It is the womens body and she should have the right to say what goes on - but on the other hand - if the man/boy wants the baby - then it should be handed over at birth and let the man/boy bring it up without any financial help from the mother, and no detriments to her at all regarding job, money etc., Do you think that would be a fair option?
A lot of men/boys complain about abortion, but do not want the responsiblitly of bringing up a baby or what it entails.
And by the way it takes two to tango as they say - why don't men use a condom, or use the petty excuses when they don't
2007-05-09 00:41:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Redhead 5
·
6⤊
1⤋
That would be a fair point except that using birth control is not taught or promoted in this country to the people who need to hear it most: teenagers. Teaching abstinence has been proven NOT TO WORK.
The christ-cons will tell you that criminals will get guns in spite of legislation so we should have no gun control. Well, using that logic, teens will have sex no matter how much you preach abstinence, so we should teach sex-ed in schools. That won't happen of course, because the christ-cons want to force their morality on anyone who doesn't think like them.
I think a lot more people in this country would support abortion laws if we also had comprehensive sex-ed taught in our schools, reformed the monstrous state of foster care in our society and vigorously promoted adoption.
2007-05-09 19:15:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by BOOM 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
They shouldn't have the right to choose life or death for someone who can't speak for themselves. It's murder, not choice. By the way, it takes two to make a baby and birth control is available to men.
2007-05-09 07:53:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by Debra D 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Before Roe v Wade there were not as many birth control options available. Now their are many pills, better condoms, and new contraceptive devices. Most of them have side benifits such as condoms prevent STDs like HPV, HIV and other not curable deseases. Pills help regulate and moderate menstration. They help with other hormonal problems. There are choices which are applied once a month and some that last for 3 or more years. In addition before Roe V Wade abortions were regulated by the states and in some states they were illegal and in others they were legal. 30 years ago it wasn't a common to go to other states, now people do it all the time for various reasons. Before Roe V Wade. Women were not given jobs they were under qualified for, now we have laws that force employers to give women jobs that they are not the best candidates for and pay them more then they are worth. Before Roe V wade there was no HIV, now condoms should be used regardless. Before Roe V Wade we didn't keep accurate records of Abortions related illness and fatality, now we know that statistically you are more likely to die or have serious illness from abortion then from pregnancy. Before roe v wade we didn't know that very young babies still in the womb felt pain, now we do. Before roe v wade we didn't have organizations and agencies to help single mothers or families in poverty. Before Roe V Wade it wasn't socially acceptable for a single women to have a kid. Now it is common. Before Roe V Wade we didn't have the same quality of life, or the same economy that we do now. Before Roe V Wade we never thought more African American babies would be aborted every year then born. Before Roe V Wade our hospitals and knowledge of pregnancy were no where near as good as they were today. It is clear now, that Before Roe V Wade the Laws were made by elected Representatives, that states could decided what medical procedures are warranted and what procedures are murder. Now we have Judges who are appointed for life decided what laws I must live under. The supreme court was full of liberals who felt that laws are only valid if they agreed with them.
The world has changed so much in 30 years, Abortions should not be the birth control.
Lets elect officials which will replace the activist judges in the supreme court with actual judges who look at laws and decided if they are constitutional not weather they agree with them morally.
Abortion laws like all laws decided what is moral and what is not. That is what all laws do. Lets put the law making back where it belongs.
2007-05-09 09:08:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
For starters because it is not always the woman's decision to become pregnant in the first place, and that factor is not allowed for in any legislation. I could continue but I don't want to let any facts get in the way of your opinions.
2007-05-09 08:03:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by ash 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with this issue; however, no individual has a constitutional RIGHT to have any medical procedure performed on them. Do we want to help each other? Yes !!! But, don't try to bastardize the constitution so that a new right is interpreted into the law.
2007-05-09 08:26:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by YRU4IT 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
You may have a point.A woman who would choose to have sex with a nit wit(do you always use protection?Do you actually have sex?)may not be rational.However,it is none of your business.
2007-05-13 04:22:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by R B 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because they are human.
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." --Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791
2007-05-09 08:27:11
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Would have, could, should have are all easy to say but they don't change the circumstances the woman finds herself in.
2007-05-09 07:54:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
If someone believes abortion is wrong--that's fine. But it is a religious belief. And this is a free country. They DO NOT have the right to impose their religion on those who don't happen to share it.
2007-05-09 07:59:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋