Buzzo
Well-Known Member
It's one of two major issues I think, and I don't think people try to skirt around it. Many people make huge efforts at addressing it. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm not going to get into it here.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's not really loaded it's just that it is the essence of the debate but both kind of prefer to skirt around it.
I suppose. Just ignore me. I'm just being rude. I get in trouble every time this topic comes up with both sides. I once got into a massive row with all my mates in college for not being pro-choice enough just because I suggested that it was not a decision to be taken lightly. For the record I am pro-choice, but whereas I am hugely intolerant of people who don't share my views on loads of things, I can perfectly understand why anyone would be anti-abortion.People who can't afford the expense currently involved in travelling to the UK for an abortion can't get one.
it's the essence of the debate as dictated by prolife groups, the church, and the political class. the essence of the debate for those who most need abortion services tends to be more concerned with poverty, health, abuse, and other social problems that don't usually affect anyone actually in a position to make a change.
no one goes skipping into an abortion clinic.
I agree to a point. But look at it another way - if poverty, health, abuse, and other social problems were sufficient justification for an abortion why are they not sufficient justification for infanticide? Would they be sufficient justification for a very late term abortion?
People who can't afford the expense currently involved in travelling to the UK for an abortion can't get one.
"what if we consider abortion to be killing on a par with a fully developed baby". that's just rephrasing the same question. you can call it fundamental, but it's just not answerable by anything other than personal choice.
There has to be some point along that timline where you say "No, not here, up to here but not here". How do you decide where that point is? That is my question. the answer may be different for everyone but it is certainly answerable.
I'm pro-choice in the sense that if I was a woman, I probably wouldn't have an abortion but don't feel that I have the right to impose my opinion on everyone else.
It comes down to allowing people to be responsible for the decisions they make as opposed to imposing a set of rules that may not suit everybody.
Do people really consider themselves pro-abortion?
and if so, does that mean, they're totally opposed to having children?
what will happen to a feotues if untouched 99% of the time?bang on,bull. id consider meself anti-abortion but pro-choice,I dont think abortion should be seen as a contriception which I know women who've had so many its obviously what they think, but people,REAL PEOPLE, not fetuses should have complete control over their own destiny
The baby can't say the sameWord to most of what you said, oh shit.
Apart from the fact that out of all the people I've known who've had abortions none had any damage to their health. By what do base saying that it always poses a serious risk to women?
I am pro abortion simply put because it's murder, the way I think meat is murder.
It's a handy contraception for people who have no responsibility and are lazy and selfish people.
No one makes these people have sex......
Even the morning after pill is dubious imo but hey!
Upgrade your account now to disable all ads...
Upgrade nowWe use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.