The vast majority of women who have abortions are not because they were raped but because they voluntarily had sex.
YES X1,000,000
For instance you’re not allowed to kill people with Alzheimer’s or those in a coma or without permission those in a vegetative state.
They undermine social cohesion, decays the moral character of the people, force the government to provide birth control for free (I don’t oppose it for moral reasons but for financial reasons), and oftentimes teen pregnancies and thus abortions.
Irrelevant to why what you said was ignorant. This is something you’ll understand better when you grow up.
That would cost you billions of dollars a year. Where are you going to get the money?
What does this have to do with clumps of insentient tissue which are not, and never will be people?
Cite?
This is just a restatement of the premise. You can’t say something is immoral because it’s immoral. That’s redundant.
This is hilarious. You’re too cheap to pay for condoms, but you’re willing to fork over thousands of dollars per women to pay for prenatal care and deliveries an maternity care (along with neonatal care, of course). It’s cheaper to spring for the balloons, bro, if you really care about financial concerns.
Not if you give them condoms, but why are you only talking about teeaangers? Adults fornicate too. They fornicate even more than teenagers. Do you think the governemnet should tell them not to do it?
Can you explain why homosexuality is immoral? How about “adultery” within open marriages?
Hey Curtis, I’m a 55 year old woman. I can tell you for a fact that sex is good. Actually, it’s even better than good, it’s great. Doesn’t matter if it’s within or without the vows of marriage, it’s really really awesome if you’re doing it right with the right person.
As a 13 year old you will have no idea what good, loving sex can bring to your life until you experience it. I only hope that someday you do. Many never do. Until you do I suggest you not speak ill of “fornication”. It just makes you sound ignorant.
When you become pregnant I will support whatever CHOICE you make about your situation. I only expect that you do the same for my daughters and grand-daughters.
If their brains are badly damaged enough, yes they can be “killed”, because they are already dead for practical purposes. Do you want to outlaw organ harvests as well?
All nonsense. It’s your proposals that undercut “social cohesion”; and at any rate “social cohesion” isn’t a good enough reason to reduce women to breeding animals. And the idea that of saving money by no providing birth control just demonstrates how anti-woman your position is; you want to make it hard to avoid getting pregnant, forbid your victim from getting an abortion, shovel as much hardship onto women as you can.
No, because whether some stranger carries a pregnancy to term is neither your business nor mine. If religious people don’t like the fact abortion is legal they can find another religion.
Look at the current situation. You believe that, at the moment, the situation is such that there are considerable (or, at least, avoidable) problems with society. Apparently a majority of the people are for it, in general, whilst your views are in the minority - otherwise you wouldn’t need legislation. If you passed laws censoring and inflicting a moral standard - aren’t you worried that the moral standard that will be inflicted won’t be yours? What if the government of the times uses those laws and that power to, rather than aid your cause, but work against it? Rather than moving towards your position there’s a good chance that things might move away.
That’s the problem with giving the government too much power (well, one of them). They’re under no obligation to use it to further your particular wishes.
No, because they are not anybody’s to trade. A human being has a right to health care and the health decisions made are not government’s to make, they are the patient’s decisions to make.
Conservatives: would you support a total ban on and confiscation of all firearms to maintain the pre-HCR health care status quo and open up the ANWR for drilling?
You seem to be under the impression that only impulsive, unwed, teenage girls have unwanted pregnancies. You couldn’t be more misinformed.
How do you define judgment and wisdom with regard to having sex? Waiting until you’re married? Using contraceptives? Sounds reasonable.
If you know so much about contraceptives, no contraceptive exists that is 100% efficacious. Women DO get pregnant while responsibly trying to prevent conception.
So, what’s a married woman who doesn’t want to get pregnant to do? Would you suggest that married men and women abstain from all sexual relations once they have decided that procreation is no longer a desired outcome?
You should also realize that as common as pregnancy and childbirth is, it is not without it’s health risks, particularly for older women. Not just for the woman, but for the fetus as well. For instance, at age 40, there is a 1 in 160 chance of a woman producing a baby with Down’s Syndrome. Compare that to a 20 year-old woman, whose risk is 1:1,667. Women, however, can remain reproductively fertile until their late 50s. Women in their 50s commonly have chronic illnesses such as hypertension, diabetes, and hypothyroidism, for example, which can be dangerously aggravated by carrying a pregnancy to term. Further, they are likely at a place in their lives at which raising a child can be physically, emotionally and mentally less than ideal for both the mother and child. Suffice it to say, pregnancy in older women is not a matter to be taken with such a cavalier attitude.
Guess what: married women using contraceptives have unwanted pregnancies, too. Why should their rights be denied because you and your religious friends disapprove of the the behavior of young, unmarried, impulsive women?
The UHC bill’s budget is well into the hundreds of billions-certainly they can’t spare a billion or two for this?
They will never be people only because they will be aborted.
A focus on sex is a primitive return to primate instincts and keeps humans away from higher ideals.
If they want to have sex than I won’t stop them.
It causes chaos and undermines procreation.
In organ harvests the subject is permanently, irrevocably DEAD.
I’m not going to ban fornication or homosexuality-the only thing I favour banning is abortion.
There is a 100% guarantee birth control-sterilization and if a couple’s old but don’t want kids and still want sex they probably should sterilize themselves.
And? Billions of sperm and eggs and and fetuses never become people for one reason or another. The vast majority of “potential humans” will never exist regardless of abortion.
Ah, the typical Christian hatred of life and pleasure and affection. Let me guess, the higher ideal in this case would be Christianity, your grim grey death cult of guilt and malice?
Homosexuality doesn’t “create chaos”. And even if it did interfere with procreation, so what? We are greatly overpopulated, not underpopulated.
And with abortions the tissue in question was never even a person; not even a dead one. If anything they deserve less consideration.
At any rate; the two cases are directly comparable because with both there is no one there. Just tissue.
Wonderful. So they aren’t allowed to change their minds, or to use less intrusive methods. They have to permanently sterilize themselves just so you can indulge your little sadistic power trip.
Wrong. It’s not 100% effective and 1 in 3 pregnancies occurring following a sterilization of the woman results in ectopic pregnancy, which can be life-threatening. As with any surgical procedure there are risks that can be exacerbated by chronic illnesses. It is an extremely invasive procedure.
You are young. I realize it’s difficult for you to understand that it’s completely normal for adults to engage in sexual activity well into old age for many reasons other than procreation. Intimacy being an important one. There is no reason to woman should be forced to choose an invasive procedure when there are less invasive, though highly effective contraceptive choices available. Nothing, not even, sterilization of either the man or woman is 100% effective.
A sperm potential is roughly 0.0000001%- a fetus is much higher.
God, not Christianity.
In Europe due to below replacement birth rates they’re heading for a massive financial crisis where they can’t support the social welfare system of the enormous elderly population.
And yet, the Bible does describe precisely the punishment against someone who causes the end of a woman’s pregnancy through an act of violence, and it is not the same punishment that one would receive for murder or an accidental death of an existing person. It’s not even as strict as the punishment as one would receive for burning someone or breaking their bone. So not only do your pro-life views not come from the Bible, your perspective on the personhood and rights and necessity of protection of fetuses runs directly counter to the instructions of the Bible. As a Christian, that ought to give you pause.
