The Abortion debate

#1

I thought I should start this to help the Sarah Palin thread from being derailed. Lets try and keep this debate clean and on point no personal attacks, please!

First of all my stance is I’m Pro-Life except in cases of rape, mothers health and if its a case of save one baby or loose both.

From the other thread:

Here we go, my position:

A pregnancy is not a infection, disease or unwanted tumor it does not naturally occur in a woman’s body, it is a direct result of her CHOICE to have sex, that choice can lead to a obvious consequence which is a pregnancy. Once that happens a new life is formed independent of its mother but still dependent on her for life, its the mothers responsibility to bring that new life into the world because it was a direct result of her choice, that choice does not give the mother an inherent right to kill another human being.

A woman has a gift/burden to bring new life into the world it might not be fair but it is how nature/God intended it. Our society has become accustomed to the idea that we shouldn’t have to take responsibly for our actions because its too hard, that logic is self-destructive and wrong, Youth and irresponsible behavior are no excuse for killing.

#2

you know, qt3 might be the only gaming focused forum that i know with the capability to discuss a topic such as abortion in a mature and respectful way. good luck guys.

#3

Is this about Sarah Palin and her stance on abortion or is it only on the abortion debate itself?

#4

Yeah, the post titled “The Abortion Debate”, along with Taranis’ opening position statement on the overall issue, are awfully ambiguous.

#5

You are to the left of Sarah Palin. She doesn’t make a rape or incest exception.

#6

I personally wouldn’t want my wife/girlfriend/significant other to have an abortion, but it seems like the issue is so far from having a definitive answer that it has to be left up to the individual. Any existential consequences are between the person and God if God ends up being out there.

#7

There is no other case where we allow the government to say that you have to give up part of your body to save someone else’s life. I understand the emotions attached to this subject, but I would not allow the government to treat it any differently. We should expand sex education and support for single mothers, mothers of the disabled, and those who would give up their babies for adoption, but not outlaw abortion.

#8

I know but she’s a whole lot closer then Obama ;-)

#9

I don’t know, you might want to ask a woman who has been raped whether Obama or Palin is more reasonable.

#10

As if we haven’t done this topic to DEATH. The death of a BABY.

#11

This is where we cant see eye to eye, Pro-Life people don’t see it as your body therefore not your decision.

We should expand sex education and support for single mothers, mothers of the disabled, and those who would give up their babies for adoption, but not outlaw abortion.

I agree with everything here except the outlaw abortion part. If the courts overturned Roe v. Wade we will need to fund all the expenses to help these new adopted babies find homes.

#12

I have to confess that these are the types of things on the internet that make me hate emoticons the most.

But beyond that, I don’t think that Palin’s stance really is closer. She advocates suffering through her position, which your stance is trying to avoid in the extreme cases.

#13

Of course the reality of Roe v. Wade being overturned lies with the Supreme Court and not the President. Any new appointments to the court would have to be approved by congress and its very doubtful anyone judge as extreme as Palin would make it through.

I actually do know someone who was a result of a rape and his mother decided keep him. I can’t image what that would be like!

#14

I’m against abortion because killing babies seems icky. But I don’t know that forcing incompetent individuals to be parents is much of a solution. Also, back when abortion was illegal, lots of women died of illegal abortions. That’s not good.

So, I’m against it but think the government should mostly just stay out of it. It’s one of those situations where there are no good solutions, just icky ones of various stripes.

#15

#16

Barbaric!

#17

True but times have changed its not longer such a shock to see a pregnant teen, and people don’t ship them off the distant relatives anymore.

So, I’m against it but think the government should mostly just stay out of it. It’s one of those situations where there are no good solutions, just icky ones of various stripes.

I agree there’s no perfect solution but I’d rather take the side that saves life’s rather then takes them.

#18

We kill things everyday. From bacteria to the food we eat, vegetarian or not. It’s our own arrogance that rates the lives of those that are like us above the lives of everything else.

#19

lives.

#20

Would you be ok with the government forcing people to donate a kidney if they were found to be a match with someone who needs one? After all, that person will die if they don’t get a kidney.