Does the Pro Life camp address the inevitable social issues that would come from illegalizing abortion?

Question

Morally I'm Pro Life but I don't vote that way b/c I think to provide a decent quality of life to all those babies, we need more than to slap a law on the books. We need better health care, parenting resources, foster care, adoption resources, welfare programs, education system, and (let's face it) better police protection in 15 years when many of those babies may adopt a life of crime. Since Republicans who would overturn Roe v. Wade are the least likely to raise taxes for any of this, how does the Pro Life camp plan to address these realistic problems?

To me, it makes more sense to try to reduce the number of abortions the "back way"--by bettering health care, higher education and job options for the women most likely to opt for an abortion. There were actually fewer abortions in Clinton's tenure than Bush's--the economy was better and women felt like they had a better shot at making a future for themselves and a baby. I think we need more than just a law to do it right. Thoughts?

The article I found about abortions during Clinton vs. Bush is from 2004, so the trend might be changing, but you didn't answer my question. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/14/214122/41) If the rates are indeed falling, why is that and how can we do more of it to naturally reduce the number of abortions without simply slapping a law on the books?

How would bettering health care reduce abortions? How optimistic would you feel about bringing a baby into this world if you couldn't afford health care for yourself, much less a baby???

Sorry sociald, I didn't mean for that to come out that way. I thought I was responding to the first guy. I like your answer.

Answer 1

The pro-lifers are always pro life until their little Mary comes home pregnant from college and they find out the lil' baby might not be 100% white like their suppossedly innocent little ray of sunshine...

The pro-lifers are always pro life until their little Johnny knocks up the little $lut from the trailer park...

Answer 2

I really think that certain segments of the religious right polarize around lowest common denominators such as race, abortion, and other issues because they are fairly cut and dry with which to channel their collective hate. If you look at the later part of the last US presidential election it is clear that the republicans reached out to these groups in a last minute attempt for votes. Just watch the video "Right America feeling Wronged" by Alex Pelosi and you will see examples of that. Roe vs Wade will never be overturned since that would just create a massive black market of back alley abortion sweat shops that would just cripple the nation's health care system on a pandemic level unprecedented in social medical history.

Answer 3

I have nothing against abortion being legal. I dislike the fact that the desire for abortion is so high.
there are a number of things we could do to decrease abortion:

1- more birthcontrol. sadly you must now to 18 to buy condoms

2- more laws to protect pregnant women from discrimination. this applies especially to the cases where a pregnant teen is kicked out of her high school and sent to an alternative school where pregnant females and violent males make up the whole student body. (and be the way the father of the baby gets to stay right where he was before the pregnancy)

3- stop cutting welfare

4- work to stop at risk and poor children from having bad lives through better education, after-school programs, and improving neighborhoods. (just make life better. even if it doesn't seem like it effects abortion or children's lives- it does)

5- make foster care safer and more productive. many kids get out at 18 with basic skills, no family, and no where to go.

6- have universal healthcare

and there are many more. those are just 6 main ones.

Answer 4

No, they generally don't answer that question. I think they should. Although raising taxes generally brings in less revenue (it promotes exodus from our country by employers, who then take their jobs with them and those hard workers who get fed up and search for a country with kinder tax laws, like Costa Rica), so that isn't the solution.

You should look into Rudy Giuliani's campaign. He is proposing ways to reduce abortions by decreasing the regulations that make adoptions so difficult. If pregnant women know that there's an option where her child has a good chance of finding a loving, secure, and safe home for her child, she would be less likely to have an abortion. This sounds like the perfect solution to satisfy the issue you raised and to go along with your belief that abortion is morally wrong. It wouldn't stop abortion, but we would see less of them. Making abortions illegal just puts abortion into secretive underground actions. No government can stop abortions, they can only enact legislation that makes it so they won't hear about them much.

Answer 5

First, I'm pro life all the way, but don't vote that way either for many reasons I won't go into and that have nothing to do with this question

Second, I agree with you. Better the life of women and the economy and you better their chances of raising their children on their own if the men flake out....which happens a lot.

Third, I don't think the abortion thing should be overlooked. Even though the issues you mentioned are important in making abortions seem less necessary, I don't think we can overlook the fact that with the laws still there, more babies will die in the interim as laws and ethics are debated.

What I think needs to be done more is to make it easier for women to go after the father's for child support and harder on the men making all these babies and then leaving it up to the women to deal with. I know there are laws in place now that help with that, but if a man decides he doesn't want to pay anything, he can easily avoid doing so for many, many years while the woman has to deal with raising that child alone. If we could find a way to crack down on these 'deadbeat dads' hard enough, then maybe fewer of them would be so casual about not using protection to prevent pregnancy. Yes, women can also do something about this too, but many of the ones getting pregnant are also very young...barely legal in most cases, and their inexperience and ignorance leaves them vulnerable....so this goes back to proving that what you said about educating women is a valid point as well and needs to be done. But I also think there needs to be stronger laws that makes a man have to step up and take responsibility whether he likes it or not.

Answer 6

I am just curious but how would bettering health care reduce abortions?
Education absolutely.
I personally do not think abortion should be completely illegal.
Irresponsibility need to be discouraged and responsibility encouraged definitely.

""How optimistic would you feel about bringing a baby into this world if you couldn't afford health care for yourself, much less a baby???""

So by 'better' health care you mean free or almost free health care.. not better ... just cheaper. because your reasoning addresses affordability... which has nothing to do with quality. which is what I would mostly define as better.

No problem. My point in it is, that if a person is worried about affording healthcare, then instead of deciding to have children ( again children shoudl be a decision, not the result of irresponsibility ) one should be out earning a better living so they can afford the healthcare to then have the child.

Answer 7

Did it ever occur to you that if you don't want a baby then don't MAKE one. there only, what a BILLION ways to keep from becoming pregnant. You say your pro life? but you vote for abortion??? Way to go, so at 1,400,000 abortions a year, just how much innocent blood DO you have on your hands. That like saying, "I'm against violence, but I want do anything to stop it, if I see a 80 year old man across the street getting beat to a bloody pulp by a bunch of thugs, its really not any of may business, you know free expression and all" Action have results, so does doing nothing.

Answer 8

What party represents the pro-lifers anyway. Not the Democrats that for sure, not the republicans because of the laws already in place republicans believe it or not are the true patriots of laws and the moral obligations to abide so why are people still worried is there another political party that will represent them?

EDIT: furthermore I do think anywhere there is a liberal, Conservative,moderate republican judge out there who would ever overturn one of the most controversial issues in US history because it would to them, political suicide unless they were a complete lunatic. Its been almost 25 years this ruling has stood firm with only a few minor modifications being attached, if anything this should be a reminder that pro life is not a political issue its a moral issue.

Answer 9

I am pro-life whenever possible, also.

However, I have known too many adults who spent their lives in hostile, abusive, sadistic households because they were never wanted by their mothers and were told as much almost everyday. It is a side effect of those mothers who are so self-absorbed that they aren't even capable of making the decision to put a child up for adoption because they are incapable of really caring about the child's welfare and are more interested in saving themselves the 'shame' of doing so.

For this reason, I am also pro-abortion. I have seen too much suffering experienced by unwanted babies to think that it is worth risking putting another one in that situation.

Many of our country's poor were raised within this circumstance, many of our mentally ill and many of our homeless and unemployable. Many wish they had never been born and many end up committing suicide at some point in their lives.

Late term abortions should never be legalized again, however. No viable baby should be killed at the whim of its mother. The law needs to mandate that those babies be carried to term and the mother referred to adoption services.

Ultimately, I like to think that I am neither pro-life or, pro-abortion, but pro-baby. I am not at all concerned with women who wish to have abortions. I am, however, greatly concerned with the welfare of the child and the circumstances those children face once born.

Answer 10

The additional costs you speak about are nothing every generation before Roe V Wade didn't have to deal with. Those generations had their priorities straight. The CHILDREN came first, then the color tv, new car, golf clubs or what ever. Now days, an abortion has become a "convienience" so some egocentric little Hoe doesn't have to be bothered with actually sacrificing her I-pod so her baby can have fresh diapers. Call abortion what it Really is, it is not choice, it is murder!

Answer 11

There should be a Planned Parenthood in every town. You'd see the rate of abortion go down. They educate and provide birthcontrol.
And you were correct to say we need better healthcare....the US has a high infant mortality rate. Prenatal care isn't affordable to alot of people.