Libs/Dems please explain to me how you feel about abortion. When should it be allowed and when should it not?

Answer 1

I think it should be allowed in cases of rape and incest and if the case the mothers life is in danger.

It should not be used as a form of birth control, as reversing an unwanted pregnancy.

I think the government should stay out of it and it is an ethical decision a pregnant mother reserves the right to make. Personally I think it's wrong, but only God can judge our moral decisions, not the federal government.

Answer 2

I feel that it should be allowed up until the point of viability. After that, it should only be allowed when the mother's life is in danger. I understand that viability is, thanks to medical science, earlier than ever, and may become earlier still in the future (My daughter was born at 26 weeks, and she's now 7 years old). I have no problem with accepting this. However, it does not change the fact that the vast majority of procedures are doe at a point when viability will, in all likelihood, never attach. Unless science is able to construct an artificial womb, most of the time these fetuses are those which cannot be called living humans.

For those who are against it but willing to allow exceptions for things such as incest or rape, I am confused. I imagine your opposition is based on your belief that from the moment of conception, it is a human being, as no other reason for opposition has been put forward. So why would you be willing to allow human beings to be killed simply because of the circumstances of their creation? It isn't the "baby's" fault how it was conceived, was it? You are clearly demonstrating that you haven't really thought this through, and your opposition is only skin-deep.

Answer 3

Personally I believe that at 5 months when the brain waves first appear and the fetus can feel pain as well as have a chance to live outside the body, that is when the cutoff for abortions should be.

I am very passionately pro-choice because I don't think the government should get involved in such personal life decisions and that women should become mere 'baby makers.' What I mean by that is every situation is different, and if a women was raped or in an abusive relationship she would be forced to carry the baby to term simply because she was biologically born with the ability to bear children. While that is obviously an extreme case the bottom line is that reproductive rights should not be controlled by law.

Furthermore the issue of abortion is a moral one and I don't think people should have the right to impose their morals and religious beliefs on other people. Women should be able to choose what is right for them (up to the point where the fetus won't suffer). A lot of pro-lifers claim that we shouldn't be having sex unless we are ready to handle a baby and/or married. Well, some people never want to have children...are they never supposed to have sex because the only purpose of sex is to reproduce? Where will it end?

I also believe that there should be better sexual education though, to hopefully reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies and better social programs/aid so women don't feel the need to have an abortion solely because of finaicial reasons or single parenthood.

Answer 4

First of all, abortion should be allowed mainly in the first trimester. If a woman is married to a man, both must consent to the abortion; after all, it's his DNA as well. After the first trimester, abortion should be allowed only in the case of rape, incest, or underage sex or if there is a MAJOR threat to the mother's life or the child's life. The mother should be able to decide in all cases mentioned in the previous sentence even during the first trimester, even without the man's approval. Nothing allowed in the trimester; that's murder. I don't care what you think, but abortion in the first two trimesters is not murder because the fetus is not a living human being. Moneywise, government money should be used only in the case of rape and threat to mother and/or child's life.

PS: I am still thinking over this issue, so my opinion may change. Forgive me if I sound the slightest self-contradicting.

Answer 5

Safe, Legal and rare should be the standard. The problem is however that Roe v wade is what they call Bad Law. It does not create equity with other laws:

1) If a man dies and leaves a will saying "I leave my estate to my children" and his wife/GF/ whoever is pregnant with his child, that child gets a share of the estate. Yet how is this his "child" if it is not a life?

2) No child is conceived with out two parties. Yet the father has no say in the matter of an abortion. Yet if the mother chooses to have the child the Father must pay support. He is therefore paying for a choice he has no say in. Fathers should have the right to either opt out of responsibility )and there fore rights to) the child, or be able to have the woman carry to term if they are willing to absorb all responsibility for the child.

Law, any law only works if it applied equally and Roe v Wade doe snot provide equal protection for both men and women and there fore is bad law which will eventually be struck down.

Both Pro-life and Pro-choice people need to look at how unequal the law is and fix that portion of the debate

Answer 6

I do not think anyone should take a way a mothers right to choose. This is not what I would do for myself but if someone makes that choice it is thier choice and no one elses business. Now if abortion was outlawed we would once again have back alley doctors putting a womans life and the childs life in danger and making big bucks. Now what I want to know is how someone can be so against abortion yet they support the death penalty?

Answer 7

I am an American. (Not a Lib, Dem, or Rep) This is America. Lets not forget the freedoms we enjoy nor encroach upon the freedoms of others. The decision should be an individual one. Those who insist that it should be outlawed should be required to adopt an unwanted child before they open their mouths and spew. The Catholic church should stop preaching that it is the governments responsibility to provide for all of these unwanted children. Simply excuses having unwanted child after unwanted child, then tries to use moral responsiblity as a weapon to force taxpayers to provide for all the little unwanted catholics running around.

Answer 8

I am against abortion, ever, for any reason other than the immediate saving of the mother's life. (life not health). That includes incest and rape. Sorry, I just don't agree with giving a rapist's child the death penalty because of his father's criminal act. There are plenty of people who have been born due to incest and if one of the participants was underage that is rape. See my reply about rape.

This being said, it is my personal belief. However, when it comes to politics, I am not the dictator. So, in my humble opinion, Roe Vs Wade should be overturned because it is bad law and a great overreaching abuse of Judicial power.

The issue should be returned to the States where each can decide if there will nor will not be abortions. If they decide to permit them they will decide who, when and how they will be done. Each state has the right to be as liberal or as conservative with this issue. I wish everyone felt the same way I do about it but it is a State issue and I will respect the will of the people.

.

Answer 9

I am completely pro-choice and I don't think there should be any limits placed on a woman's right to choose. I don't like abortion, but outlawing it isn't going to solve anything. If anything, outlawing it would make things worse, because desperate women and girls would resort to having illicit, unsafe abortions that would result not only in the fetuses being killed, but in some cases the mothers, as well. If we can't save the fetuses, we should at least save the mothers!

Answer 10

If we allow the government to dictate what medical decisions we can or cannot make, where does it stop?

Roe had nothing to do with allowing abortion, it states that the government does not have the authority to dictate what medical procedures that we can and cannot have.

If you think about it, Roe also keeps the government from forcing people to have an abortion.

It should always be safe and legal.
The government has no right to dictate one narrow view of "morality".