Printable View
http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/roberts_roeCall2
theres to be powers whom are against the idea,.. there are those whom would argue beethoven would have never been ,.. but then their those whom are pro-choice,..
where do you stand? what is your opinion?
all for it
I am pro choice.
All for it! In fact, I think they should be mandatory for all unfit parents.
im anti abortion.
instead they should abort the mother who didnt use condoms..save the innocence that could be the next american idol
It's my body, hence my choice if I want something growing in there. I'd eject any other parasite that took up residence in me.
Then again, I'm getting my tubes tied. Woo.
I'm all for pro choice. Its not my body, therefore I can't say or do anything to stop someone from getting it.
I'm split on the subject. On one hand we are talking about ending a potential life. On the other hand I'm not a woman and have no idea how easy or difficult the decision is to make. Personally I believe that ultimately the only one who has the right to choose is the expectant mother. I don't think it's the governments right to determine how anyone treats thier own body as long as the actions don't harm anyone else. You'll notice I said potential life, because there is no concrete evidence of when a fetus is a human and no longer just a parasite feeding off its host. Of course I'd be rather pissed off if someone aborted my child, unless not doing so risks the mothers life.
i'm not for it. it seems to hurt most women. we talk to women who have had them all the time and they feel awful about it.
im pro choice, of course only til 3 months along. Although I think that with abortion should come mandatory classes for the woman about how to prevent pregnancy in the first place. I know it seems like common knowledge but some people are seriously clueless
joke, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by VoldtaEngler
they ask the mother how she became pregnant and tell you about different methods of birth control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pull~My~Hair
Here's my answer...
I will never have one.. (I am a guy)
Women should be able to.. Wait.. All people should be able to.. Have the choice to do whatever the fuck they want to without worry...
The only people it should matter to are the two people involved.. but ultimately it is up to the women...
Sorry guys.. we can plant our seed anywhere.. It is their choice...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belladonna
consider the alternative. having the kid, and being unable to support it, or provide for it, or educate it or even care about it. results: kid dies of neglect, or is mistreated by uncaring parent(s), or tries to grow up with no support.
and people wonder why the world is a shit-hole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bondage Clown
(non-consensual sex act) removes any choice. i originally had a word that rhymes with grape, but it was turned into ****s.
I completely agree with Toe Cutter.
I am against humankind being here to begin with.
i think its a states right issure states shoudl be able to ban it but there should be no federal ban
if your state bans it take a trip to another state if all states ban it get it done on an indian reservation that is on federal land
people keep tellin me to move when my state ban guns i like ,see if that will fly for planned parenthood
The gun is good. The penis is evil. The penis shoots seeds, and makes new life, and poisons the earth with a plague of men, as once it was. But the gun shoots death, and purifies the earth of the filth of brutals
some have said that the increase in abortions have lowered the crime rate
no im not against abortion, im against cars. they kill more babies in my state then every clinic in the world. Oh wait sorry, I forgot that my moral code means that we have to do everything we can to prevent deaths as long as we don't stand to lose any profit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheramil
I forgot to put that part in..I totally agree with you... An oversite on my part :thumb:
Overturning Roe would actually return the matter to the states. This would be the state of the law Post-Roe: http://www.overruleroe.com/summary_table.htm . From there, pro-lifers could attempt to convince citizens of their state of the need to limit or ban abortions. This definitely would not fly with Planned Parenthood,Quote:
Originally Posted by bohoki
OEC
To answer the question: I am opposed to outlawing abortion at this time. I believe the Roe decision has had some unfortunate political consequences, however. It simply gives two inept political parties a guaranteed voting base.
OEC
in a book i just read you get steralized at birth and have to do a course to get a license to have kids. im all for that, but until then im prochoice.
that would be an awesome way to do it grebo... seriously. holy fuck.
but yeah... im totally opposed to abortion, unless its endangering the life of the mother and/or baby to carry it to full term... but.. on the other hand, if a woman wants to do it, she should be able to. i would never do it personally.
wow i thought this thread was gonna be 100% controversy.. its doin alright :D
Here's the case that will decide the future of Roe. It will be challenged the second the Governor signs it
S.D. Gov. 'Inclined' to Sign Abortion Ban
Feb 25, 2006
By CHET BROKAW
Associated Press Writer
PIERRE, S.D.
Gov. Mike Rounds said he is inclined to sign a bill that would ban nearly all abortions in South Dakota, making it a crime for doctors to perform an abortion unless it was necessary to save the woman's life.
The ban, including in cases of **** or incest, was approved Friday by South Dakota lawmakers, setting up a deliberate frontal assault on Roe v. Wade at a time when some activists see the U.S. Supreme Court as more willing than ever to overturn the 33-year-old decision.
Planned Parenthood, which operates the only clinic in the state that provides abortions, vowed to sue. But even before the bill has a signature, money to defend it poured in. Lawmakers were told during the debate that an anonymous donor pledged $1 million to defend the ban, and the Legislature was setting up a special account to accept donations.
"We've had people stopping in our office trying to drop off checks to promote the defense of this legislation already," Rounds said.
Many opponents and supporters of abortion rights believe the U.S. Supreme Court is more likely to overturn its 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion now that conservatives John Roberts and Samuel Alito are on the bench. Lawmakers said growing support among South Dakotans for abortion restrictions gave the bill momentum.
"I think the stars are aligned," said House Speaker Matthew Michels, a Republican.
The legislation was decried by opponents who said it would particularly impact **** victims and poor women. Currently, a clinic in Sioux Falls is the only place where abortions are provided in South Dakota. The closest alternative is a Planned Parenthood location in Sioux City, Iowa, about 90 miles away.
"It's a sad state of affairs that we have only one choice (for abortion) right now," said Charon Asetoyer of the Native American Women's Health Care Education Resource Center in Lake Andes. "But if you have to go out of state, the cost of making that trip will be prohibitive."
If a **** victim becomes pregnant and bears a child, the rapist could have the same parental rights as the mother, said Krista Heeren-Graber, executive director of the South Dakota Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault.
"The idea the rapist could be in the child's life ... makes the woman very, very fearful. Sometimes they need to have choice," Heeren-Graber said.
About 800 abortions are performed in South Dakota each year. Leslee Unruh, president of the Alpha Center, a Sioux Falls pregnancy counseling agency that tries to steer women away from abortion, said most of them do not stem from **** or even failed contraception, but are simply "conveniences."
Unruh said she believes most South Dakota women want the state to ban abortion, and many who have had abortions "wish someone would have stopped them."
Under the measure, doctors could get up to five years in prison for performing an illegal abortion. The House passed the bill 50-18 on Friday, and the Senate approved it 23-12 earlier this week. If signed, it would become law July 1.
A judge is likely to suspend the abortion ban during the expected legal challenge, which means it would never take effect unless the state gets the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and wins.
Rounds said his staff will review the bill for technical defects. He said he vetoed a similar measure two years ago because it would have wiped out all existing restrictions on abortion while the bill was challenged in court.
"I've indicated I'm pro-life and I do believe abortion is wrong and that we should do everything we can to save lives. If this bill accomplishes that, then I am inclined to sign the bill into law," he said.
___
Associated Press Writer Doris Haugen contributed to this report.
Yes.
Meh, fuck it.. I say everyone
should get a '70's era microwave
and stand in front of it the entire
time while cooking a 20 pound
turkey, making sure that it is
waist - groin level and the glass
in the door is broken out.
Once it's done, so are you.
Sit, eat, sleep... for tomarrow
is another day.
Plus, guys, it makes for a sure
way to win loads of cash in bar
bets... "bet you $100 my balls
glow in the dark"
I'm generally against abortion in most situations, particularly when it is after the first couple months. Problem I see is that banning abortion isn't going to help reduce abortions, I think. Much like most forms of prohibition, if it's something people really want, they'll figure out a way to get it. If it's illegal, it just becomes more expensive and dangerous.
Our time, and the time spent by people who fight so hard to criminalize abortion, would be much better spent reducing the "need" for abortion, by educating people on how to avoid unwanted pregnancy.
For or against abortion is a very personal choice, and one you really are never sure of until you are there. However I am 100% for keeping abortions legal and easily accesable.
If South Dakoda is so concern about the lives of these children here is a thought, guarantee insurance for every woman for the full term of her pregnancy, insure and feed the kid from birth to 16, and teach kids before puberty about birth control on a serious and usefull level. I guarantee this will reduce the number of abort far more than the Supreme court ever could, but as Morning Glory pointed out, they only want to do the things to preotect kids that don't cut into the wallet. I am constantly horrified how the second a kid his born the value of it's life drops faster than driving a new car off the lot.
I am completely for allowing women the option to choose (i.e. keeping abortions legal), as well as for allowing easy access to RU-486 and the Morning After Pill (not the same thing).
I am all for retroactively aborting those who would see those options made illegal.
If the ban it, we're just going to have more women going out of state, or to mexico, or to Canada, or deliberately falling down the stairs, etc... If a woman does not want a baby, she will find a way to get rid of it. It just depends if it is a skilled doctor, or someone with a coat hanger. I just think it's a lot safer for women to have the option of using a doctor, instead of the other alternatives.
oh just one more comment, the whole 'how would you feel if YOU were aborted?' arguement is insane. If I or anyone else was aborted then no one would have any association to them as the person that they would have became, and the loss implied by this illogical statement wouldn't exist.
I have a pro-choice-tendency, but rather than having a 16 years old girl aborting her child, I'd have her know about the risks of unprotected sex.
I'm absolutely pro-choice for pregnant **** (okay, censorship. violently forced sex then) victims, because I think, without trying to sound too catholic, the child would be better of dead than having a mother that hates it.
But for the usual pre-20-unwanted-pregnancies, as I said, I'd rather see some prevention than post-fertilization intervention. It somehow leaves a bitter taste in my mouth seeing girls aborting their children and having unprotected sex just a few days after.
Anyway, a rather good solution, imho, would be to just nuke the planet.
People should be allowed the choice. Lots of people do lots of things I don't agree with, but overall I'm glad we have the freedom to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vega
*CLAP* *CLAP* :cheer: :female:
your not totally wrong. i just don't like abortion. i had a few kids i didn't plan. can we suport them yes. but only because my husband works his ass off. i'm not saying take it away but maybe teach people to be more careful and it's not all about them. i'm sorry to whomever this pisses off but it's really not your body being pulled apart. just how i feel. you don't want a baby don't have sex. i'll shut up now. this hits to close to home.Quote:
Originally Posted by sheramil
I'm for PUPPIES
and there's too many
of them running around
as well. But given my
choice a kid or a dog,
and I love kids, I would
still take a dog any day.
If me and the Muse do
decide one day, a mutt
or a kid, it will be an adoption
of some species...
the best for all parties involved.
I am pro choice. It should be entirely up to the woman what's going to happen.
There are circumstances where a woman really cannot afford to bring a baby into to the world in many many respects.
I'm Christian, therefore I should be against it. But I'm not. Mum has said to me, "If abortion is OK, then girls will just forget about using condoms and keep having abortions."
I don't believe this. Abortions aren't cheap, and I know two girls who have had abortions and it left them quite traumatised, but neither girl could have looked after a baby if she'd kept it. (So, no, they wouldn't just "keep having abortions" instead of using rubbers.)
So, if a girl finds herself in such a situation, it's entirely up to her and I'm completely for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vega
:yeeaaahh: