George Walker Bush

[Liquid Blue]

So when your opinions conflict with each other, you find it much easier to skirt the issue and give some simple statement that doesn't really "solve the problem".

I gotcha. B)

[Cops]

I'm pretty sure he meant that he wanted to ask someone in a foster home if they rather would have been aborted. As in, would you rather have been aborted before you were born and not have lived, or would you rather have not been aborted and still given a chance to live, albeit in foster car.

That's an unfair question to ask, of course any rational person is going to say they would have rather been adopted then aborted. I see pro-lifers using that shit in some promotional video to try and dupe people into believing that a fetus is the exact same thing as a fully developed human being.

[HateTheFake]

That's an unfair question to ask, of course any rational person is going to say they would have rather been adopted then aborted. I see pro-lifers using that shit in some promotional video to try and dupe people into believing that a fetus is the exact same thing as a fully developed human being.

its called common sense noone wants to die, ive known a few people in foster homes and they came out just fine. So why kill an innocent life? You know what happens when you have sex, you know how to prevent pregnancy (i hope?) so why kill an innocent life for something you did? All this bullshit about not having enough money, blah blah blah means nothing if you can give it up for adoption or a family. No matter how you want to say it, your still killing a life, which would have chosen to live if given the question

Also theres no difference between a fetus and a baby. Neither can take care of itself?

[HeavenSent]

would you rather have not been aborted and still given a chance to live, albeit in foster car.

[Mantra-Slider]

its called common sense noone wants to die

what?

[Pandagirl!]

I giggled.

For the record I'm just clarifying what HTF said for Money, not necessarily agreeing with his hypothetical situation.

[Summa]

its called common sense noone wants to die, ive known a few people in foster homes and they came out just fine.

I've also known a few that didn't come out fine. Not everyone has the moral compass and beliefs that you do. People fuck kids up for life simply for the hell of it or for their own gain. I've been reading all of your posts and they are all idealistic and under the assumption that this world is full of morally good people, not assholes. Newsflash, its not.

You know what happens when you have sex, you know how to prevent pregnancy (i hope?) so why kill an innocent life for something you did? All this bullshit about not having enough money, blah blah blah means nothing if you can give it up for adoption or a family. No matter how you want to say it, your still killing a life, which would have chosen to live if given the question

You overestimate some young people's intelligence when they are under the influence or even some when they aren't. You also fail to address women who were sexually assaulted. Most of the youth is under the impression that "it'll never happen to me so why should I care?". While a bit moronic, its for the most part true. Then there are the few that its not true for. Imagine this situation (and this happened to my friend): a 17 yr old couple has sex and he gets her pregnant. Her parents are basically disowning her now and definitely won't pay for the abortion or help with the child's bills at all if she chooses to have the kid. So my friend and his girl have 2 options, keep the kid, drop out of high school and start trying to pay the bills (which is no longer a way to get above the poverty line for the most part in this country, and mind you this guys had almost a full ride to college) or scrounge together what little money they can grab and have the abortion and move on as best they can.

Now I'm going to assume you will respond to the above story with the whole adoption response. Do you understand the financial stress that 9 months of pregnancy puts on a couple who are wage slaves? Going pay check to pay check. Now throw a shit ton of medical expenses on top. Coupled with the severe trauma physically, socially, and emotionally that it will put on the young girl having to go to school every day with a baby in her uterus. It just is not a logical choice for a couple with meager funds. People who adopt kids do not usually pay for the medical expenses, don't know where you got that shit from, but it just plain ain't true. And on top of that, say we enact HateTheFake's SuperAwesome Adoption Plan 2008, what do you think will happen? Take our "more deaths per year than have been lost in Iraq" revive them all and put them all into adoption. You think we have enough adoptors for that many adoptees? I sure as hell don't. Instead you would find dumpster babys, people throwing their kids away because they can't support both so they choose themselves over their kid. The adoption system is neither good enough to field quality parents, nor large enough to handle that kind of increase in incoming adoptees.

Also theres no difference between a fetus and a baby. Neither can take care of itself?

In your opinion. It is a matter of when you believe conception and self awareness occur. Do you think that the child becomes human at the point of meeting between the sperm and egg? Probably. Whereas I believe it occurs when the child becomes self-aware aka comes out of the womb and starts screaming like a mofo.

[Epinephrine]

I've tried to find any concrete answer to the abortion question as far as human rights go, like when is a fetus, a human? What if the mother's life is endangered? Etc, etc. I think that it is fairly certain though, amongst many people, that at some point a human is harmed, and at that point then yes, the Government has the right to intervene on behalf of that person.

The problem is, of course, that no two humans on Earth can agree on the what and when and how of "abortion".

But as HateTheFake unknowingly points out, abortion isn't quite murder. Yes, both are violations of basic rights - but so is theft, yet "theft" is obviously different from "murder".

This is where, and why, the 10th Amendment steps in. It reserves any power not specifically given to the Federal Government "to the States respectively, or to the people."

I think that at the very least, the question of abortion's legality/morality/whatever should be decided at least the state level. There's no reason otherwise, if anything, the current scheme is precisely the reason for the 9th and 10th amendments. It's obvious that abortion is a massively decisive issue - and so if the Federal Government enacts one group's law, one group's ideas on the what and when and how of abortion, it's pretty obvious that there's going to always be a large amount of pissed off people, which pretty much guarantees that abortion will be legalized and banned and re-legalized until Hell breaks loose (in part perhaps because of all the baby-killers' souls filling it past capacity).

Fuck, how is that in any way "democracy" or even fucking "orderly conduct" or anything resembling a decent society?

Let the states decide. At that level, the people at least have the freedom to relocate to a place where their beliefs on abortion are the best satisfied. If you devolved the power to an even lower level, like municipal, then it becomes too complicated, as issues of geography and location and citizenship status amongst others cloud the issue too much.

Given that the power is reserved for the States and the People, I think it follows that such laws would be put up to a State-wide vote. This means that people can directly express their beliefs. You then see this process happen in 50 different places, as each State puts up various proposed laws/amendments/etc. People can then vote with their ballot as well as their wallet, by choosing to move to certain States or even 'boycott' other States.

In short, the abortion debate would become just like the gay marriage debate, which means retard states like California can take three steps backwards just as my home state is moving in the direction of being the first Southern state to fully legalize it. Yeah, it seems crazy and shitty now, but in the long-run I think every State will let the gays marry, just because at some point people who belong to our generation(s) will get into office. Acceptance of 'gay culture' is spreading very rapidly.

Likewise, letting States try to each provide the best answer to a complex issue like abortion would be a small step in making everyone just a wee-bit happier.

I think the entire issue of federal vs states is a red herring. Even at the state level, you're still making a law one way or another which is going to offend the sensibilities of a great number of people. To then suggest that people who don't agree with the law can simply move to or away that particular state will only serve to further polarize America which can't be good for anyone.

Furthermore, a lot of abortions are made or wanted specifically by those who cannot vote because they are too young, and cannot have the mobility to move away (because they live with their parents unless you're advocating kids run away to the next state to get abortions) or because social economic factors play into it. As well, some people who have abortions will be residents of a place who never thought they'd need an abortion (i.e. condom broke, birth control pill failed) but who will realize last minute that they need one. So simply saying that having a law and the population will sort itself out is sort of naive.

Then there's the issue where many places will likely have laws where it's illegal to go across state lines to have an abortion and come back. Or to put into a better context, illegal for doctors and counsellors to direct people to proper places to get abortions out of state. Then you will see a lot of people who may do stupid and every harmful things to get abortions because they are not sure where to go (remembering that the young and socioeconomically challenged are the most likely to get abortions) like the coathanger method or using drugs improperly or going to underground sources.

So because of the 'last minute' reality of abortion and because of the groups of people considered, you really cannot compare it to something like gay marriage which is planned for a long time, and can easily be quite mobile. Thus the 'let every state' argument is sort of a red herring. While it's nice to think that every state can have their own choice, in the end what does it matter, because once that law is made in that state, millions of people will like or hate the law regardless and many people will be affected regardless.

(just to be specific, I support the status quo which says that abortion is legal everywhere)

[Money]

its called common sense noone wants to die

but how can u "die" if you were never born?

[Cops]

I'm going to add to what Epinephrine said, which is mainly directed towards HTF. Of course we realize that having sex can lead to getting someone pregnant, but condoms break and birth control can fail. Being safe doesn't always work so as much as it's my responsibility to deal with the fact I knocked up a chick I might not be able to deal with the reality of having a child. I might be a 16 year old kid who did what every other teenager wants to do, which is get laid. Abstinence and church might work for you but for the other 95% of people out there it's not really a solution. Regardless of how Christian people think they are, they are for the most part still going to be sexually active. It's the same bullshit the churches in Africa are teaching children and teenagers, which is to not wear condoms while having sex just don't have sex in the first place. The thing that you religious fundamentalists and ideologues overlook time and time again is human nature. It's natural for us to want to have sex. It's not bad to give into our sexual urges, and to expect people not to have sex is out-right-fucking-ridiculous. You can't stop people from having sex but what you can do is help them have safe sex.

As Epinephrine pointed out, (I'm paraphrasing here) "abortion being banned in 'certain' states is shitty idea". Overwhelmingly the problems from banning abortion in certain states would be atrocious.

Getting back to the gay marriage issue. Like I said before, I don't expect the average person to accept gay marriage. What I do expect is that gay couples receive legal protection from the federal government. This state wide bullshit about 'certain' states legalizing gay marriage is not a solution. California took a few steps backwards as Jerome said, and Connecticut took a few steps forward. But where does that realistically get us? Every time progress is made it's un-done by another States ability to ban gay marriage. How far do you think you've come on this issue? No offense, but not fucking far.

[raizin]

I might be a 16 year old kid who did what every other teenager wants to do, which is get laid.

And everyone who is out there trying to get laid knows what can happen. Im not going to tell you what you should believe in abortion, but i was one of those kids in highschool who knocked up a girl. Now im 25 and my Daughter is in 1st grade and i cant imagine ever taking that life away because i wasnt man enough to own up to her.

[Liquid Blue]

Well of course you can't

that's a silly way to look at it

really, how many parents do you know that spent time raising their children (1st graders no less), seriously say they wish they never had the kid

I definitely give you props for raising your daughter, but as I'm sure you met a few in highschool, there are alot of idiots out there. Not everyone is emotionally or mentally mature enough to positively handle a tense situation like having a baby. Some people just shouldn't have kids, and the sad thing is that alot of the people that definitely are not ready to handle the responsibility, are the main ones fucking without condoms or birth control pills.

[genocidal]

Airtight argument for being pro-abortion

More abortions = less people.

[Liquid Blue]

whoever coined the term "pro-abortion" should have been aborted

[404 Not Found]

adoption > abortion

Some families cant have kids, in most of the circumstances a family will pay the mother for her time and hospital bills if she signs over her legal rights after the birth.

Problem solved.

If I understand some of the posts you have, you say that more abortions have been performed in the last year than deaths in the Iraq war. Compound that to a yearly figure and then estimate how many families want to adopt and can afford to adopt in the aftermath of the Bush years and you are going to have one massive amount of kids that have nobody able to adopt or afford them.

Who will pay for these unwanted kids that are not adopted? Surely not my tax dollars. Will you adopt 10 - 15 kids to help out?

You're very unrealistic as well as contradict yourself. You base your comments on your religious ideals and not reality.

Maybe the children who are not adopted within a 3 year timetable after birth can be treated humanely as we say and do with our unwanted animals at the SPCA?

I surely doubt the Churches would pay to upkeep adoption centers nation wide with so many kids that nobody can afford.