Indeed. I voted according to the question asked in the OP, IOW the contrary of what I would have voted if I had answered the poll question instead.
Ought to be legal, though it doesn’t mean I have to like it.
^^^ This.
Your poll options are worded exactly the opposite as your trailing question in the OP. Very bad polling behavior!
I voted on the poll as it stands, not the question in the OP.
Yes, legal. I like how WhyNot put it: Bodily autonomy is more important than what I think.
I’m pro-choice, but for some pretty dry reasons. I hate abortion. It disgusts me. I find it morally reprehensible. But:
-
It’s impossible, in my view, to separate the rights of the unborn child from the rights of the pregnant woman.
-
Outlawing abortion doesn’t stop it. The best way to reduce abortion to a minimum is to fully remove the stigma of single motherhood and to give single moms great support - good job opportunities, daycare, etc.
So while emotionally I hate the idea that someone would choose to have an abortion because the unborn child was going to be gay, I have to follow the same logic as the ‘general’ abortion case.
My head overrules my heart. Is has to be legal.
However, if there was a law that, even if there were a test to determine if your child was going to be gay, it was illegal to administer that test or share the results with the parents, I’d be all over that!
If abortion is a woman’s right to control over her own body, we’ve already decided that the fetus has no independent rights. If a gay fetus has a right to protection, don’t they all?
Right, I voted no by mistake because of this.
Not necessarily. India basically allows elective abortion, but abortion based on gender is prohibited by law (mostly because parents were aborting female children for cultural/economic reasons and creating an imbalance in the gender numbers.)
But, doesn’t that beg the question, if a woman says that gender is not a factor in her decision to abort, how do you prove whether she’s lying or not?
No. Their body, their choice. But I wouldn’t want to hang out with such a person. Ok, that’s putting it mildly. Still, I absolutely would not support such a law.
This isn’t part of your question but to some of us it’s important to note when circumstances warrant. IMHO, unless the person in this scenario already has a child, they are not a “parent”, and I think you have it righter when you say “fetus” than when you say “baby.”
Tricky, but not impossible. There are lots of laws that depend on “intent.” Demonstrating intent is hard, but sometimes, perps make it easy, such as by boasting about it to friends on Facebook.
I know a guy who keeps a baseball bat, baseball glove, and baseball in his car. If anyone asks, he says, “I play a lot of pick-up ball.” The real reason is that he likes having a weapon in his car. He’s said that, unguardedly, to enough of his friends that a canny DA could elicit that as testimony.
See, to me, that just begs the question of why abortion is allowed under any circumstances. I’m basically pro-life, though. I only vote pro-choice because I suppose it’s not really the government’s business to meddle in… and if the government shouldn’t be meddling, then it shouldn’t be meddling, period. If the government wants to protect some fetuses, then I see no reason to deny protection to the rest of them.
During the 1992 vice presidential debate there was a question about abortion rights. James Stockdale, H.Ross Perot’s running mate, made a statement that also applies here. “I believe that what a woman does with her body is her business. Period”
So I would not support a law preventing people from this abortion option. But as others have already said, they’d be off of my friends list.
Yeah, I think the poll results are completely corrupted. The actual poll question is phrased exactly the opposite of the question asked at the end of the first post (IOW yes can mean no and no can mean yes…)
Sure. But the fact that it can be difficult to prove a crime has occurred is not in and of itself a reason to make something legal.
Yes, I would like to change my vote please.
Based on linguistics alone, anyone who is truly “pro-choice” would kinda sorta hafta vote “No” as (aside from term limits in pregnancy), “pro-choice” automatically excludes “support[ing] a law that would prevent” choosing to terminate a pregnancy for ANY reason.
I’m pro-choice, which means I believe it’s each pregnant person’s choice whether or not to continue or terminate a pregnancy. This person’s choice would be to NOT administer such a test on my fetus with the idea that if the results were positive, I’d terminate the pregnancy. Being homosexual is not a physical disability/handicap, it’s a societal disability and handicap…and one that society’s just going to have to cure itself of.
While I agree for myself, I think that’s redefining the terms as commonly used. A significant number of people who identify as “pro-choice” are generally found (in polls and in lawmaking) to favor some restrictions on abortion, especially in the last half of pregnancy.
I’m OK with abortion of fetuses for any reason whatsoever. It’s just a fetus, not a person (IMO).
Among other things taking up random space in my mind is this play which addressed that scenario.