Pro-choice or Pro-life?

Are you on a side in this debate? Which side are you on? What made you decide to be pro-choice or pro-life?

Admin wrote:

Are you on a side in this debate? Which side are you on? What made you decide to be pro-choice or pro-life?

I find loaded labels to be virtually pointless on a discussion board, but I would definitely describe myself as being closer to the "pro-life" side. To grossly oversimplify, legalized abortion is helping perpetuate the sexual irresponsibility that has led to rampant rape and incest.

I do not think it is a coincidence that the promoters of legalized abortion have a pro-rape mentality. For example, take a look at the following quote from Roe v. Wade.

"The detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice altogether is apparent. Specific and direct harm medically diagnosable even in early pregnancy may be involved. Maternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by child care. There is also the distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically and otherwise, to care for it. In other cases, as in this one, the additional difficulties and continuing stigma of unwed motherhood may be involved."

None of these bases would have been given any credence whatsoever had the seven justices not predicated their rationale on one critical assumption- that a woman has no right to refuse to engage in sexual intercourse. Without that assumption, they could not have derived the conclusion that restrictions on abortion could restrict a woman's right to refrain from becoming pregnant because she would have had the right to avoid pregnancy by refusing to engage in sexual intercourse.

They were certainly intelligent enough to be well aware of this obvious assumption. I can only conclude that Roe v. Wade was part of a deliberate attempt at promoting their pro-rape agenda.

That's a little irrational.

futureshock wrote:

That's a little irrational.

How so?

Your criticism seems to imply that women only want to have sex in order to get pregnant, and that they want to decline the opportunity to have non procreative sex.
Is this what you believe?

futureshock wrote:

Your criticism seems to imply that women only want to have sex in order to get pregnant, and that they want to decline the opportunity to have non procreative sex.
Is this what you believe?

I am not understanding either your assumption about my position or your question. How did you derive from my criticism (of abortion or of Roe v. Wade?) that women only want to have sex in order to get pregnant?

i think future said that, because of your responses.
they seem to imply that if two people want to have sex, it can and is only to reproduce.

Thanks Krystine, you are correct.

no problem

De-legalize abortion because it promotes a "pro rape agenda" so that the men who rape women are held accountable? Why, that's a perfectly logical way to punish men. Use their victim's wombs instead of the penal system. I'm sure if we delegalized abortion the incidence of rape would decline.

Right. Spock wouldn't even argue with that logic.

Double

even if they did make abortions illegal, women would still get them and risk alot more doing underground abortions.

If hell comes, and I am raped and pregnant as a result and abortion is illegal, I am not going to be chasing down rapist's checkbook with a swelling abdomen. I'm going to take the hanger I used to abort and drive it in each of his eyes, then through his testicles.

Since I don't approve of capital punishment, he can then live. :angelic smiley:

in the result if you were raped and became pregnant, why would you want a rapist supporting your child or you?
why would you want that person, that scum bag of a person to be in any way shape or form a part of your child's life or yours?
i would not want my first child or any of my children to be concieved from rape, and would not want the rapist to support me or that child.
one, that would be a major trama to yourself physically and emotionally-being raped
and second, in a way, a permanent reminder of the day you were raped.

what if you were married and someone raped you and you became pregnant...how hard would it be to raise that child...

krystineM wrote:

even if they did make abortions illegal, women would still get them and risk alot more doing underground abortions.

Exactly right.

It seems like NorthStar is saying, that if a woman does not want to get pregnant, she should keep her legs closed. According to him, Roe Vs. Wade is only necessary if one thinks women have no control over keeping their legs closed, i.e. which would be akin to being raped, not being able to keep your legs closed.

NorthStar wrote:

I do not think it is a coincidence that the promoters of legalized abortion have a pro-rape mentality. For example, take a look at the following quote from Roe v. Wade.

"The detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice altogether is apparent. Specific and direct harm medically diagnosable even in early pregnancy may be involved. Maternity, or additional offspring, may force upon the woman a distressful life and future. Psychological harm may be imminent. Mental and physical health may be taxed by child care. There is also the distress, for all concerned, associated with the unwanted child, and there is the problem of bringing a child into a family already unable, psychologically and otherwise, to care for it. In other cases, as in this one, the additional difficulties and continuing stigma of unwed motherhood may be involved."

None of these bases would have been given any credence whatsoever had the seven justices not predicated their rationale on one critical assumption- that a woman has no right to refuse to engage in sexual intercourse. Without that assumption, they could not have derived the conclusion that restrictions on abortion could restrict a woman's right to refrain from becoming pregnant would have had the right to avoid pregnancy by refusing to engage in sexual intercourse.

They were certainly intelligent enough to be well aware of this obvious assumption. I can only conclude that Roe v. Wade was part of a deliberate attempt at promoting their pro-rape agenda.