Pro-choice or Pro-life?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

This again? Anyway, option one for two key reasons:

1. I trust the judgement of women. Nobody wants to have an abortion--they do it because they're in a sh!tty situation and it's the best choice for them. I don't think anybody else is equipped to make such a tough choice.

2. Any free society is predicated on the autonomy and independence of the individual. If people don't have absolute control over what they do with their bodies, freedom and liberty are irrelevant. I'm not willing to live in a world where government/religion/whatever takes precedence over free thought and free choice.

[SevenEleven]

Option 1.

Safe, legal, and easily available!

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Option 1 is horrific and if you voted for it you can't condemn Republicans for lacking compassion.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Option 1 is horrific and if you voted for it you can't condemn Republicans for lacking compassion.

Both parties support abortions after the 3rd trimester for Yemeni Shia children.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Option 1 is horrific and if you voted for it you can't condemn Republicans for lacking compassion.

Both parties support abortions after the 3rd trimester for Yemeni Shia children.

That's sadly true.

[John Dule]

Option 1 is horrific and if you voted for it you can't condemn Republicans for lacking compassion.

Option 1 is the default unless you're a Jesus freak and/or misogynist.

See, I can do it too!

[Former President tack50]

Option 2 is the only reasonable option if you are a pro choice person to be honest. (which I am). Do pro-choice people seriously want to make it legal to abort an 8 month old baby? Wtf?

And yes I know third trimester abortions are very rare and normally only done to save the mother's life or due to congenital diseases; but that is not a reason to make them legal in all cases?

I am more than fine for third trimester exceptions for saving the mother's life or for congenital diseases that will end with the child dying in pain only a couple of months after birth.

But the possibility of a third trimester abortion "just because the mother wants it" is one that should be illegal, even if it is something that almost never happens. There are tons of things that "almost never happen" but are illegal.

Personally, I feel that abortion on demand should be legal in the first trimester and illegal on the third one. I do not know where to draw the line for the 2nd trimester, but it should probably be a couple of weeks before viability.

Looking at charts quickly, the moment where viability is at 0% seems to be, with modern medical techniques, at 21 weeks. So I'd personally ban on demand abortions after 20 weeks (5 months).

[Kingpoleon]

Looking at charts quickly, the moment where viability is at 0% seems to be, with modern medical techniques, at 21 weeks. So I'd personally ban on demand abortions after 20 weeks (5 months).

I don’t really buy the viability argument too much. No sane doctor would induce a pregnancy at 21 weeks - or really before 37 weeks - just because the mother wanted to “terminate the pregnancy.”

[TDAS04]

Option 2.

[Orwell]

I don't care so I guess Pro-choice

[Hope For A New Era]

Pro-choice.

Not pro-abortion, pro-choice. There is a difference.

Option 1, because third-trimester abortions make up about 1% of all abortions. It does not happen without good reason. No one stays pregnant for eight months and only then decides to get an abortion. That is an authoritarian straw man.


I hate how politicized this issue is. Not even a thing in any other country.

[Suburbia]

If life begins at conception, and if abortion is murder, then a pregnant woman who requests an abortion is just as guilty of murder as the abortion provider to performs abortion. But the pre-Roe laws that banned abortion never treated pregnant women who wanted to get an abortion as if they deserve to be prosecuted, and even these days most pro-lifers only want to prosecute the abortion providers, not the pregnant women who ask to get an abortion. There is something "off" about the motives of pro-lifers.

I am pro-choice because I am afraid of the prospect of women self-aborting with a coat hanger, and because I respect women's self-autonomy.

This. I don't want to see women get hurt, or even die.

Leave abortion alone. Leave women alone. This is about human rights and basic decency to me.

[Spark]

Pro-life in all cases in principle, but in practice with notable exceptions.

[dw93]

#4

There’s an alternative to abortion. Adoption is that alternative. Also, the perspective father should have a choice in the matter and most would choose life instead of murder.

So you think a rapist (who would be executed if I had a legal say in the matter) should have a say in whether his victim carries a pregnancy that his criminal act caused to term?

[It’s so Joever]

The pro-choice vs pro-life argument is a false premise that the GOP (and some Democrats) has been pushing for political gain. The question is not whether we should ban abortion or not, it should be asking why so many abortions are “necessary” and how we can adjust our systems to mitigate those factors.

[Benjamin Frank]

I find it interesting the number of Republicans who have lied for years that they are 'pro-life' only to be exposed by the Covid Virus into revealing that they are, in fact, pro-death.

I believe there are several of them who routinely post on this board as well.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

Option 3

[T0rM3nTeD]

I wish that the nomenclature would change to be Anti-Abortion / Pro-Choice. The problem with the term pro-life is that a large percentage of the people who identify as pro-life don't really care about saving life, but care more about not having abortion. Many of the evangelicals (my family included) do not support sex education at a younger age, making contraceptives such as condoms and birth control easily available to young teens, etc. They care more about putting their beliefs of no sex before marriage on the population. If preserving "life" was more important to them than no sex before marriage, they preach no sex before marriage, but also put things in place to prevent pregnancy, and therefore abortions, knowing that people will have sex no matter what.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Option 1 is horrific and if you voted for it you can't condemn Republicans for lacking compassion.

Option 3 is even worse. Legalize murder of the innocent because it is a byproduct of rape?

Option 2 is really the only sane option but some people can try their hardest to justify 4.

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

Essentially option 1

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

I am pro choice and even think eugenics is justified.

[Alcibiades]

I wish that the nomenclature would change to be Anti-Abortion / Pro-Choice.

That is actually the terminology prescribed by the BBC (and I presume others) in its style guide.

[Kingpoleon]

I am pro choice and even think eugenics is justified.

Is this you?:
https://youtu.be/7fGU5R2qBDc

[VAR]

Pro-life (Option 3), but as Forumlurker said, better sex ed and access to contraceptives should be our first priority.

[Alcibiades]

Pro-choice (with a certain cut-off point for elective abortions, but this is mostly academic as there are so few late-term abortions). To be honest, it’s not really an issue which animates me, and the only things which can spur my passion around it is some of the insufferable, hypocritical pro-lifers.