This is a thread totally dedicated to abortions, reasonings, dipshit arguments and why you think the way that you do at any given point in time.

I'm a firm believer in living by my beliefs but not using coercion to force them on anyone else.

Your life.....your decisions are what you have to live with. I will deal with the issue when it comes to me.

I'm pro choice. Do your thing.

Pro Life........

Abortion under 3 circumstances:
1. Rape
2. Incest
3. Mother's life in danger

Abortion not for convenience or for birth control.

Pro choice. I would never have an abortion, but I'd never tell another woman what to do with her body.

Personally against. Legally support. While I find the idea of abortion personally upsetting I think it's incredibly naive to think that making abortion illegal makes it go away. As a country do we really want to go back to the days of unsafe unlicensed abortions? Are we prepared to jail women and doctors for making a desperate and difficult decision? How do we make logical sense of this path from a legal perspective? If a fetus has the legal rights of a person, how do we view IVF clinics as anything short of mass murder? As much as people on the far extremes of either side of this issue want to make seem black and white, you either support baby killing or you don't, for me the rational position is we've probably got it as right as we can. I fully support funding programs targeted at reducing abortion (aside from abstinence education which has been routinely shown to be a abject failure).

This is an honest question. When someone who is pro-choice says that abortion should be legal but rare, what is the logic there? My assumption is that someone who is pro-choice doesn't see abortion as immoral. So if it isn't immoral, why worry about it being rare?

Pro-Choice. I utilize logic.

wkfan;1848494 wrote: Abortion under 3 circumstances:
1. Rape
2. Incest
3. Mother's life in danger

Abortion not for convenience or for birth control.

This is where my thoughts lie. I wouldn't say I'm really Pro-Life or Pro-Choice but I don't believe that someone should use an abortion as a form or birth control.

wkfan;1848494 wrote:Pro Life........

Abortion under 3 circumstances:
1. Rape
2. Incest
3. Mother's life in danger

Pro Choice. Why are the unborn in these cases less innocent and do not deserve the same rights as other fetus? It doesn't seem right to claim to be Pro Life and still advocate abortions in certain cases. You shouldn't have it both ways.

Fab4Runner;1848499 wrote:Pro choice. I would never have an abortion, but I'd never tell another woman what to do with her body.

+1

Heretic;1848517 wrote:Pro-Choice. I utilize logic.

Interestingly enough, I'd probably consider this answer a black-and-white logical fallacy. The implication that you are either pro-choice and utilize logic or pro-life and do not utilize logic.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1848516 wrote:This is an honest question. When someone who is pro-choice says that abortion should be legal but rare, what is the logic there? My assumption is that someone who is pro-choice doesn't see abortion as immoral. So if it isn't immoral, why worry about it being rare?

It's a fair question, and a good one.

Bill Clinton's mantra on abortion was the classic canard to ensure it was "safe, legal, and rare". But then came the Time reporter who famously said she'd do a Monica Lewinsky on Bill to thank him for "keeping abortion legal". Notice she's not offering her services for the other adjectives, just the first one to only. The second two are optional, and not to be concerned about.

Clinton also said it was his goal to "discourage abortions". As you said, if it's legal, why would you discourage woman from abortions? Isn't that promoting the pro-life agenda? Isn't discouraging a woman from having an abortion tantamount to coercion? Can't have that!

Zunardo;1848530 wrote:
Clinton also said it was his goal to "discourage abortions". As you said, if it's legal, why would you discourage woman from abortions? Isn't that promoting the pro-life agenda? Isn't discouraging a woman from having an abortion tantamount to coercion? Can't have that!

Seems closer to persuasion than coercion to me (and they couldn't be more different). I'm for the total legalization of drugs, not because I encourage their use, but because there is a good amount of evidence to suggest doing so will reduce their use.

justincredible;1848524 wrote:Interestingly enough, I'd probably consider this answer a black-and-white logical fallacy. The implication that you are either pro-choice and utilize logic or pro-life and do not utilize logic.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white

Possibly, but it saves the effort of typing a longer post where what I say goes directly over the head of the pro-lifers (or simply is ignored, because it doesn't fit their personal way of looking at things).

But, in short:

1. If abortion is something a potential parent wants, the child is unwanted due to various factors.

2. Such as poverty, in which case there be welfare, making the pro-lifer's "innocent unborn child" automatically turn into the welfare trash they tend to have a lot of disdain for and want support systems for cut.

3. Or there could be other factors, such as not being ready for (or unwilling to undergo) that sort of commitment. Either way, that sort of thing can easily lead to an unwanted or neglected child. Which easily can lead to a life of delinquency and crime, leading to jail and becoming a different sort of taxpayer burden.

Therefore, if someone wants an abortion, might as well make it happen. Pragmatism says that can nip all sorts of potential problems in the bud.

Besides, I find it hilarious that the whole "sanctity of life" argument ONLY comes up with stuff that hasn't even been born yet. No problems with categorizing them as trash if their economic status places them in welfare poverty. Or putting their lives on the line in overseas military conflicts. Or so on.

The father should have an equal say of whether or not to keep a child....

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1848516 wrote:This is an honest question. When someone who is pro-choice says that abortion should be legal but rare, what is the logic there? My assumption is that someone who is pro-choice doesn't see abortion as immoral. So if it isn't immoral, why worry about it being rare?

I don't know of any pro-choice groups that specify occurrence or rarity of abortions. Typically, the mantra of these groups is that abortions be three things: Safe, Legal, and Accessible.

However, I will comment that pro-choice groups aren't "Pro-abortion". Having an abortion is a difficult decision to make and it isn't a pleasant experience no matter your beliefs. This is why groups like Planned Parenthood focus most of their efforts on contraception, sexual education, and sexual health rather than abortions.

sleeper;1848539 wrote:... This is why groups like Planned Parenthood focus most of their efforts on contraception, sexual education, and sexual health rather than abortions.

Uhhhh, no.

The first video in a new investigation conducted by pro-life group Live Action has revealed that Planned Parenthood has been grossly exaggerating its commitment to prenatal care. In reality, countless of its abortion clinics across the country provide no assistance to pregnant women who want to keep their children. The group frequently claims to provide prenatal care, often as a justification for why it deserves federal funding for its work. In its 2014-2015 annual report, Planned Parenthood stated that it had provided upwards of 17,000 prenatal services. (Compare that to its 325,000 annual abortion procedures, over 30 percent of the nation’s abortions each year.)

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/444233/planned-parenthood-prenatal-care-not-groups-focus

“No, see, we don’t see pregnant women as a way of giving prenatal care, we see pregnant women, um, you know, if they are considering other options,” another employee at a Santa Fe clinic responded.

Two workers admitted they knew the name &#8220lanned Parenthood” was “deceiving.”
In fact, Live Action stated they contacted 97 Planned Parenthood clinics across the organization's 41 affiliates where undercover recording is legally allowed, and only five said they offered any form of prenatal care. ...

Intrigued, I ran my own search of services offered by Planned Parenthood, which on its website lists &#8220regnancy testing and services” under its list of offered features. These services, the website notes, vary from clinic to clinic.

Narrowing down my search, I found a relatively nearby clinic that does offer &#8220regnancy services,” located in Charlottesville, Virginia. However, a closer look at the clinic's website revealed the only &#8220regnancy service” it actually offers is &#8220regnancy planning services.”

In fact, “If you choose to continue a pregnancy, we will provide you with a list of resources to help you obtain prenatal care,” the website stated.

However, if the patient chooses to “terminate the pregnancy,” Planned Parenthood is more than happy to provide you with on-site abortion services, the website adds..

http://www.mrctv.org/blog/planned-parenthood-expos-we-dont-offer-prenatal-care

Con_Alma;1848543 wrote:Uhhhh, no.



Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/444233/planned-parenthood-prenatal-care-not-groups-focus



http://www.mrctv.org/blog/planned-parenthood-expos-we-dont-offer-prenatal-care

Might as well just post Fox News articles. No wonder you are so ignorant.

I posted PP's annual report in another thread; go read it and then come back to reality. 97% of their services are non-abortion; reality.

Yeah, Planned Parenthood is an abortion clinic that provides some other services to keep the lights on.

325k abortion (nearly 1/3 of all abortions annually!!!!) vs. 17k prenatal services. That's simply indefensible. Clearly a majority of women who want to keep their baby go elsewhere for prenatal care, which kind of destroys the whole "comprehensive services" argument.

To quote my favorite youtuber of the week, Dave Rubin: "Two things can be true at the same time."

1.) I think abortion should be legal.

2.) I don't think it should be used as birth control.

gut;1848545 wrote:Yeah, Planned Parenthood is an abortion clinic that provides some other services to keep the lights on.

325k abortion (nearly 1/3 of all abortions annually!!!!) vs. 17k prenatal services. That's simply indefensible. Clearly a majority of women who want to keep their baby go elsewhere for prenatal care, which kind of destroys the whole "comprehensive services" argument.

2015 Service breakdown

STI/STD Testing & Treatment - 4,218,149 - 45%
Contraception - 2,945,059 - 31%
Cancer Screening and Prevention - 682,208 - 7%
Other women's health services(Pregnancy tests, pre-natal services) - 1,190,408 - 13%
Abortion Services - 323,999 - 3%
Other services(UTI Treatments, adoption referrals, family planning) - 95,759 - 1%

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/2114/5089/0863/2014-2015_PPFA_Annual_Report_.pdf

Page 30. Reality. Keep spreading lies though!

I spend one third of my time working in a neonatal ICU. I am pro-choice.

sleeper;1848558 wrote:2015 Service breakdown

STI/STD Testing & Treatment - 4,218,149 - 45%
Contraception - 2,945,059 - 31%
Cancer Screening and Prevention - 682,208 - 7%
Other women's health services(Pregnancy tests, pre-natal services) - 1,190,408 - 13%
Abortion Services - 323,999 - 3%
Other services(UTI Treatments, adoption referrals, family planning) - 95,759 - 1%

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/2114/5089/0863/2014-2015_PPFA_Annual_Report_.pdf

Page 30. Reality. Keep spreading lies though!

Most of that can be done at Walmart, CVS or many other clinics. PP is first and foremost "family" planning, mainly without the family part - it really would be more accurate to call themselves "Family Unplanning" or "Non-family Planning".