I'm against abortion myself, but....

[Magic Man]

Draka, that's the point I'm making. They ARE black and white. Even if you odn't support aboriotn in the later stages, you STILL support the choice to abort in the earlier stages. That still makes you pro-choice. What stage it's in doesn't matter. Bottom line, do you AT ANY STAGE in development support a woman's right to choose. That makes you pro-choice (or Pro-Allow-Abortion). Period. You can't have your cake and eat it too on this issue.

And that's the point we're making. They are NOT black and white. Pro-choice doesn't give the full story for some people, like those in Draka's example. You can call them pro-choice if you want, but there's going to be a "but" to it. It would be better if you said "pro-sometimes-choice".

 

[SoyLeche]

And that's the point we're making. They are NOT black and white. Pro-choice doesn't give the full story for some people, like those in Draka's example. You can call them pro-choice if you want, but there's going to be a "but" to it. It would be better if you said "pro-sometimes-choice".

If I were to draw a Venn Diagram, I'm pretty sure that I'd have "pro-sometimes-choice" entirely encompassed by the realm of "pro-choice". The only thing that wouldn't be in this realm is "pro-never-choice".

Of course, my circle for "pro-life" would intersect with "pro-choice" a whole heck of a lot - which is why I don't like the terms. They don't tell you all that much.

 

[Magic Man]

If I were to draw a Venn Diagram, I'm pretty sure that I'd have "pro-sometimes-choice" entirely encompassed by the realm of "pro-choice". The only thing that wouldn't be in this realm is "pro-never-choice".

Of course, my circle for "pro-life" would intersect with "pro-choice" a whole heck of a lot - which is why I don't like the terms. They don't tell you all that much.

Sure, just like Buddhism would be part of "religion" as would Christianity and Paganism.

And I agree with the last part.

 

[doppelganger]

I consider my views "pro-life" through my support of a woman's right to seek a regulated, legal abortion.

 

[Draka]

Draka, that's the point I'm making. They ARE black and white. Even if you odn't support aboriotn in the later stages, you STILL support the choice to abort in the earlier stages. That still makes you pro-choice. What stage it's in doesn't matter. Bottom line, do you AT ANY STAGE in development support a woman's right to choose. That makes you pro-choice (or Pro-Allow-Abortion). Period. You can't have your cake and eat it too on this issue.

What he said below.

And that's the point we're making. They are NOT black and white. Pro-choice doesn't give the full story for some people, like those in Draka's example. You can call them pro-choice if you want, but there's going to be a "but" to it. It would be better if you said "pro-sometimes-choice".

I am pro-choice politically with limitations. I am pro-life in my own life and consider it awful and should be illegal to have abortions past a certain stage in the pregnancy. I internally don't approve of any abortions unless they are in severe extenuating circumstances, BUT realize that I have no say in anyone else's life or internal decisions on a subject so delicate and controversial. However, I feel if one is going to make such a decision they should make it within a certain amount of time before the fetus inside them is to the stage that they would survive anyway...at that point I can't see how anyone can deny that it is killing someone.

I really don't like the terms pro-choice vs. pro-life anyway. It seems to me, that by saying that you are clearly one or the other, you are saying that if you support even the slightest bit of choice that you are somehow "anti-life". That you are somehow "pro-abortion". That simply isn't so.

 

[+Xausted]

I am pro-choice politically with limitations. I am pro-life in my own life and consider it awful and should be illegal to have abortions past a certain stage in the pregnancy. I internally don't approve of any abortions unless they are in severe extenuating circumstances,
what do you consider "severe extenuating circumstances" please?

 

[Magic Man]

I am pro-choice politically with limitations. I am pro-life in my own life and consider it awful and should be illegal to have abortions past a certain stage in the pregnancy. I internally don't approve of any abortions unless they are in severe extenuating circumstances,
what do you consider "severe extenuating circumstances" please?

For instance, if she knew the kid was going to turn out like you, abortion would be permissable.

 

[doppelganger]

I consider my views "pro-life" through my support of a woman's right to seek a regulated, legal abortion.

I forgot, a centerpiece of my pro-life stance is my support of healthy sex education, availability of contraception and efforts toward increasing social justice and reducing poverty.

Research shows teaching safe sex and reducing poverty are the best ways to reduce the number of abortions (and they have a wide array of additional benefits as well, including reducing overpopulation, disease, environmental degradation and political instability). There's no reasonable evidence that making abortions illegal reduces their occurrence at all. There's plenty of reliable evidence that making them illegal makes them far more dangerous and likely to result in additional deaths and injury to both the mothers and the babies.

So my view are "pro-life" because they are "pro-choice."

 

[+Xausted]

For instance, if she knew the kid was going to turn out like you, abortion would be permissable.

take that to our abusive thread, i was actually asking a serious question (i know it is rare, but i really wanted to know). you welcome to give me your opinion on what classes as "good cause" though.

 

[Draka]

I am pro-choice politically with limitations. I am pro-life in my own life and consider it awful and should be illegal to have abortions past a certain stage in the pregnancy. I internally don't approve of any abortions unless they are in severe extenuating circumstances,

what do you consider "severe extenuating circumstances" please?

Rape, incest, medical jeopardy, extremely young teens and pre-teens who find themselves pregnant through a stupid mistake, those kinds of things. I also would have some leeway with if the child would have severe medical problems that would most likely be quickly fatal or severely life dibilitating. Along those lines.

However I do have enough sense about me to realize that certain pregnancies, in certain times of a woman's life, may be emotionally and mentally scarring to them and that is why I am pro-choice. Just because I may not like the idea of abortion, I am grown-up enough to realize I am not in someone else's shoes to even be in a situation to consider such a thing. Therefore, the choice is not mine, but theirs. I still maintain, however, that the decision should be made early. JMO

 

[+Xausted]

Rape, incest, medical jeopardy, extremely young teens and pre-teens who find themselves pregnant through a stupid mistake, those kinds of things. I also would have some leeway with if the child would have severe medical problems that would most likely be quickly fatal or severely life dibilitating. Along those lines.

However I do have enough sense about me to realize that certain pregnancies, in certain times of a woman's life, may be emotionally and mentally scarring to them and that is why I am pro-choice. Just because I may not like the idea of abortion, I am grown-up enough to realize I am not in someone else's shoes to even be in a situation to consider such a thing. Therefore, the choice is not mine, but theirs. I still maintain, however, that the decision should be made early. JMO

do you have different laws over there to us here in England?
where i live an abortion will not be performed after 12 weeks. you can go out of town by agreement of the drs until 16 weeks and in some places until 21/22 (cant remember exactly). there a hardly any foetus' that live that long outside the womb in other circumstances.
i am not attacking you at all, just interested in the different perspectives. this comes from a personal view. i had an abortion 3 years ago, and not through any of the reasons you first cited. if that pregnancy continued it would have destroyed any chance i ever had of having a life for me and my children. it was not undertaken lightly, and it still upsets me sometimes, but it was done for financial reasons more than anything. so does that make me "wrong" somehow?
again, i am not on the attack,just interested

 

[Magic Man]

I forgot, a centerpiece of my pro-life stance is my support of healthy sex education, availability of contraception and efforts toward increasing social justice and reducing poverty.

Research shows teaching safe sex and reducing poverty are the best ways to reduce the number of abortions (and they have a wide array of additional benefits as well, including reducing overpopulation, disease, environmental degradation and political instability). There's no reasonable evidence that making abortions illegal reduces their occurrence at all. There's plenty of reliable evidence that making them illegal makes them far more dangerous and likely to result in additional deaths and injury to both the mothers and the babies.

So my view are "pro-life" because they are "pro-choice."

So, wait...is that black or white?

 

[doppelganger]

So, wait...is that black or white?

Chartreuse.

 

[Draka]

do you have different laws over there to us here in England?
where i live an abortion will not be performed after 12 weeks. you can go out of town by agreement of the drs until 16 weeks and in some places until 21/22 (cant remember exactly). there a hardly any foetus' that live that long outside the womb in other circumstances.
i am not attacking you at all, just interested in the different perspectives. this comes from a personal view. i had an abortion 3 years ago, and not through any of the reasons you first cited. if that pregnancy continued it would have destroyed any chance i ever had of having a life for me and my children. it was not undertaken lightly, and it still upsets me sometimes, but it was done for financial reasons more than anything. so does that make me "wrong" somehow?
again, i am not on the attack,just interested

Unfortuantely, yes, we have different laws here. If a woman wanted to have a late term abortion here...they can. If they want to have an abortion at, say, 5 or 6 months...they can. I think that is sick and wrong. There is no reason to wait that long. Partial birth abortions are disgusting realities.

As for your abortion, I prefer not to sit in judgement of anyone. I may have preferred that you consider adoption, but I don't know your circumstances or life. Ultimately it is only you and your husband that can sit in judgement of your action. That is what pro-choice is about. If I knew you and your circumstances better, might I have disapproved?...quite possibly, but again, it still wouldn't be my place to say or do anything about it...it's your life, your family, your choice.

 

[Magic Man]

Chartreuse.

No, it HAS to be black or white! Which is it!!??

 

[Draka]

No, it HAS to be black or white! Which is it!!??

Ebony with ivory polka dots?

 

[Draka]

No, it HAS to be black or white! Which is it!!??

Creamy porcelain with stripes of midnight black?

 

[Draka]

No, it HAS to be black or white! Which is it!!??

I KNOW!!!! It's a chessboard!

 

[doppelganger]

Unfortuantely, yes, we have different laws here. If a woman wanted to have a late term abortion here...they can.

I don't think that's necessarily the case, Draka. The U.S. Supreme Court has only protected the right during the first trimester, and I'm pretty sure most states (around 35-40 of them) make abortion illegal after the first trimester, with some having exceptions for the sort of situations like rape and severe health emergencies as you discussed above.

A "partial birth abortion" is a political term (not a medical term) that doesn't necessarily refer to an abortion late in the pregnancy. It is an attempt to give a short, scandalous, description of a method of performing an abortion surgery. Legally, in most states it would still be limited to the first trimester.

 

[Draka]

I don't think that's necessarily the case, Draka. The U.S. Supreme Court has only protected the right during the first trimester, and I'm pretty sure most states (around 35-40 of them) make abortion illegal after the first trimester, with some having exceptions for the sort of situations like rape and severe health emergencies as you discussed above.

A "partial birth abortion" is a political term (not a medical term) that doesn't necessarily refer to an abortion late in the pregnancy. It is an attempt to give a short, scandalous, description of a method of performing an abortion surgery. Legally, in most states it would still be limited to the first trimester.

Well, I just know I have heard women who have admitted to having abortions past 4 months. If laws have changes, it seems to be more by state than anything.

Found this: Partial-birth Abortion Laws granted, a bit old, but still informative.

It is a state by state thing. Unfortunately my own state hasn't banned such a thing, along with about 20 other states as well. That is still a large amount of area where it is legal. In a country such as this it is a dangerous thing, since one can just take a few hour drive across a state border to get one if they are illegal in their own state.