"Abortion Doctor" Murdered

I mean - it seems pretty clear that whether abortion is legal or illegal - people still have abortions and people still don't have abortions. OK - you have me there - they have more now when it's more accessible, but still ... (I've seen some statistics that show that it may not be a huge margin of difference. In other worlds, sadly, an awful lot of babies were still aborted when it was illegal. This whole legal/illegal issue seems a moot point at times.)
Click to expand...
It hasn't got to do, however, with the number of abortions, but with the safety of abortions.

Abortion, the deliberate termination of one's own pregnancy, has been around for millennia, long before modern medicine made it what appears to me to be a rather safe procedure. This means that people in no way need an abortion clinic to have an abortion; there exist natural, home-brewed alternatives. Alternatives such as forcing a clothes hanger up your vagina, throwing yourself down a flight of stairs, taking a scalding-hot bath, or having someone deliver powerful blows to your stomach.

What's the problem with these methods? You guessed it - they're anything but safe and painless. So what does an abortion ban accomplish? People who can afford to make the trip to another city, state or country, and pay for the treatment, do so. Those who can't, go to unsafe back-alley clinics or resort to the above methods. Direct result - hospitals are flooded with women in need of emergency treatment after horrific 'do-it-yourself' abortions.

So on balance, legal abortion is by far a preferrable alternative.
 
garcia<3 said:
This makes no sense. Is someone forcing you to get an abortion, I thought you were a male?
Click to expand...

Is the legality of abortion a federal issue which all states have to follow? If yes - then states and cities (and the people living in them) do not have the choice to make it illegal. An opposing view is being forced on them.
 
Last edited:
A Christian Sceptic said:
Is the legality of abortion a federal issue which all states have to follow? If yes - then states and cities (and the people living in them) do not have the choice to make it illegal. An opposing view is being forced on them.
Click to expand...


The law does not say you have to get an abortion! It leaves it up to the individual to choose what is best for them. A view is just a view. This view doesn't harm you in anyway.
 
A Christian Sceptic said:
Is the legality of abortion a federal issue which all states have to follow? If yes - then states and cities (and the people living in them) do not have the choice to make it illegal. An opposing view is being forced on them.
Click to expand...
Is this a problem? If you replace "abortion" with "segregation," is it still a problem?
 
A Christian Sceptic said:
Is the legality of abortion a federal issue which all states have to follow? If yes - then states and cities (and the people living in them) do not have the choice to make it illegal.
Click to expand...

Shorter A Christian Skeptic: Since taking away choices is bad, giving women a choice to have an abortion or not takes away the choice of others to take away that choice.

Strong argument!
 
A Christian Sceptic said:
Is the legality of abortion a federal issue which all states have to follow? If yes - then states and cities (and the people living in them) do not have the choice to make it illegal. An opposing view is being forced on them.
Click to expand...

The same is true of the Civil Rights Act. For the Southern states, "an opposing view was forced on them."

Horrible, isn't it?
 
garcia<3 said:
The law does not say you have to get an abortion! It leaves it up to the individual to choose what is best for them. A view is just a view. This view doesn't harm you in anyway.
Click to expand...

If the citizens of South Dakota want Abortion to be illegal - why shouldn't they have the right? It's their state. You don't need to live there and if you do live there you can move away or work to make it legal. Or heck - do it by towns. That would even be better. This town - illegal. That town - legal. That town - more restricted. That town - less restricted.
 
A Christian Sceptic said:
Pro-choicers are about giving people choices in all areas of life or for just abortions? - it seems like a huge overgeneralization you're making about pro-choicers, pro-lifers and restricting choices.
Click to expand...

As I like to say, "pro-lifers" are really "pro-choice"... it's just that they want to choose for everyone else ;)
 
linusrichard said:
Is this a problem? If you replace "abortion" with "segregation," is it still a problem?
Click to expand...

Yes - to many people it is a problem. Not only that - there are Federal laws that aren't even in the same area as Abortion and Segregation - and those are a problem too, to many, many people.
 
A Christian Sceptic said:
If the citizens of South Dakota want Abortion to be illegal - why shouldn't they have the right? It's their state. You don't need to live there and if you do live there you can move away or work to make it legal. Or heck - do it by towns. That would even be better. This town - illegal. That town - legal. That town - more restricted. That town - less restricted.
Click to expand...

If the citizens of South Dakota want to throw Mexican immigrants into concentration camps - why shouldn't they have the right? It's their state. You don't need to live there and if you do live there you can move away or work to make it legal.

Etc, etc.

Your "logic" can be used to justify pretty much any damn thing.
 
A Christian Sceptic said:
If the citizens of South Dakota want Abortion to be illegal - why shouldn't they have the right? It's their state. You don't need to live there and if you do live there you can move away or work to make it legal. Or heck - do it by towns. That would even be better. This town - illegal. That town - legal. That town - more restricted. That town - less restricted.
Click to expand...

Women can be second class citizens not capable of making a medical decision in one state but they're first class citizens capable of making a medical decision in another?

This isn't like deciding to sell booze or not, equal access to medical care is a human right.
 
A Christian Sceptic said:
If the citizens of South Dakota want Abortion to be illegal - why shouldn't they have the right? It's their state. You don't need to live there and if you do live there you can move away or work to make it legal. Or heck - do it by towns. That would even be better. This town - illegal. That town - legal. That town - more restricted. That town - less restricted.
Click to expand...

It's a moot point. The citizens of SD have voted twice now to keep abortion legal in their state.
 
I Ratant said:
.
The mind sets of those pro-choice folks is different than the pro-lifers.
Possibly a lot more tolerant of the things life throws at us, not looking for "the" hard-coded answer, either in some book or from some rabble rouser.
Pro-choicers may have been exposed to the hard-line, and being able to think a bit more clearly, reject it, both the abortion problem and what to do about abortionists.
The situation has a whole of gray on one side, and total black on the other.
Click to expand...

Understood. And I also note that still no one here has been able to find one single example of "pro-choice" violence oriented towards "pro-lifers" for the views they hold on these issues.

'Nuff said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom