Religiously Pro-Life (of course)
Politically Pro-Choice (of course)
2006-10-02 06:59:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by Fire_God_69 5
·
2⤊
3⤋
There are thousands of couples in the United States alone who are battling infertility. I personally know 3 couples. Each of those couples would gladly not just raise one or more unwanted baby, but give that baby unconditional love, stability, and welcome into their empty arms and lives. If a person considers them self to be pro-choice, then they should not only be just "pro" abortion, but also be willing to support a woman's choice if she wants to keep her baby or if she wants to give it a chance at life with an adoptive family. I do not believe in abortion, I believe there are always better alternatives. However, I do understand that abortion is a legal option for women. I do not pass judgment on a person who has chosen an abortion. I know several women who have gone through that experience. It is usually a very difficult decision for most women, not made lightly or without regret. My family gives financial support to a crisis pregnancy center. In addition, I have provided free daycare to young single moms in need. I don't believe it is enough to say you are pro-life, but must put some action to those words. Based on the number of children who continue to be abused, killed, mistreated, and abandoned, making abortion legal has not made every child a wanted child. I don't believe the abortion issue is merely about who is on which side of the political fence, but is an issue of fundemental human rights. Each baby conceived has the right to be born, live a life in a loving family, and grow up to be the person he/she was created to be.
2006-10-02 07:40:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by sevenofus 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well I'm pro choice.
Honestly I don't think a bunch of old white guys should pass laws on what women do to their own bodies. Also you don't want abortions going underground, as that leads to the women dying from complications and non-sterile conditions. (Which is probably what extremist pro-lifers want)
People like to make a morality issue out of it, but really its one of practicality. Having mothers go to term with babies they resent is not a good thing.
But I hope realize that there is a long waiting list for people to adopt babies, it's a fairly comlicated process. So there is a lot of demand for these "unwanted" kids. If a mother doesn't want a baby, adoption should be seriously considered.
2006-10-02 07:03:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Dizazter 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
Pro-choice.
2006-10-02 07:01:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by Elizabeth 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Pro life. Here's my theory: Your mother brought you into this world, so if you're "grown up" enough to spread your legs and not use protection, you're grown enough to raise that baby that doesn't have a choice. Adults, on the other hand, do have a choice. I can't justify anyone aborting an unborn baby due to bad choices they've made for themself. It doesn't matter WHO raises those kids, they WILL get taken care of...otherwise, control yourself more and don't be ignorant and act like it's okay to keep getting pregnant cause you know you can just kill the baby if you don't want it, or if it's inconvenient for you at the time...
It's only my opinion, I'm not trying to convince anyone otherwise.
2006-10-02 07:08:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by Shining Ray of Light 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
I am pro life and I know that there are tons of families that want to have a baby but can't. Those are the people who are going to raise the babies. Those children are not unwanted!!! How dare you say that. They are just waiting for a home to call thier own.
2006-10-02 07:01:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by mktk401 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
i'm pro the right choice for each person.
do I think abortion is a good thing? NO way, but some times its what that person wants.
i find that those who choose abortion arent always making the "right" choice, meaning they aren't given all the options or feel that its the only option.
bottom line, its still has to be available, women just need to be better informed and supported with their decisions.
2006-10-02 07:20:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by okiedokey 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
All of "those kids" are not unwanted. Just because there are those who have no regard for another life , believe in putting their pleasure above responsibility, doesn't mean the world is filled with all of those kind of folks. There are caring loving people who would cherish a child to hold and to raise. Every pregnancy represents a life. Every abortion is muder of that life. Everyone has a choice in the beginning-how about birth control?! Clear and simple.
2006-10-02 07:03:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by Catie 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Pro Life. We would not have unwanted pregnancies if people who are not mature enough to have kids keep their legs closed. I was a product of adoption and strongly believe in it.
Your argument is flawed. You make excuses for people behaving poorly.
Abortion to save a woman's life is one thing, abortion because you do not want to accept the consequences of your behavior.
2006-10-02 07:14:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Chainsaw 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, personally, I think it is best left up to those with the ummm..problem. You & I should only try to help women keep the domain of their bodies to themselves.
And, there are plenty of those children around the world as it is, so I don't disagree, but there is a fine line between a woman choosing her fate & destiny, & the government deciding who lives & who dies a few years after that. They will feel that they can control anyones body they want.
THAT is why Roe vWade is so very important & we have to stop the current administration from chiseling it away more, or getting rid of it entirely.
2006-10-02 07:03:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by fairly smart 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm mostly pro-life, but recognize abortion is never again going to be illegal.
In the day of Partial Birth Abortions (where they literally kill a full-term, 9 month old unborn, just before it's coming out during labor) it's a bit tough to justify being pro-abortion, I think, without sounding like a complete idiot.
This whole "it's just a fetus" justification may have made sense when Roe V Wade was first passed, which made abortion legal ONLY FOR THE 1ST TRIMESTER, but I don't see how you can justify killing a 9-month old fetus who is literally going to be a healthy newborn in 15 minutes if you let the birth take place.
And the justification for "the safety of the mother" is bogus;
When there are complications in birth, they do a ceaserian section, they don't shout "oh no, there's complications, we have to kill the baby!".
2006-10-02 07:07:02
·
answer #11
·
answered by dork 7
·
1⤊
3⤋