I would be anti-abortion too. But that does not mean I am not pro-choice. Indeed, many who claim to be pro-life are anything but. They are best characterized as anti-choice. Ask those who claim to be pro-life about the death penalty or social welfare and assistance programs.

(December 16, 2013 at 1:00 pm)TheBeardedDude Wrote: I would be anti-abortion too. But that does not mean I am not pro-choice. Indeed, many who claim to be pro-life are anything but. They are best characterized as anti-choice. Ask those who claim to be pro-life about the death penalty or social welfare and assistance programs.

Now you are conflating issues, women have a choice whether or not to take the risk with unprotected sex. That's the choice, that's the empowerment of women. It causes males to compete for attention and drives up production in society hence the cure for poverty.

I'm fully pro-choice. And anyone who claims to be for "small government" and against government intrusion in people's lives should be also.

I wouldn't have wanted the government telling me I couldn't get a vasectomy because it offends some religious people, for instance.

You can't take the choice away from them at any stage of reproduction and say they still have choice.

(December 16, 2013 at 1:05 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: I'm fully pro-choice. And anyone who claims to be for "small government" and against government intrusion in people's lives should be also.

I wouldn't have wanted the government telling me I couldn't get a vasectomy because it offends some religious people, for instance.

Yeah heaven forbid there be consequences to your actions. As I said flagrant abuse of sexual freedoms for personal satisfaction, and theists say we can't have morals...........

---

(December 16, 2013 at 1:05 pm)TheBeardedDude Wrote: You can't take the choice away from them at any stage of reproduction and say they still have choice.

As I said, with our every understanding of the process the time allotted for abortion is restricted, to believe it will not be restricted further is to believe we know as much as there is.

Parents do not own their children, at what point does it become a life. If there is even a possibility that it could be in question, you stand point becomes morally reprehensible.

I'm not pro-abortion. I'm pro a woman's right to choose and control her own reproduction.

(December 16, 2013 at 1:12 pm)JohnCrichton72 Wrote: Yeah heaven forbid there be consequences to your actions. As I said flagrant abuse of sexual freedoms for personal satisfaction, and theists say we can't have morals...........

Except it isn't a crime for a woman to have sex, so saying she deserves a life sentence is a bit of a joke, don't you think?

(December 16, 2013 at 1:12 pm)JohnCrichton72 Wrote: Parents do not own their children, at what point does it become a life. If there is even a possibility that it could be in question, you stand point becomes morally reprehensible.

When it's born. Before that, it's part of a woman's body, and she can do whatever the fuck she wants with it.

Virgin Mary should have aborted.

(December 16, 2013 at 1:12 pm)JohnCrichton72 Wrote: Yeah heaven forbid there be consequences to your actions. As I said flagrant abuse of sexual freedoms for personal satisfaction, and theists say we can't have morals...........

LOL, I love how the "consequences" to the actions of BOTH the man and the woman who engaged in sex are visited only on the woman. Funny; I almost never see men standing up to say what the consequences should be for THEM.

Also the assumption that unwanted pregnancies result ONLY from unprotected sex always makes me laugh. Protected sex sometimes fails, but you'd never know it to listen to the "pro-life" mob.

Perhaps there needs to be a medical procedure where an unwanted baby is transplanted inside a republican's penis. Then let him choose after that..