• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are you ProLife? ProChoice? ProChoice With Limits?

What is your stand on abortion?

  • Total voters
    45
Pro-Choice, during the first 22 weeks.
 
RightinNYC said:
NY should be forced to have the same gun laws as TX? VT should be forced to have the same gambling/prostitution laws as NV? CO should be forced to have the same laws banning medicinal marijuana as OH?
Click to expand...
I dont see a reason an equitable solution couldn't be worked out.

I don't see why the federal government should be in charge of coming up with one size fits all policies for the country on all these issues.
Click to expand...
I already explained it.

No, why would you think that?
Click to expand...
Just asking.
 
Your Star said:
Pro-Choice, during the first 22 weeks.
Click to expand...

And Soccerboy, Jallman and others

Yay! That's sort of what I was getting at. That, yes, many people are ProChoice. But many of these same people who are ProChoice have some reasonable limits. I think MOST ProChoice people are that way. It's just that some people's limits are more stringent (perhaps TOO stringent) for others to live with. Can't we all just get along? ;-)
 
Hoplite said:
Otherwise all you have to do is hop the border and one state's law becomes meaningless. If you let individual states decide, you get a constantly shifting patchwork of different levels of legality.
Click to expand...
That's exactly the point. I want that, that's a good idea, IMO.
 
jallman said:
I am ProChoice with limits. I think that the fetus begins to feel and register pain once the thalamus, cortex, and spinal cord are all connected. At the point the fetus actually has spatial awareness and can sense pain, all bets are off as the woman has had ample time to decide what to do with the fetus before then. The accepted time limit on this, medically, is 22 weeks. In the interest of caution and compassion, I would prefer to see the limit set at 18 weeks.
Click to expand...

Almost verbatim, that is my feeling on the issue.
 
I am pro-life, the only absolute exception I make is the mother's life being in danger. I haven't actually figured out where I stand on rape. The fetus is still a life to me, but I can see the arguments about her mental health, in this case only. I would prefer additional counseling (also available for husband/boyfriend/significant other, if not they're not the rapist), automatic stripping of parental rights from the rapist, universal access to the morning after pill, and work to make adoption easier, for everyone. If the incest isn't considered rape, then it is still consentual sex.

I don't think laws will ever reach my ideal. I doubt they will even reach to the point of exceptions of rape and incest. But this is what I would like to see.
 
roguenuke said:
I am pro-life, the only absolute exception I make is the mother's life being in danger. I haven't actually figured out where I stand on rape. The fetus is still a life to me, but I can see the arguments about her mental health, in this case only. I would prefer additional counseling (also available for husband/boyfriend/significant other, if not they're not the rapist), automatic stripping of parental rights from the rapist, universal access to the morning after pill, and work to make adoption easier, for everyone. If the incest isn't considered rape, then it is still consentual sex.

I don't think laws will ever reach my ideal. I doubt they will even reach to the point of exceptions of rape and incest. But this is what I would like to see.
Click to expand...

I just picked up your post for convenience -- as several others have said either ProLife No Exceptions -- so forgive me but. But let me ask those who do feel that way, "Do you believe in birth contol?" IUD's and the pill (most of them) work by aborting a fertilized egg. How does a ProLife No Exceptions believer rationalize that then? No offense. I am just very curious.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
That's exactly the point. I want that, that's a good idea, IMO.
Click to expand...
Why is this a good idea? Why is a confusing network of 50 different sets of rules and regulations, all of which can change theoretically every election cycle, a good thing?
 
MaggieD said:
I just picked up your post for convenience -- as several others have said either ProLife No Exceptions -- so forgive me but. But let me ask those who do feel that way, "Do you believe in birth contol?" IUD's and the pill (most of them) work by aborting a fertilized egg. How does a ProLife No Exceptions believer rationalize that then? No offense. I am just very curious.
Click to expand...

Actually, I am all for those things. And I don't take offense, I've heard it before. I was going to mention it in my post anyway. However, I have to mention, I wasn't a "ProLife, No Exceptions" person in the poll technically. I chose "other".

I have no issue with birth control, IUDs, MAPs, or anything like this, because there is no actual conscience choice to kill the baby growing inside of them. These all prevent implantation. And there is no way for anyone actually taking these to know whether they are killing anything, even if they use these regularly. I don't believe life starts at conception, but rather implantation. The fetus doesn't actually start to develop until it is implanted.

To me, the reality is abortion is a conscience choice to kill a known inconvenience. The vast majority of women will not even find out they're pregnant until almost a month into the pregnancy, if not farther along. By this time, the baby is developed enough to be considered "alive", to me. And it is developing more and more each day.

I know that, to some, this is saying "punish the woman for getting pregnant", but honestly, I don't think it is right to take the life of a growing, developing child. I know that at two months, at least, you can hear the heartbeat of the baby. I believe abortion is wrong, and should be considered murder. Also, I don't consider pregnancy a punishment. We are women. We have children. Almost every woman knows, hopefully, from the time they are preteens or younger, that, once they hit puberty, if they have sex, they can get pregnant. It isn't punishment, to me, it is biology. I even realize that rape victims didn't have a choice to say no, but killing the baby for the sins of its father is still wrong. At the very least, the baby could be put up for adoption.

I am all for getting all women easier access to birth control, condoms, IUDs, MAPs, and safe tubal ligations, all affordable. Anything that could help lower the number of unwanted pregnancies would be good, so that the abortion issue becomes a moot issue altogether anyway.
 
I don't like the term pro-choice, however I support Roe v. Wade.

  • First trimester - abortion on demand.
  • Second trimester - abortion laws are up to the individual state.
  • Third trimester - no abortion unless there are extraordinary circumstances(life of the woman, condition of the fetus).

I support woman's reproductive rights.
 
roguenuke said:
Actually, I am all for those things. And I don't take offense, I've heard it before. I was going to mention it in my post anyway. However, I have to mention, I wasn't a "ProLife, No Exceptions" person in the poll technically. I chose "other".

I have no issue with birth control, IUDs, MAPs, or anything like this, because there is no actual conscience choice to kill the baby growing inside of them. These all prevent implantation. And there is no way for anyone actually taking these to know whether they are killing anything, even if they use these regularly. I don't believe life starts at conception, but rather implantation. The fetus doesn't actually start to develop until it is implanted.

To me, the reality is abortion is a conscience choice to kill a known inconvenience. The vast majority of women will not even find out they're pregnant until almost a month into the pregnancy, if not farther along. By this time, the baby is developed enough to be considered "alive", to me. And it is developing more and more each day.

I know that, to some, this is saying "punish the woman for getting pregnant", but honestly, I don't think it is right to take the life of a growing, developing child. I know that at two months, at least, you can hear the heartbeat of the baby. I believe abortion is wrong, and should be considered murder. Also, I don't consider pregnancy a punishment. We are women. We have children. Almost every woman knows, hopefully, from the time they are preteens or younger, that, once they hit puberty, if they have sex, they can get pregnant. It isn't punishment, to me, it is biology. I even realize that rape victims didn't have a choice to say no, but killing the baby for the sins of its father is still wrong. At the very least, the baby could be put up for adoption.

I am all for getting all women easier access to birth control, condoms, IUDs, MAPs, and safe tubal ligations, all affordable. Anything that could help lower the number of unwanted pregnancies would be good, so that the abortion issue becomes a moot issue altogether anyway.
Click to expand...

Your stance on birth control is very well thought out. Thank you. Great post.
 
roguenuke said:
I have no issue with birth control, IUDs, MAPs, or anything like this, because there is no actual conscience choice to kill the baby growing inside of them.
Click to expand...
Actually, there is. I use a hormonal IUD with full knowledge that every month I'm sexually active it could cause the death of a fertilized egg. In fact, I very much hope that it will do so.

These all prevent implantation. And there is no way for anyone actually taking these to know whether they are killing anything, even if they use these regularly. I don't believe life starts at conception, but rather implantation. The fetus doesn't actually start to develop until it is implanted.
Click to expand...
Well, it actually starts developing as soon as the egg is fertilized, before it's implanted.
 
Hoplite said:
Why is this a good idea? Why is a confusing network of 50 different sets of rules and regulations, all of which can change theoretically every election cycle, a good thing?
Click to expand...
Because I want be able to compare societies. With 50 states. some will be pro-choice, some pro-life, and the rest a mix in between. We would practically have 50 samples to compare how different laws from the abortion sides can affect the US. Logically, after a period of time, the federal government can model it's laws after those states with the greatest benefit, either pro-choice or pro-life.

And if it's such a big issue, pro-choicers or pro-lifers can obviously vote with their feet.
 
Last edited:
Interesting question.One thing that slightly disturbs me is when pro choice people attack pro life people with "even in the case of rape".We are all decended from rapists and rape victims.What i am trying to say is we shouldnt see the child as some kind of devil seed.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
Because I want be able to compare societies. With 50 states. some will be pro-choice, some pro-life, and the rest a mix in between. We would practically have 50 samples to compare how different laws from the abortion sides can affect the US. Logically, after a period of time, the federal government can model it's laws after those states with the greatest benefit, either pro-choice or pro-life.

And if it's such a big issue, pro-choicers or pro-lifers can obviously vote with their feet.
Click to expand...
No one is going to move because their state is pro-choice and they are anti-abortion.

I dont understand why we have to go through that entire mess when we can have one set of laws for the entire country that way we dont have to spend decades tangling over the issue and they dont become hot-button issues during local and state elections, sucking resources and time away from actual issues.
 
I'm pro-life and pro-choice. I wouldn't condone someone getting an abortion, but I'm not one to force my opinions of abortion on other people. I'd simply prefer people to choose life.
 
Jucon said:
I'm pro-life and pro-choice. I wouldn't condone someone getting an abortion, but I'm not one to force my opinions of abortion on other people. I'd simply prefer people to choose life.
Click to expand...

People who have abortions are choosing life: their own, and those of their extant children.
 
1069 said:
People who have abortions are choosing life: their own, and those of their extant children.
Click to expand...

I know, which is why I wouldn't force my opinion of abortion on other people. The best solution would be for these people not to get pregnant in the first place, but things happen.
 
Last edited:
Hoplite said:
No one is going to move because their state is pro-choice and they are anti-abortion.

I dont understand why we have to go through that entire mess when we can have one set of laws for the entire country that way we dont have to spend decades tangling over the issue and they dont become hot-button issues during local and state elections, sucking resources and time away from actual issues.
Click to expand...

Because most of your beliefs are wrong and so are mine.
We need time, lots of time, to figure out what is right.

That was the whole point the of the U.S. in the first place, we are supposed to be a nation of nations.
 
Hoplite said:
No one is going to move because their state is pro-choice and they are anti-abortion.

I dont understand why we have to go through that entire mess when we can have one set of laws for the entire country that way we dont have to spend decades tangling over the issue and they dont become hot-button issues during local and state elections, sucking resources and time away from actual issues.
Click to expand...
Because we are a developed democracy, and have time to weigh decisions using all formulas and methods. this way, we can apply 50 formulas at the same time. Since it's a social issue, and not an economic one, the extra debate can only help us!

And if this one issue alone is SOOOO important to individuals, as I said, they can vote with their feet.
 
Last edited:
I would never recommend an abortion to a loved one but I won't be the one taking the choice away.

If you don't like abortion don't have one.
 
I am pro-choice but I'm for the federal government to stay out of it and leave it to the states to decide.

I wouldn't mind a ban on abortion during the third trimester. But if the choices are pro choice and pro life then I'm pro choice all the way.
 


Pretty much my views. Embryos and fetuses aren't people
 
I reject the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice" as weasel terms that try and avoid the use of the word "abortion". I am in favor of a woman's right to have an abortion and am not afraid to actually phrase it that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom