Susan Komen cuts off funding for criminal organization Planned Parenthood.

Abortion is a tough one.

The number of people who support abortion continues to drop. As technology becomes more-and-more exact, it is easy to see the fetus inside of a woman's body. Anyone who has had a child knows that when you go to that 20-week appointment, you can see the damn baby in there if you get the 3d ultrasound. That thing looks like a damn baby any way you slice it.

Many people currently hold on to the philosophy that abortion is not murder based on the arguments made decades ago. I am not saying these arguments are bad or wrong, just that there hasn't really been any recent wins for the pro-choice movement in a long time.

Also, with the plan B, rape pill and other post-intercourse contraceptives on the market, the number or rape pregnancies is WAY down. Basically, you have to get raped/have sex and then just pretend it didn't happen for a few weeks. Obviously there are other factors in play like denial, fear of talking about it, too young, etc. Those cannot be ignored.

I am not arguing wither way, I think it is a really hard decision and I am not sure where I stand.

Anyway you cut it, abortion is a private medical procedure that is between a woman and her doctor. I wish everyone would leave it at that. "Keep it secret. Keep it safe."

3rdcoaster wrote:

Anyway you cut it (pun intended) abortion IS infanticide. Rationalize, justify, but the truth remains.

"Abortion should be ENDED on one condition.

Everybody that registers to vote has to declare if they are FOR or AGAINST abortion.

All those AGAINST get put on a list. When the next unwanted baby comes up, it goes right to whoever is at the top of the list and they are solely responsible financially from that point on as if it was their own.

Now let's see who really wants to step up and back their "beliefs"."

So we should eliminate anyone on government assistance according to your logic.

The Progressive/Liberal political stance on abortion is rooted in population control. It is much cheaper on the State to simply destroy the fetus than to provide a lifetime of welfare services.

I am on the fence about abortion... I can see cases where it is needed, but I don't necessarily agree with it being a government subsidy.

Wierd logic, but I'll play... Many of the pro-life people I know, including myself, would adopt a baby in order to save the child from abortion; even though there are endless waiting lists at adoption agencies for those wishing to adopt infants. But, to play it your way, I propose that those who are in favor of abortion also put their name on a list and be ready to provide for post-abortive counseling (which I have and have seen the devastation these women feel), at their expense, or financially provide the abortion service out of their own pockets (in order to eliminate tax payer funding of abortions). See how your logic becomes so convoluted?

Sammy Sallamy wrote:

The Progressive/Liberal political stance on abortion is rooted in population control.

There may have been some people for whom population control was a reason to support birth control but it's certainly not a major reason now if it ever was. It's primarily a women's rights thing but there's also an element of pragmatism - abortion rates are lower and abortions are safer in countries with comprehensive sexual education, easy access to contraceptives, and legal abortion. Prohibiting abortions isn't any more effective than prohibiting alcohol or marijuana, it just drives it to the black market.

asdfasdf wrote:

Prohibiting abortions isn't any more effective than prohibiting alcohol or marijuana, it just drives it to the black market.

That is not true. Sure, some women will go black market to get an abortion, but the majority would not. Your average career woman slut who has an abortion every 3 years would not go to some back alley to get a coat hanger shoved inside of her.

That is urban legend and false thinking.

Lecherous wrote:

That is not true. Sure, some women will go black market to get an abortion, but the majority would not. Your average career woman slut who has an abortion every 3 years would not go to some back alley to get a coat hanger shoved inside of her.

That is urban legend and false thinking.

Your average career woman slut who has an abortion every three years doesn't exist. She's a strawman. It's not even a strawman that makes sense - do you know a single person of either gender who looks forward to surgery?

What most people don't understand (or are choosing to ignore here) are the implications of pro-choice/pro-life and would would really happen if Roe v Wade were overturned. If abortion were illegal, that really wouldn't affect the number of abortions.

Rich women would go to Canada or to Europe to get them done, or they would pay a private doctor in the US to perform the service under a different name.

Poor women would take coat hangers to themselves or ingest some sort of a drug cocktail in an attempt to kill the fetus. Or maybe they would try to induce some sort of trauma to themselves in an attempt to make their bodies inhabitable. People will do anything when they feel backed up against a wall. The bottom line is that illegalizing abortion will only take away the ability for women to get SAFE abortions. If abortion is illegal, they'll still happen (and you're a moron if you think this is not true), but mortality rates among low-income women will probably rise, and those who do survive will likely have irreparable damage.

Ironically, the only way to REDUCE abortions is to make birth control affordable and widely available, which is one of Planned Parenthood's biggest goals. Want to reduce abortion? Donate to PP.

Lecherous wrote:

asdfasdf wrote:

Prohibiting abortions isn't any more effective than prohibiting alcohol or marijuana, it just drives it to the black market.

That is not true. Sure, some women will go black market to get an abortion, but the majority would not. Your average career woman slut who has an abortion every 3 years would not go to some back alley to get a coat hanger shoved inside of her.

That is urban legend and false thinking.

Riiiiight. Because the average career woman doesn't understand and/or can't afford to use birth control? You're an idiot.

By the way, the number of abortions has declined by 32% since 1978. Its roughly down to where it was in 1974. Source: Wm. Robert Johnston

I have mixed feelings about abortion. I think most men who support the right to choose do. But at the end of the day I think its up to the woman to decide what to do.

I'm very much against late-term abortions unless its to save the mother's life. I think the idea aborting a baby that could potentially survive is horrific.

MarathonMind wrote:

3rdcoaster wrote:

Anyway you cut it (pun intended) abortion IS infanticide. Rationalize, justify, but the truth remains.

Well when you "cut it" in the first trimester (as happens in the vast majority of abortions), you are removing something which cannot survive outside the mother's body. How can you consider it an infant?

Like I said, justify it / rationalize it all you want. Incidentally, I didn't say that abortion should be illegal. I'm of a libertarian bent and I'd say I lean towards the side of the argument that it might be best if we just continue to allow people that want to commit infanticide to just go ahead and get it done safely (for the mother, not the infant!). I think, in the not-so-distant-future, we'll be really wishing we had allowed those infants to be born. Demographics and all.

west coaster wrote:

east coaster wrote:

You do not have the right to commit suicide so it seems that no, you do not have a right to your own body.

Anyway, how is anyone's rights being denied here? You want an abortion, pay for it your damn self.

You do in Oregon !! smart person :) oh yeah you sound like another self centered man !

Birth Control is a two person problem...But men don't have to deal with it every month.

Abortions despite what pro-lifers think are birth control. you might not like it, but denying it does not make go away. you don't want to pay for it. My insurance plan pays for Viagra as a health problem...pay for that your dam selfish person.

Good, go to Oregon and get an abortion then.

If men don't have to deal with it every month it sounds like it is not a man's problem.

But again, how are your rights being denied just because your decision is not being financed by someone else? Take responsibility for your damn self.

Yeah I can really see us wishing we had a generation of impoverished children born to parents who didn't want them.

It is not rationalizing or anything else. Try to understand this: we do not think an early trimester fetus is a person/infant. I would have absolutely no issue suggesting an abortion and wouldn't feel conflicted about it. There is no soul, and so the fetus's personhood comes down to its brain. If it doesn't yet have consciousness it isn't a person. Thus first trimester abortions are fine. Later abortions are more complicated, but I'm sure a reasonable person would agree that they're needed in some cases (to save the mother's life).

Freelove wrote:

There is no soul, and so the fetus's personhood comes down to its brain.

Okay, a reasonable person would accept that your statement is an opinion and not a fact. I, for one, believe that we do have souls. I believe a fetus has a soul, as do millions of other people in our country.

I happen to have a masters degree, not that it should matter, and I have plenty of very well-educated friends who belong to churches. I am guessing they probably have similar beliefs.

Yeah I'm not saying that's a fact, I'm saying that's my opinion. If you don't believe in souls you don't need to rationalize aborting an early term fetus.

Freelove wrote:

If you don't believe in souls you don't need to rationalize aborting an early term fetus.

For the most part, you are correct. I could see where an atheist might still be against it for whatever reason, but 99% of the time you would be correct.

Kidding, right? wrote:

What a crock. How about that baby living inside you. What a great Mother you are. Was baby too much for you? An inconvenience? A financial burden? Not the right time? May you burn in hell someday simply because you thought it OK to tear a baby limb from limb because you weren't ready but the baby was.

You know a blastula doesn't HAVE limbs, right? Most of the cells haven't even differentiated into their respective body patterning states beyond the three basic tissue layers.

east coaster wrote:

If men don't have to deal with it every month it sounds like it is not a man's problem.

But again, how are your rights being denied just because your decision is not being financed by someone else? Take responsibility for your damn self.

Small thinking...Pathetic, stay on your side of the country !