to keep going down. A lot of women don't like placing kids in places that have no control over their well-being.

Zyphlin said:

Hello one of those people that Ikari is clearly talking about. If that's your opinion of what the "fundamental difference" is with regards to how they see life, it's abundantly clear you either have no desire to honestly understand the view point of the other side or you are just acting like you're ignorant of it.

The fundamental difference Ikari is clearly talking about is whether or not the fetus should be considered a child with the typical rights associated with such.

Most of those on the pro-choice side do not believe it is, and as such the woman's rights almost universally override the rights of the fetus.

Most of those on the pro-life side do believe it is, and as such the woman's rights are almost universally secondary to the fetus's right to life, since said right in an innocent being is almost always considered the highest as it relates to the law.

In both cases, the individuals policy views are rather consistent with their view regarding that fundamental issue.

Click to expand...

I actually like PARTS of this a lot because they are accurate in many ways. While I think you and Y2L are missing each other and a little off about what each of you are talking about the way you describe things is pretty accurate. I don't think the word "most" is accurate but it does address the foundation of the abortion debate that I have always pointed out for years about TWO lives and ONE will always lose based on rights and laws. Theres no getting around it and theres factually no way to make it equal. Its exactly why i am pro-choice with limits. I could never be pro-life cause I could never support the underlined red part. By your general discription I could never be full pro-choice though as you define it but theres no inbetween (another reason I think labels are stupid)

But anyway getting back to the point I could NEVER support making the woman's rights almost universally secondary to ZEF, baby, unborn, preborn etc etc rights. It never ever made sense to me and seem logical or just on any level BEFORE viability. At the moment of conception I could NEVER rank a zygote>woman. Now like you said many can and have admitted that here for reasons just like you said. New life, innocent life, a life that can't speak for itself etc While I don't agree THIS IS HONEST and that's respectable. Unfortunately those posters don't post a lot or have lots of online public conversations because extremists on both sides keep them away. Just like I NEVER deny that there are circumstance/times that I view the woman's rights > than the ZEFs rights but not universally they admit that they ranked the woman second at times. They admit it because its honest and factual. They have integrity and dont try to cover what their stance is. For me its about rights legal and human and my decision on those are influenced by viability. I just could never rank an unknowns rights over a woman's rights, an unknown that may abort itself, that isn't viable yet that may never come to be etc ve a known woman, who is already born, variable and a citizen. Some feel the same some disagree in one direction or another but until more people simply admit what their stance actually is and they avoid the nonsensical noise of the nutball extremists the conversation will always be tainted with the filth of the dishonest.

radcen said:

Agreed. And that may be part of the problem. Said propaganda only really serves to drive the two sides even farther apart.

Click to expand...

As we pass on to death, we may die with our hands at each other's throats.

AlbqOwl said:

And once more, you and other pro-abortionists are arguing what I have not argued and are missing the point I have been making.

Click to expand...

That's usually the way it works around here, don't cha know.

AlbqOwl said:

And once more, you and other pro-abortionists are arguing what I have not argued and are missing the point I have been making.

Click to expand...

But you haven't made a point. You attempted to but your argument failed because it was not based on facts.

Times have changed since the 40s and 50s when couples got married at a much younger age ( late teens, early 20s ).

Now marriage is usually delayed in today's world unlike in the not so distant past.

Many young people are going to college or focusing on careers before even thinking about children or marriage.
Since the sex drive is very strong in the teens and twenty's and abstinence is unrealistic , and most birth control is not goof proof so unwanted pregnancies might happen which means the girl/ woman has one of two choices; have an abortion or have a baby.

Most single moms stay single moms and many end up on welfare.

Those who have abortions and delay motherhood may very well get married later and start families.

We have to be realistic and know that is what happens in many cases where the woman had an early elective abortion.

If we want the future generations to have two parent families we have to understand that sometimes some of those girls/ women just might have an early elective abortion before they marry and raise a family.

As I have mentioned earlier, I feel that with the new virtually goof proof long term birth control ,and has low failure rates there will be fewer and fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

To me long term birth control is the hope for more stable two parent families in the future.

minnie616 said:

Times have changed since the 40s and 50s when couples got married at a much younger age ( late teens, early 20s ).

Now marriage is usually delayed in today's world unlike in the not so distant past.

Many young people are going to college or focusing on careers before even thinking about children or marriage.
Since the sex drive is very strong in the teens and twenty's and abstinence is unrealistic , and most birth control is not goof proof so unwanted pregnancies might happen which means the girl/ woman has one of two choices; have an abortion or have a baby.

Most single moms stay single moms and many end up on welfare.

Those who have abortions and delay motherhood may very well get married later and start families.

We have to be realistic and know that is what happens in many cases where the woman had an early elective abortion.

If we want the future generations to have two parent families we have to understand that sometimes some of those girls/ women just might have an early elective abortion before they marry and raise a family.

As I have mentioned earlier, I feel that with the new virtually goof proof long term birth control ,and has low failure rates there will be fewer and fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

To me long term birth control is the hope for more stable two parent families in the future.

Click to expand...

That's a load of crap. What seems to escape your notice is the baby. It apparently has also escaped your notice that this baby is an alive human being and deserving of life but you people seem to have moved the goal posts so much with illogical arguments so that today it is almost impossible to disentangle one from your evil intentions. All of you should be ashamed of yourselves along with anyone who has gone through this procedure.

I was not moving any goal posts just telling it like it is.

Long term birth control and future forms of very low failure rate birth control is the reality of the future.

There will be far fewer unplanned pregnancies and abortions ( in fact those numbers are already falling ... they fell 13 percent between 2009 and 2011 and are continuing to fall).

If there is not a unwanted pregnancy there will not be an elective abortions and the only abortions will be for medical reasons.

minnie616 said:

I was not moving any goal posts just telling it like it is.

Long term birth control and future forms of very low failure rate birth control is the reality of the future.

There will be far fewer unplanned pregnancies and abortions ( in fact those numbers are already falling ... they fell 13 percent between 2009 and 2011 and are continuing to fall).

If there is not a unwanted pregnancy there will not be an elective abortions and the only abortions will be for medical reasons.

Click to expand...

Stop being pragmatic, Minnie!:lamo