Your stance on abortion

[Ashendant]

I'm for it and i don't have any problem with killing a pile of flesh until their brain activity starts, that's the line i define between a pile of flesh and a living being

[reverendjeremiah]

I'm for it and i don't have any problem with killing a pile of flesh until their brain activity starts, that's the line i define between a pile of flesh and a living being

I see it a bit different. Even if the baby is ready to pop out in a week, the woman should be allowed to terminate it. I know it sounds a bit off, but as far as I am concerned it is considered the womans body until it is out of the womans body. In other words, the woman should have the choice 100% of the time up to and until it is born.

Any time after I would consider murder..like those mothers who dump their new born babies in the dumpsters and leave them to die overnight.

[KichigaiNeko]

I'm for it and i don't have any problem with killing a pile of flesh until their brain activity starts, that's the line i define between a pile of flesh and a living being

I see it a bit different. Even if the baby is ready to pop out in a week, the woman should be allowed to terminate it. I know it sounds a bit off, but as far as I am concerned it is considered the woman's body until it is out of the woman's body. In other words, the woman should have the choice 100% of the time up to and until it is born.

Any time after I would consider murder..like those mothers who dump their new born babies in the dumpsters and leave them to die overnight.

I am thinking here that the first trimester is the best time for a great many medical reasons...mostly to do with the health of the woman. Anything later will put the woman in a position of medical jeopardy. Should she THEN decide to go to term but find that she is unable or unwilling to care for the infant; then I feel it is her right to place that child for adoption ..there are so many children and so many childless couples on the planet who really need to hook up. I understand Jerry that the 'dumpster' option is abhorrent.

[Ashendant]

I'm for it and i don't have any problem with killing a pile of flesh until their brain activity starts, that's the line i define between a pile of flesh and a living being

I see it a bit different. Even if the baby is ready to pop out in a week, the woman should be allowed to terminate it. I know it sounds a bit off, but as far as I am concerned it is considered the woman's body until it is out of the woman's body. In other words, the woman should have the choice 100% of the time up to and until it is born.

Any time after I would consider murder..like those mothers who dump their new born babies in the dumpsters and leave them to die overnight.

I am thinking here that the first trimester is the best time for a great many medical reasons...mostly to do with the health of the woman. Anything later will put the woman in a position of medical jeopardy. Should she THEN decide to go to term but find that she is unable or unwilling to care for the infant; then I feel it is her right to place that child for adoption ..there are so many children and so many childless couples on the planet who really need to hook up. I understand Jerry that the 'dumpster' option is abhorrent.

The first trimester is a pile of flesh so i don't agree with you, and most women don't realise they are pregnant by that time anyway

[KichigaiNeko]

I'm for it and i don't have any problem with killing a pile of flesh until their brain activity starts, that's the line i define between a pile of flesh and a living being

I see it a bit different. Even if the baby is ready to pop out in a week, the woman should be allowed to terminate it. I know it sounds a bit off, but as far as I am concerned it is considered the woman's body until it is out of the woman's body. In other words, the woman should have the choice 100% of the time up to and until it is born.

Any time after I would consider murder..like those mothers who dump their new born babies in the dumpsters and leave them to die overnight.

I am thinking here that the first trimester is the best time for a great many medical reasons...mostly to do with the health of the woman. Anything later will put the woman in a position of medical jeopardy. Should she THEN decide to go to term but find that she is unable or unwilling to care for the infant; then I feel it is her right to place that child for adoption ..there are so many children and so many childless couples on the planet who really need to hook up. I understand Jerry that the 'dumpster' option is abhorrent.

The first trimester is a pile of flesh so i don't agree with you, and most women don't realise they are pregnant by that time anyway

How would YOU know?? Because most MEN wouldn't...silly puny little man thing

[Ashendant]

I'm for it and i don't have any problem with killing a pile of flesh until their brain activity starts, that's the line i define between a pile of flesh and a living being

I see it a bit different. Even if the baby is ready to pop out in a week, the woman should be allowed to terminate it. I know it sounds a bit off, but as far as I am concerned it is considered the woman's body until it is out of the woman's body. In other words, the woman should have the choice 100% of the time up to and until it is born.

Any time after I would consider murder..like those mothers who dump their new born babies in the dumpsters and leave them to die overnight.

I am thinking here that the first trimester is the best time for a great many medical reasons...mostly to do with the health of the woman. Anything later will put the woman in a position of medical jeopardy. Should she THEN decide to go to term but find that she is unable or unwilling to care for the infant; then I feel it is her right to place that child for adoption ..there are so many children and so many childless couples on the planet who really need to hook up. I understand Jerry that the 'dumpster' option is abhorrent.

The first trimester is a pile of flesh so i don't agree with you, and most women don't realise they are pregnant by that time anyway

How would YOU know?? Because most MEN wouldn't...silly puny little man thing

I read on wiki that pregnancy usually between 15-20 week, and at 26 weeks the brain activity starts in the fetus and it becomes a living being

[Edwardo Piet]

The poll is too simplistic for my liking. I say that I'm usually pro-choice but it depends on how developed the fetus is. For example, if it's very near birth and basically a baby then I'm anti-choice (I don't say pro-life since I consider life itself to be neutral).

[Anomalocaris]

I see it a bit different. Even if the baby is ready to pop out in a week, the woman should be allowed to terminate it. I know it sounds a bit off, but as far as I am concerned it is considered the woman's body until it is out of the woman's body. In other words, the woman should have the choice 100% of the time up to and until it is born.

Any time after I would consider murder..like those mothers who dump their new born babies in the dumpsters and leave them to die overnight.

I am thinking here that the first trimester is the best time for a great many medical reasons...mostly to do with the health of the woman. Anything later will put the woman in a position of medical jeopardy. Should she THEN decide to go to term but find that she is unable or unwilling to care for the infant; then I feel it is her right to place that child for adoption ..there are so many children and so many childless couples on the planet who really need to hook up. I understand Jerry that the 'dumpster' option is abhorrent.

The first trimester is a pile of flesh so i don't agree with you, and most women don't realise they are pregnant by that time anyway

How would YOU know?? Because most MEN wouldn't...silly puny little man thing

I read on wiki that pregnancy usually between 15-20 week, and at 26 weeks the brain activity starts in the fetus and it becomes a living being

If brain activity is mark of living being then we can safely abort fundamentalists all the way till their very last year.

[Minimalist]

I'm pro-abortion and pro-birth control with the proviso that it is the woman's choice to do either, not some shit-licking religious fanatic who thinks his silly-ass god still wants the planet to be more over-populated.

For that matter I think the government should pay for abortions and actively promote them as a means of reducing the population. Far cheaper in the long run than welfare or incarcerating the little fucks.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Wrong question. I don't "support" abortion, I support the right of a woman to choose whether she has a baby or not under special circumstances.

Why circumstances and why?

What about ;"Doctor I'm pregnant and would prefer not to be"

Medical decision, period.

---

For that matter I think the government should pay for abortions and actively promote them as a means of reducing the population.

Not sure that would work,unless we had a one child policy,like China.

Licensing pregnancy might work.

BUT BUT, BUT,if you just stop dropkicks from breeding who is going to support baby boomers in our old age?

Perhaps if we licensed breeding AND had a really selective immigration programme? Of course that would mean getting rid of the illegals and stopping the inflow. Perhaps mine the borders and have helicopter gunships with 'Puff the magic dragon",just to start?