Hey, i'm pro choice, but I think the choice has to be made earlier, like when the woman is contemplating sex. Woman's body, womans choice. Then there would be no more abortions... everyone is happy.
What would you choose?
2006-08-10 19:07:26 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Anthropology
dont have sex. It is a tragedy and very selfish if you trade a kid's life for an orgasm.
2006-08-10 20:00:49 · answer #1 · answered by Stand-up Philosopher 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I love sex, but I don't want children. I am pro-choice because I believe women should always have that option. But I don't think we would have so many abortions in this country if sexual education in schools focused on condoms and birth control, rather than abstinence. I think it is ironic that the same people who push for outlawing abortion also push for abstinence only sexual education. Like we're all really going to wait until marriage. In Louisiana (that's the state I'm in), we recieved this abstinence only "education". Plenty of the girls I grew up with got pregnant in junior high and high school. I think if they had actually been given the information they needed back then, they could have had very different lives.
2006-08-11 05:00:37 · answer #2 · answered by miss advice 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think that most women that get pregnant and then opt for an abortion are in no shape or ready for a family. Of course she should not have sex without protection. I'm pro choice and I just don't understand why a women would lay down get pregnant and then kill her own baby.But then what happens when a women gets pregnant through rape? This would be hard on the women in any case, I am still pro choice so I think the women should seek counseling and place the baby up for adoption, since this is not the childs fault, what has happened.
2006-08-10 19:20:13 · answer #3 · answered by SecretUser 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You're thinking too simplistically. You can wear a condom, and be on birth control, and something can still happen. A woman can take every precaution on the earth besides abstinence, and still get pregnant.
It's not, "Oh, she had sex! She deserves to have that baby! It's her fault!" because she did everything in her power to prevent pregnancy. You can't expect anyone to stay celibate in this day and age in a modern country, unless they're religious enough to do so. A baby is NOT a punishment. You don't make a woman carry around something that isn't even technically a HUMAN for nine months because you're morally against what she did.
And if you DO consider it a human, you're treating the pregnant woman as a second-class citizen. Why? Because no human has a right to use your body without your consent. It's like rape. If a man is raping you, you have the right to kill him in many states. If a fetus (or human in some minds) is using your body when you don't want it to, you have the right to kill it. If you aren't giving the fetus equal status to the human, then she can have it destroyed. If you are, she can have it destroyed because it's there without her permission. End of discussion.
2006-08-10 19:58:03 · answer #4 · answered by Eri 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
it extremely is a fashion for conservatives to mistakenly correlate a scientific technique (like abortion) with homicide. Abortions are distinctly correlated with low-earnings populations. Many low-earnings human beings of a distinctive race than the white conservatives in many cases seek for abortions because of the fact they won't be able to handle to pay for the cost of having infants. as a result, they substantiate that persons of distinctive races homicide and inspire racism interior the destiny generations. that's why conservatives in many cases forget relating to the girls people who could make this determination and shout relating to the fetus. they do no longer prefer women human beings to have a call. they're adamantly destructive to any minority getting any variety of equality in our society.
2016-11-04 08:27:19 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would say no sex before an abortion. But, to be honest, people who choose to abort their baby have a reckless disregard for life and the human body, and would probably choose abortion before no sex.
2006-08-10 19:13:45 · answer #6 · answered by Aliza, Queen of the Night 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I believe the exact same way you do (earlier the better), but I am a firm believer in self-control. I was celibate for almost 3 years by choice. I needed to really love myself before I was ready to share myself with anyone else. Lots of yoga and meditation. I discovered that I really, really liked me (not only myself but by myself).
I would choose celibacy again in a heartbeat. It was a really wonderful time of self-discovery for me.
2006-08-10 19:15:45 · answer #7 · answered by mistress_piper 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
If you had to choose between eating an apple or a lump of rotten meat, what would you choose?
Do you get the point? It's not as if there aren't any other options...
2006-08-11 07:33:20 · answer #8 · answered by julia 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Maybe she should choose to have protected sex? You know, sex + protection = no pregnancy = no need for abortion.
2006-08-10 23:33:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
How did this question get into the anthropology section? If you want to discuss abortion and other social/political/religious questions find the proper section.
2006-08-10 20:04:15 · answer #10 · answered by West Coast Nomad 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Depends on the guy-lol- just kidding, that's stating the obvious, no sex of course as masturbation is usually more satisfying
2006-08-11 04:03:51 · answer #11 · answered by Caro 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋