I was going to respond, but apparently BobLibDem has the entirety of pro-lifers figured out.
To the OP: yes, I fully support free contraception and sex education. I also think it is silly not to.
Last time I checked, anyone can post an opinion in any thread, unless a mod says otherwise.
It is not always known who and/or where the father is.
Exibit #1–The woman taken in adultry and about to be stoned. Where was the guy? How did she commit adultry all by herself?
I am all for taking deserved swipes at Bricker, but I don’t think he is anywhere near advocating that BobLibDem shouldn’t be allowed to “post an opinion in any thread”
To be fair, Jesus did say “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”, followed immediately after with “Damn it, Mother!”
The Pill works by preventing ovulation. Another science failure by the right.
Some birth control pills can prevent [url=http://www.thesurvivaldoctor.com/2013/02/23/abortion-and-the-pill/]implatation of a [del]fertilized egg[/del] baby, child, whatever.
I would support it.
(Mostly because the former almost always get immediately relegated to the pit, on account of being really, really dumb. Not gonna name names, you all know who I’m talking about. :p)
Rabid pro-lifer checking in. FUCK YES!
I support it as well.
Was there a payoff to this thread? Any point? Or didn’t the answers live up to expectations?
I’m in favor of abortion on demand AND free, easily-accessable birth control – both issues available to women of all ages, not just those age 18 and over.
But now I have an offshoot of this topic: Anti-abortionists argue that abortions (and many forms of birth control) are destroying not only fetuses but souls. I’d like to see a coherent definition of a “soul” and a believable explanation of why humans supposedly have “souls” but animals do not. Is it possible to explain this dichotomy (Person = Soul, but Dog = No Soul) AND keep religion out of the discussion?
Is it possible to keep religion out of ANY discussion about abortion and birth control?
– RaineyCat
This sums up my viewpoint as well. I am a supporter of All Our Lives, a fairly new pro-life group that advocates for birth control and all other “non violent choices”. I do think that everyone should have access to birth control. In my ideal world, I wish that people were not having unplanned pregnancies in the first place. However, I do agree that in many cases, birth control access isn’t the problem so much as that people choose not to take advantage of for various reasons. For example, I think many middle class people fail to appreciate that a significant number of low socioeconomic status teenagers intentionally become pregnant because they perceive having a child at a young age as a good thing (like a sign of maturity or something to give their lives meaning when they have nothing else going for them). You can throw condoms at people all you want, but if they’re not actually motivated to prevent pregnancy it won’t matter.
Of course. Not all pro-lifers believe in souls (examples: Prolife Humanists and Secular Prolife - and it’s also worth noting that at least one of the founders of the above mentioned All Our Lives is a pro-life atheist).
Personally, my reasons for being pro-life have never had anything to do with religion.
A lot of times, I think religious groups will take a prominent role in social movements due to the fact that churches make it easy for activists to organize. Look at how active religious groups like the Quakers were in the fight against slavery. Look at all the Christians who oppose the death penalty. The pro-life movement is the same. Just like not everyone who is opposed to the death penalty is a Christian, not all pro-lifers are Christian, and I consider discussing religion in an abortion debate to be totally pointless.
That is probably best the subject of another thread, and I think the onus is on you first to prove that there are many people who are prolife believe that animals don’t have souls. Personally, I don’t know any that believe this, especially when it comes to common reasonably intelligent domesticated mammals like dogs, cats, and horses.
PP also performs more abortions than anyone; that’s why I want it defunded by the government. If it stopped its abortion advocacy & reverted back to its HISTORIC position, I’d be all for Gov’t funding.
You can say what “the right wing” wants all you want, but that does not make it so.
To the OP- Yes. I believe in the availability of contraception. For I am a Protestant!
Of course I do. As does all my family, and most of our acquaintances.
I can only suggest that you are thinking about the subset of anti-abortion people who are right-wing-American and/or Roman Catholic.
Roman Catholic because some of them are opposed to Birth Control as well as being opposed to Abortion.
Right-wing-American because some of them are opposed to ‘free’ programs of any sort, and would reject your premise that it could be shown to have any good effects.
On the other hand, nobody I know (even the RC’s) is actually opposed to birth control, and nobody I know is actually opposed to free social welfare programs, but some of the people I know and some of the people I am related to are opposed to abortion.
Sorry, I couldn’t let this one slip by. Why are some who are against abortion so willing to enact some way to persecute/prosecute a woman who doesn’t want to gestate against her will, even if it ruins her life? Do they really want to throw women in prison, or worse, who choose not to let an unwanted pregnancy enslave them? If so, that’s bloody sick.
Do these folks actually believe that harming women, or scaring them enough, will prevent them from seeking ways to terminate unwanted pregnancies? Good luck with that. Unfortunately, if anti-abortionists ultimately get their way, I believe all this will mean is an increasing number of desperate women in the US physically maimed or killed through unsafe procedures, but that’s okay, I guess; women are simply sperm depositories and child-bearing machines after all. Rights? Feh! That’s only for men and fetuses.
For abortions before the fetus is viable, I’d support pnealties such as fines, community service, and suspension of licence (for the doctor) to make sure that we are serious about opposing abortion but I don’t support prison terms in those cases. However this is obviously different after . In those cases, it should not be regarded differently from infanticide (or murder in general).
I’ve cited this before but Cecil Adams demonstrated that there was no large amounts of women dying from abortions with coat-hangers before Roe.