(December 16, 2013 at 1:04 pm)JohnCrichton72 Wrote:(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.
What about women who engage in protected sex but their method of birth control fails?
You are accusing TheBeardedDude of conflating issues and then you are simplifying the argument by saying women only become pregnant when they engaged in unprotected sex which is completely untrue.
Furthermore, I'm not understanding your position on abortion. It seems like what you're saying is that people who engage in unprotected sex are idiots who can't control their libidos, but they shouldn't abort the pregnancy because the possibility exists that they might be good parents! So what? There are people who willing get pregnant and have children but are demonstrably bad parents. What should happen to them?
And, again, I ask what about the people who can control their libidos? Who do practice safe sex? But who, through no fault of their own since they were using protection, get pregnant anyway? What then? Should those women be allowed to get abortions because at least they had enough brains and self-control to make their partner use a condom?
Teenaged X-Files obsession + Bermuda Triangle episode + Self-led school research project = Atheist.