Recently in South Dakota Governor Rounds signed a bill to prohibit abortion. I personally think it should be up to the individual to chose if it is right for her. What are some of the oppinions out there?
209311
I am wise enough to know that I am not smart enough to say whether abortion is right or wrong. However I feel very strongly that If abortion is outlawed then  it should still be legal in cases of rape, incest and a mothers health. Also I believe a father should be able to stop a  abortion if he will take complete responsibility for the child. Lastly if it is legal then a man should be able to give his rights away to a child if he does not wish to have one. In that case he would not be required to support it. That may sound harsh but if woman whats choice than they cannot Deni it to the father.
118806
You raise a perfectly valid point, and one with which I happen to agree. That's why I tend to avoid answering abortion questions. When I do weigh in, however, it is always on the side of choice, simply because the alternative contradicts my fundamental philosophy regarding the rights of the individual in society. It makes not one iota of difference what I personally think of abortion, unless I am directly involved in some way (i.e., I'm the potential father). \n\nMore to the point, however, I don't believe this issue is ANYONE else's business but those parties directly involved. In other words, it NEVER should have become a political or moral issue in the first place. It is an entirely personal and (very) private issue. So, when male politicians and religious leaders jump in with both feet, that's when I get really angry. It could not be any LESS their business, and no amount of sanctimonious moralizing is ever going to change that fact.\n\nOne final point. I think every abortion is a tragedy, but not for the reasons the pro-life zealots say it is. The tragedy is that a young woman is going through personal hell and is making a choice that may well haunt her for the rest of her life. She may be having the abortion for any number of reasons (rape, incest, health dangers, personal choice, whatever) and she will doubtless suffer for whatever decision she makes. That sad fate is plenty bad enough without having perfect bloody strangers blundering in to voice their disapproval on top of all else. \n\nThe bottom line is that this is rightly her decision to make in the end. Sure, if there is a father present who actually wants this child, he should have a say in the outcome. And doctors clearly have some role to play here, too. But how did such a deeply painful and personal choice ever become fodder for hypocritical politicians and pious religious leaders (whose primary responsibility is to preach tolerance, surely)? It is madness, pure madness...
516607
One of the worlds' great mysteries.\n\nAs one of the people above me said....They support someones right...even if it's a mistake.   Well if it's a mistake...Why the hell do you support it?!  But yet, smoking is a mistake, and you do everything in your power to stop smokers.  Damned Hypocrites!\n\nHere's a question...if an unborn baby is a female... aren't you taking away her right to choose?\n\nHey, death penalty opponents...think of the death penalty as a 'late term abortion' ....\n\nI don't get it...kill the ones who have not sinned, and save all the sinners.  Nice.....
228465
Abortion should be a woman's choice. There should be a separation of church and state when it comes to this issue. Morality is something that each individual must realize for him/herself and not have it pushed on them by some other person. I don't think I could go thru with an abortion except under certain circumstances, but that would be my choice. Who am I or anyone else to judge a woman who has one? If people are going to be throwing around quotes for this here is one to add: Judge not lest ye be judged. I think the whole world would be better if people stopped worrying about what other people were doing and governed themselves in more civilized fashions. \n\nBy the way I like your question and following comments. It was funny and philosophical.
109194
The hope of the Pro-life camp in South Dakota (and elsewhere) is that it wll be tied up in court long enough for John Paul Stevens to retire (he is 85), and GWB will pick his replacement (who of course will be Pro-Life) giving the Supreme Court a majority of 5 who will overturn Roe v Wade.\n\nSo it isn't a matter of the proponents of the law hoping there will be no legal challenge, quite the contrary: they welcome that legal challenge.
137635
Blingme - Her question was stated correctly. She is essentially trying to determine why states allow abortion if it is illegal to kill a human being. And if a state charges a murderer with two murders for murdering a pregnant woman, what is the exact definition of life. \n\n1) Either a baby is alive and the two murders is correct. In this case, abortion should be illegal; or,\n\n2) A baby is not alive and only one murder should be charged. In this case, abortion would be okay.\n\nShe is pointing out a convenient catch-22 in the abortion debate.\n\nEDIT: bree123 - I do not believe she is calling out the hypocrisy of the double homicide law. She is calling out the hypocrisy of abortion.\n\nAnd citing the ACLU does NOT make me put a lot of trust in your judgment. It is a little like me citing all the evidence the National Right to Life cites proving that life starts at conception. You aren't going to buy that. Any evidence cited should be from a) a disinterested party, or b) a source that gives BOTH sides of the argument - like my initial assessment of her statement above.\n\nSource(s): Debate 101.
79943
Hmmm.... I think euthanasia. It will make for a more interesting read to most people as the abortion debate has raged openly for decades and as a result most people are already polarised in their decision. For euthanasia, most people avoid the question and the answer... except the Dutch who are the first to legalise it.
10016
I am pro-choice, but only to the extent that having an abortion never becomes as casual as some ardent privacy rights "zealots" seem to want to make it.  I happen to believe that what is created within a woman's body when she becomes pregnant does represent a form of life. Imagine all of the preparations that happily pregnant women undertake to make sure that whatever that is is safe throughout the pregnancy.  And does a happily pregnant woman refer to her unborn as matter, an embryo, a fetus, a zygote or any other such scientifically and socially ambiguous term?  No, of course not.  She talks to her unborn "baby."  She reads her "baby" stories.  She personifies every kick and every repositioning.  She makes reference to "eating for two."  I believe that pregnant woman are carrying life.  Therefore, while there are definitely circumstances where it would be inappropriate or unhealthy to bring that life to term, those are rare and extreme and should never become casual.\nFinally, I do not believe that, in general, men should tell women what to do with their bodies. I do not believe that two unmarried persons have an equal say to what happens to the baby that the woman is unexpectedly, and perhaps unhappily carrying.  I do, however, happen to believe that two people in a healthy monogamous relationship (which is intended to be long-term) should have a series of serious dialogs when a baby unexpectedly manifests itself.  The ultimate choice is hers, but she should consider his reasonable feelings when making this crucial decision.\n\nThis is a right that must be protected at all costs, but not exploited as a casual life event.  Education, abstinence, contraception, and adoption are all measures that can be taken (and should be considered) to greatly reduce the occasions where abortion becomes the ultimate answer.\n\nThis discussion of rights isn't generally had in the context of a discourse on separation of church and state (primarily because those discourses, under the First Amendment Establishment Clause, require the State not to endorse or support any particular religion.  The State can, however, endorse the ideal of faith and of being religious generally, which many view as positive for society's morality. I happen to believe that even this much State involvement is dangerous.\n\nPlease consider this my respectfully-presented, respectfully-intended personal viewpoint.
420434
No one has the right to make a "choice" that kills another innocent human being.  It's amazing how completely ignorant most pro-aborts seem to be when it comes to prenatal development and pain perception:  \n\nhttp://www.advocatesfortheinnocent.com/fetalpain.html\nhttp://www.justthefacts.org/clar.asp\nhttp://www.abort73.com/HTML/I-A-2-prenatal.html\nhttp://www.studentsforlife.uct.ac.za/foetal%20dev%20photos.html\nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/3847319.stm\nhttp://www.lifeissues.org/ultrasound/11weeks.htm\nhttp://www.cbrinfo.org/Resources/pictures.html\nhttp://www.abort73.com/HTML/I-A-4-video.html\n\nThe average age of an aborted baby in America is 10 weeks.  By that point, the child is fully formed and can even suck her thumb.  If her palm is pricked, she will pull her hand away and open her mouth.  In an ultrasound video of an abortion at 11 weeks, the child can be seen struggling violently to escape the suction instrument, while her heartrate doubles and she opens her mouth wide.  Unfeeling, unaware, and unformed?  Hardly!  However--even if the child was unaware and not fully developed, it would still be wrong to kill her.  Shooting a premature infant in her sleep is no less murderous than strangling a full-grown adult while he is awake.\n\nSince when does being "unwanted" make people less worthy to live than everyone else?  Should we kill homeless people and elderly people who are "unwanted," too?  Let's be honest, too--there is no such thing as an "unwanted" baby in the U.S. There are two million couples waiting to adopt right now, including couples who want to adopt children with health problems such as HIV, Down Syndrome, and spina bifida.  \n\nNewborn babies cannot survive without their mothers, either.  Left alone, they will die.  They are completely dependent.  Does that mean it's okay to kill them, too?\n\nWhere is the compassion?  Where is the logic?  Pro-aborts are completely twisted, yes.
102673
The big problem is that there are a number of issues that can not be dealt with by simple answers. First is the fact that if women who wish an abortion are denied, they may (and many do) find another way. It can be through ancient "home remedies" or though "back alley" abortionists, both of which can be highly dangerous and the results have killed women or made them seriously ill.\n\nBy legislating proper abortion clinics where women can go for a professional and safe procedure, out of existence, law makers force many women into an unsafe situation that can easily kill them.\n\nThe belief that abortion is murder is held by some, but not all, people. As we are not speaking about the killing of a human that is already born, the controversy over when the fetus becomes a viable human being will continue.\n\nIf a woman is raped, is it fair to force her to accept a pregnancy?\n\nMany "right to life" folks also do not believe in contraception, or the "morning after pill" that prevents pregnancy and this places a great deal of hardship on  women who would be forced into that idea if laws were changed.\n\nThere are many questions, but at this time, few answers. It basically comes down to belief and personal ideas of morality. \n\nI also note that we in the US don't really give a hoot if we kill thousands or millions of people in wars, but will object if one abortion is done. Real confusing.
465783
Go, mom.\n\nOkay, I will not dip too deep into this because this subject is, well, one I am passionate about.\n\nMurder is murder. I don't care if the government say that you can kill a baby, that you have the right; you don't. Women have a right to THEIR bodies, yes, but after a baby is concieved, it is a seperate entity, a seperate person;human being. It is connect to, BUT no longer HER body.  Okay, What happens when you kill an adult, or, you know, let's say six of them? You will most likely get the death penalty. Why? Because you have no right, or 'decision' to make about someone else's body or life. Oh, and you want to know how law-proven guilty criminals that get death row die?...a lot more peacefully and a lot less gruesome and more human than an innocent baby that is aborted dies.\n\nI'm not an activist, but I'm sick of it. I'm sick of people supporting murder. People that cannot live up to their responsibilities of having sex, should NOT have it. I hear you on the birth control method. My mother had always told me about a roommate she used to have in college. She had several abortions, and used it as birth control. Well God (or nature, whatever you believe, or don't believe) Stepped in, and when she settled down from the college years, and got married, she was not able to have children anymore. It is wrong. If you cannot live up to your responsibilities, or not be safe and responsible, or are promiscuous it's not the baby's fault. Why should the baby have to die for your sins, your mistakes. It's believed that everyone is born with sin, but not even giving them a chance to have a life of their own is selfish. You are taking a life, and that is not right, or your place to decide.\n\nI have been through the issue with a rape. If I hadn't of had a miscarriage, I would have given the poor thing up for adoption, at least. And I was 15 at this time, a very scared, abused girl, but...killing it never once crossed my mind; I do not condone that at ALL.... and that experience messed me up very badly, to this day.  That is a terrible spot to be in, you didn't ask for it, it's not your fault, but it's not the baby's either. I mean, I won't lie, I felt terrible for what had happened (worthlessness, guilt, filth, self-pity, all the emotional baggage that came with it) but I would have felt so much more if I would have taken that life away, for nothing more than my selfishness.\n\nThere are plenty of barren, sterile couples, or just loving couples that would LOVE to have a baby, but cannot conieve that would take unwanted babies'. If it is women's right to kill their children, then why do people go to jail for it after they are outside of their womb? Hmm, it's the SAME THING. If the government says that is is their RIGHT to murder that is fu cked. What about that child's RIGHT to live, to have a life, even if it is sent to a different family. People are irresponsible and selfish. fu ck them.\n\nOh, and a smaller dip into the  the whole "they they're not babies until.. blah, blah." ,It still is a human being, no matter how small. It takes shape after a while, fingers, toes, fingernails form early on....etc. They develop faster than lawmakers gave credit... If a person other than the mother assaults a mother, and the baby dies, it is murder, if the mother decides to kill it, it's her right?\n\nThat's not right.\n\nEither be responsible, live up to your responsibilities, give it up, or just be humane.\n\n\nOOOH, \n\nAnd I can't go on anymore. I tried to sum it up for you. I can't go futher, or I will rewrite it in more detail and right a freaking book, right here and now...
580355
This is an interesting point because pro-abortion people always ingore the fact that a newborn can't survive on it's own either.\n\nIt's not about a woman's rights, it's about killing babies. That's it. Some people would rather rip a babies body apart with a suction tube than take a birth control pill.\n\n(now watch, some lib will post something about rape and insest as though more than just a few abortions are as a result of rape and insest)
373330
For the most part, abortion is at the top of my list.  I know it might be silly to some but we have to answer to God and I feel that to protect the life of an innocent baby (and it is a baby, not just a blob of tisuue) is at the top of the list.  Of course I feel that some candidates play the "Christian card" like George Bush.  I'm not a huge fan of Bush and this war but I didn't want Kerry in there, either.  Some candidates just through in Pro-life to get the Christian vote and you have to take a look at their record.  Bottom line, I just pray about it and pray that God will have the candidate He wants in there.  Of course, if you don't believe the Bible to be the Word of God then you won't understand where I'm coming from and, most likely, disagree.
63785
If it is going to harm the Mother then probably yes, it should be allowed. But I feel there should be places in all the states that if you don't want your baby you can take him/her there without have to "kill" it.\n\nI am very against abortion.
593182
Republicans are smart folks just like Democrats - lil mutual respect between friends maybe. It's good that your friends are open minded, & you should be too. There are equally good reasons for everything on the republican agenda, and if they're actually conservatives I think you'll find they are pretty mad at how liberal Pres Bush's agenda has been. \n\nOn Abortion, I don't think it ought to be overturned, but I do think there are WAY too many of them & they should be restricted in several reasonable & practical ways that help people make good decisions. Pro-life candidates can't outlaw abortion, even if they won so much of the Congress to pass it as an amendment there wouldn't be enough states to approve it. However, what they can do is pass those restrictions I refered to, and so I can support them with no problems. As a side note, I think abortion is a sin, but that's between you & God, and he tells me (long about Romans) he's plenty capable of judging folks w/o my help.
120339
If you don't agree with contraception don't use it.  If you don't agree with abortion don't have one.  What I don't understand is why you want the government to impose your beliefs on other people.
45105
*Stepping into this* 1st it should be nobody's business what a woman does with her own body, besides that particular woman.\n2nd If you are male and trying to tell a woman what to do on this topic, simply shut up. We men will never fully understand. (Unless someday science allows males to conceive, carry and birth a baby.)\nOn the topic, I'm neither pro or con, just realize something as personal as this is a personal decision and respect that fact.\nNow, if you are for the war and/or capital punishment you should go away and rethink your values as you are a hypocrit.\nThose who are left, you have your opinion, great I respect that, but you know what they say about opinions...\n\nBut if you want to see the number of abortions go down, make our government allow "The Morning After Pill" like the rest of the civilized world has. It is the fault of each and everyone of you that abortion still exists when we know of far better methods. Take responcibility and do what is needed so we have ALL options available!\n\nWelcome to the world where right wing religious conservatives think they have a right/duty to take away everyone else's rights and force them to do what they want you to do.\nSeems to me that is not the freedom countries are founded on.\n\nIf it bothers you, be very very sure that you vote freedom of choice for every bloody official position there is, from school board to president. It is time the pendulum swung back to the middle instead of the victorian insanity we see today...\n\n*Editing in a note* See below, that was not I who is trying to make a clump of cellular tissue into a baby.