And let the government tell us when to have abortions, just like in China? Or did you think that putting the government in the doctor's office would stop abortion?
2007-02-20 03:06:55 · 32 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes, men can sign their rights to the child away, and never pay child support. Many already do that. There are laws that allow that, but you have to sign your rights to that child away first.
2007-02-20 03:12:04 · update #1
lol..Supreme court is part of the judicial branch, one of three branches of GOVERNMENT. Get your facts straight
2007-02-20 03:13:53 · update #2
C=JD, if ypou knew anything about the history, you would know that rich women have always had access to safe abortions, and poor women were doing it themselves in back alleys. When RIGHTS are not protected by government, it becaomes a us vs them country. Sheesh! How many facts are missing out of people'sw lives? How can you have such a strong opinion about something you know so little about?
2007-02-20 03:17:40 · update #3
LOL! I have no idea what I am talking about? Fourth amendemnt guarantees it, and my abortion was not surgical. Did you just want to get rid of the surgical ones? you're digging a deeper hole...
2007-02-20 03:35:09 · update #4
post it and I will report you for spam. i saw that video. (inappropriate for children) and it didn't look like the one I had...whjich was a clump of cells. You see there are all types of abortions. BTW, should we require ALL surgeries to be watched before they are performed? Or just abortions?
2007-02-20 03:37:06 · update #5
NO, who are we to judge anyone? God is the only one that can judge someone. I don't have to live with someone decisions & they do not have to live with mine. In my opinion abortion should not be used as a form of birth control, but in cases where rape is a cause & health issues, again that is my opinion! I had to make a choice while pregnant with my second child, we were told that she would have numerous birth defects & we should consider an abortion - our choice was to put it in God's hands - she was born 100% healthy (she is 14 years old now & a handful, but healthy) I made a choice I knew that I could live with, every women should be able to make her choice as well.
P.S. I am a Republican
2007-02-20 03:27:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
I think a woman should have a right to choose whether or not to continue a pregnancy.
I don't think anyone should have a right to destroy a viable fetus unless the woman's life is in danger.
I think the abortion issue mixes up these two ideas - the woman's right to control, and the fetus' right to life.
Take it out without destroying it, and try to save it. If it lives, it deserves what every other living person does in terms of rights. If it dies, there's nothing more that can be done. But a baby born after 22 weeks gestation is going home from the hospital today.
It sounds extremely harsh to both sides to state it this way, but it's a start, I think. We don't get into the issues of rape, etc. because the woman ALWAYS has the right to say "I don't want to be pregnant" under my scenario. Does the right really need to include destroying a life too, even if that can be avoided?
Maybe this wouldn't work in the real world, but again I think abortion is TWO issues, not one. Each side tends to address only one issue and ignore the other.
Yes, society will have to take care of these children, as we do many others who can't take care of themselves.
And I believe that behavior would change, even a little, if this were done.
Many (but not all) anti-abortion groups put a lot of effort and resources into outreach, aid, etc. Some pro-choice clinics have been criticized for not adequately describing other options for women, so any choice can be a fully informed one.
I'd like to see society's attitudes "evolve" over this issue, as it did over civil rights for blacks. Most abortions are performed in the very early weeks of pregnancy, and in states like NY, California and other large states who would keep abortion legal even if Roe v Wade were overturned. But maybe we could all be more MINDFUL about our behavior, and the consequences of our actions. I like a good roll in the hay too, but I have to keep in mind that that's not all it is.
PS Surveys often show more support for legalized abortion among men than among women! Chris Rock's comedy routine included a line about picking up women at abortion rights rallies, for assured "no strings attached" sex. Sometimes I wonder if "the sexual revolution" liberated women more than it let men off the hook. I think that in a society where abortion on demand is the order of the day, fathering children and not caring for them loses a bit of its stigma. Some will say the woman "could have avoided the whole mess" by having an abortion, sad to say - but I've heard it!
2007-02-20 03:35:57 · answer #2 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
This is an argument that has gone on for years. Why aren't people upset or worried about the State of Texas (and others to follow) DEMANDING that all girls in 6th grade and up get the cervical cancer vaccine! Where is your rights on this one?! It is a dangerous thing to vaccinate these girls in school. It tells them that they don't have to be cautious with their sex life. Oh, wait, that's what pro choice is. A big cop out! Your choice should be to use protection against pregnancy. And for those in favor of killing a baby because mom was raped, there is this thing called ADOPTION! I lost twins (naturally) from a rape when I was 17. I would have carried them to term and put them up for adoption if I could have. I was told my third child would endanger my life. She and I are both living and well! Doctors don't know everything!
2007-02-20 03:38:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
No, restricting abortions takes away fundamental rights of choice, and opens the doorway for the government to restrict almost anything they want. If anti-abortion laws are passed, then practically any other thing regarding the sexual life of people can be passed. The right can EMOTIONALLY argue all they want about some fetuses who can't feel a thing, but they only make themselves look stupider and stupider with every ignorant word they spew. They wouldn't like it any more than everyone else if they had no control over their own body. Everyone knows abortion is only a stepping stone in the conservative ladder of control.
2007-02-20 03:15:27 · answer #4 · answered by Mystery Lady H 5 · 4⤊ 5⤋
The government should not be involved unless there is a crime.
The government can not come into your house without cause (4th Amendment). However, if you murder your child in your house, then a crime has been committed on your property, then the government has reasonable cause to invade your private property.
There is no difference with a woman's body. The government has no business telling you what to do with your property (your body), until you commit a crime, like murder. Murdering your child in your house or in your uterus is still murder.
Nothing will ever stop abortion, just like nothing will ever stop regular murder. That doesn't mean we should accept it and not have laws against it. Crime must be punished, not excused, for the good of society as a whole.
2007-02-20 03:25:22 · answer #5 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 4⤊ 5⤋
I saw a video of an abortion that someone posted here on YA and it totally changed my position on the issue. It is not just a "clump of cells." I saw a fully formed arm pulled out and disposed of. It is a CHILD not a CHOICE, and if anyone can watch the video and say differently, then I will say go ahead and let it be on your conscience. I have known two women who had abortions, and the psychological impact on them was about as bad as a rape victim. I'll try to find the video and post it and let each person decide for themself if they think it is killing or disposing of some unwanted cells.
2007-02-20 03:21:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋
Your assumption is that such a "right" exists. On what basis do you make this claim?
Secondly, rights are never "taken away" -- the government either acknowledges and respects them, or curbs, or denies them.
Third, comparing anything that America does with China reveals major ignorance about both countries.
Fourth, your understanding of this whole issue appears straight out of Karl Marx, whose analysis of economics and social issues was rooted in an "us vs. them" dichotomy. In his case, the Proletariat vs. Bourgeoisie; in your case, it's "government vs. women and doctors." Too simplistic.
Conveniently, you say not one syllable about the party most impacted by this so-called "right": the unborn.
_____________
To the contrary, it is YOU who knows nothing about the unborn. And you still haven't told us how this surgical procedure became a "right." Typing it in CAPITAL LETTERS IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR AN ARGUMENT.
Secondly, the "back alley" canard is a major myth. Women who wanted the procedure paid doctors under the table, whether rich or poor.
Third, even if this claim was true, it is not a justification for abortion. Your logic is akin to equipping bank robbers with bullet proof vests because there will always be bank robberies and some of them might get hurt or killed.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
2007-02-20 03:14:10 · answer #7 · answered by C = JD 5 · 9⤊ 6⤋
An excerpt from the Declaration of Independence, as penned by then-statesman but soon-to-be third President of the United States Thomas Jefferson: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among those are -- what's the first one? LIFE. Our Founding Fathers believed that the right to life was the one right that was above all others. No one, not a woman who is pregnant nor a doctor who prepares to rip an unborn fetus from the womb, has the right to take the life away from that unborn child, and anyone who does is a murderer. This is not me talking; this comes straight from the pages of those who fought for a free United States of America and wrote our Constitution. Abortion is an abomination, both in the eyes of God (whom our Founding Fathers believed in -- go back and see the reference to the Creator from the Declaration of Independence) and in the eyes of those to whom we owe our freedom. So to any woman who believes she has the right to choose, why don't we go back and ask your mothers if they really wanted you? Better yet, why don't we take those whose mothers didn't want them and put them to death in the name of a woman's right to choose? Your hypocrisy is staggering...
2007-02-20 03:19:10 · answer #8 · answered by sarge927 7 · 4⤊ 4⤋
No, we should never take away that right, its constitutionally guaranteed.
And in response to the following:
From: C = JD
Subject: HUH?
Message: "No, we should never take away that right, its constitutionally guaranteed."
When you have a moment, please show us where the constitution "guarantees" or even mentions abortion.
Good luck!
Although the constitution may not specifically mention Abortion, it does give us the following, and right in the First Amendment!:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Which means that you Right Wing Pro-Life people should respect that not everyone has the same views that you have, and its supposed to be that way. So stop shoving it down our throats. And stop "gloating" because if there isn't something in there that specifically pertains to Abortion, that goes BOTH WAYS.
2007-02-20 03:14:14 · answer #9 · answered by liebedich85 4 · 5⤊ 6⤋
I have got to say, I am against abortion, I think it is a hideous loss of life, however I do not think the government should have any decision in the matter. The government should never pass legislation based on morality and abortion is a moral issue better addressed through education, in the churches and at home.
2007-02-20 03:14:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 5⤋