Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.
Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.
It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.
Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.
I love that people think that anti-choice and anti-birth control laws, if enacted broadly and draconianly as the goobers want, would be welcomed broadly. It would only take a few middle class women dying of sepsis for the country to throw the bums out. Women are not brood mares. They're not Eve.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.
Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.
It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.
Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.
Stare decisis.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.
Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.
It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.
Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.
Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.
It may not be what you want to do but after a couple of conservative Supreme Court picks you will likely see things move in that direction.
Remember, as Obama said, elections have consequences.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.
If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.
Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.
Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.
Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.
Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.
And yet, being human, pregnancy still happens.
Yes, and I know a wonderful young couple who couldn't have children of their own. They've just adopted the most precious little girl who is now loved and adored, and she gives them such joy! They are only appreciative and supportive of the college girl who decided to not have an abortion.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.
Yeah, no. That's not what we're going to do.
Anonymous wrote:Just leave it to the states to decide if abortion should be legal.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.
If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.
Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.
Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.
Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.
Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.
If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.
Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.
Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.
Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.
Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.
And yet, being human, pregnancy still happens.
Yes, and I know a wonderful young couple who couldn't have children of their own. They've just adopted the most precious little girl who is now loved and adored, and she gives them such joy! They are only appreciative and supportive of the college girl who decided to not have an abortion.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.
If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.
Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.
Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.
Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.
Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.
And yet, being human, pregnancy still happens.
Yes, and I know a wonderful young couple who couldn't have children of their own. They've just adopted the most precious little girl who is now loved and adored, and she gives them such joy! They are only appreciative and supportive of the college girl who decided to not have an abortion.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.
If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.
Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.
Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.
Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.
Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.
And yet, being human, pregnancy still happens.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.
If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.
Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.
Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.
Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.
Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and take steps--as much as is humanly possible--to not get pregnant again.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If inside my body is less private than inside my house (where government can not search without a warrant), I don't know what is privacy anymore and where government intrusion can stop.
If there's a heart beating within your body, in addition to your own beating heart, it's not just YOUR body.
Yes, it is. Legally, ethically, and morally.
Legally, yes. Ethically and morally would depend on the ethics and morals of the person who is pregnant with the baby and its beating heart.
Like the oxygen masks on airplanes, a pregnant woman's first and greatest responsibility is to herself. After that, it is up to her how much care she wishes to give the other beating heart.
Yes, but I'm sure you've heard the rest of the flight attendant's message...first put mask on your own face so that you can then breathe and help those who are dependent on you. That's where a mother's ethics and morals come into the picture.
And many women weigh the ethics and morals of caring for their already existing children and decide that outweighs growing another child.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Did you even thing about what I wrote? It's an overall failure of birth control as public policy. If we have a way to get birth control to women to overcome their predictable irrationality (or lack of access or misinformation, as PP pointed out) then that shows that it's a larger failure of reproductive health policy leading to abortions. We KNOW that giving easy access to long-term birth control reduces abortion rates.
I fundamentally disagree with you. It is a matter of accepting personal responsibility.
If a woman knows that having unprotected sex could lead to pregnancy, not using birth control, when there is ready access to it, is not tantamount to "overall failure of birth control as public policy".
and you probably believe that people are rational actors in all areas of their lives. think a little more broadly if you actually care about making people's lives better, as opposed to casting judgment.
Quite honesty, it is your rationalizations that do the pro-choice movement a disservice. But we will not agree so I will leave it at that.
what, you think the pro choice movement would somehow be served by emphasizing that women with unplanned pregnancies are irresponsible flakes?