CDZ From Pro-Choice to Pro-Life (what changed my mind)

[Skylar]

Has the OP actually ever bothered to read the RvW decision for himself?

Because that would be a good starting point for him to find the answers to some of the questions he posed in post #3. The SCOTUS did actually address many of those questions.

Once the OP has educated himself he might want to try answering how he personally would take on the responsibility of raising a newborn until they have graduated college as a single father. Because that is the burden he is placing on others that he doesn't have to deal with himself.

Next the OP should go the Guttmacher site and read the statistics on women who do have abortions.

There he will discover that a majority of them do have religious beliefs similar to his own. He will also discover that many of these women already do have other children to care for and an additional child might be more than they can afford.

Again, is the OP willing to carry the burden of that additional child himself? If not, why is he imposing it on a mother already trying her best to raise the children she already has?

To get pregnant when you refuse to have a child, then to terminate that pregnancy when it could have been prevented absolutely is irresponsible. Morality isn't the issue. Religion isn't the issue. Character, absolute power over unborn human life, mindful and deliberate terminations based of haphazard value determinations are.

Haphazard according to who? What are the circumstances of a the abortion? What choices was she facing? What was her physical health?

I have no idea. And neither do you. You're making arbitrary value judgments based on a situation you aren't aware of. And its in the context that your argument breaks. As you don't know how many if any of your value judgments are applicable. You don't know the basis of her value judgments, the process used to reach them, or the time spent doing so.

All of which you'd have to know before you could begin to draw such conclusions.

You remain hopelessly ignorant of the specifics of any give woman's value judgments. While she remains the world's leading expert. Putting her in a far greater position to make such judgments than you are.

 

[Asclepias]

Has the OP actually ever bothered to read the RvW decision for himself?

Because that would be a good starting point for him to find the answers to some of the questions he posed in post #3. The SCOTUS did actually address many of those questions.

Once the OP has educated himself he might want to try answering how he personally would take on the responsibility of raising a newborn until they have graduated college as a single father. Because that is the burden he is placing on others that he doesn't have to deal with himself.

Next the OP should go the Guttmacher site and read the statistics on women who do have abortions.

There he will discover that a majority of them do have religious beliefs similar to his own. He will also discover that many of these women already do have other children to care for and an additional child might be more than they can afford.

Again, is the OP willing to carry the burden of that additional child himself? If not, why is he imposing it on a mother already trying her best to raise the children she already has?

To get pregnant when you refuse to have a child, then to terminate that pregnancy when it could have been prevented absolutely is irresponsible. Morality isn't the issue. Religion isn't the issue. Character, absolute power over unborn human life, mindful and deliberate terminations based of haphazard value determinations are.

Haphazard according to who? What are the circumstances of a the abortion? What choices was she facing? What was her physical health?

I have no idea. And neither do you. You're making arbitrary value judgments based on a situation you aren't aware of. And its in the context that your argument breaks. As you don't know how many if any of your value judgments are applicable. You don't know the basis of her value judgments, the process used to reach them, or the time spent doing so.

All of which you'd have to know before you could begin to draw such conclusions.

You remain hopelessly ignorant of the specifics of any give woman's value judgments. While she remains the world's leading expert. Putting her in a far greater position to make such judgments than you are.

Well put.

 

[Jackson]

Has the OP actually ever bothered to read the RvW decision for himself?

Because that would be a good starting point for him to find the answers to some of the questions he posed in post #3. The SCOTUS did actually address many of those questions.

Once the OP has educated himself he might want to try answering how he personally would take on the responsibility of raising a newborn until they have graduated college as a single father. Because that is the burden he is placing on others that he doesn't have to deal with himself.

Next the OP should go the Guttmacher site and read the statistics on women who do have abortions.

There he will discover that a majority of them do have religious beliefs similar to his own. He will also discover that many of these women already do have other children to care for and an additional child might be more than they can afford.

Again, is the OP willing to carry the burden of that additional child himself? If not, why is he imposing it on a mother already trying her best to raise the children she already has?

All of you fail to recognize the fact that these mothers could carry the baby to term and delivery it...to the arms of a couple that want this baby for their own. Many childless couples are waiting for these babies.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Has the OP actually ever bothered to read the RvW decision for himself?

Because that would be a good starting point for him to find the answers to some of the questions he posed in post #3. The SCOTUS did actually address many of those questions.

Once the OP has educated himself he might want to try answering how he personally would take on the responsibility of raising a newborn until they have graduated college as a single father. Because that is the burden he is placing on others that he doesn't have to deal with himself.

Next the OP should go the Guttmacher site and read the statistics on women who do have abortions.

There he will discover that a majority of them do have religious beliefs similar to his own. He will also discover that many of these women already do have other children to care for and an additional child might be more than they can afford.

Again, is the OP willing to carry the burden of that additional child himself? If not, why is he imposing it on a mother already trying her best to raise the children she already has?

All of you fail to recognize the fact that these mothers could carry the baby to term and delivery it...to the arms of a couple that want this baby for their own. Many childless couples are waiting for these babies.

When there are zero children in foster homes we can have this discussion. Until then it is a non-starter.

 

[Asclepias]

Has the OP actually ever bothered to read the RvW decision for himself?

Because that would be a good starting point for him to find the answers to some of the questions he posed in post #3. The SCOTUS did actually address many of those questions.

Once the OP has educated himself he might want to try answering how he personally would take on the responsibility of raising a newborn until they have graduated college as a single father. Because that is the burden he is placing on others that he doesn't have to deal with himself.

Next the OP should go the Guttmacher site and read the statistics on women who do have abortions.

There he will discover that a majority of them do have religious beliefs similar to his own. He will also discover that many of these women already do have other children to care for and an additional child might be more than they can afford.

Again, is the OP willing to carry the burden of that additional child himself? If not, why is he imposing it on a mother already trying her best to raise the children she already has?

All of you fail to recognize the fact that these mothers could carry the baby to term and delivery it...to the arms of a couple that want this baby for their own. Many childless couples are waiting for these babies.

That would be the mothers decision not ours.

 

[PhilosphyBeforeParty]

Given that I've been PRO CHOICE most of my adult life, I'm beginning to rethink that position now. Through Roe vs. Wade woman have been granted the legal right to decide the value of every unborn human life and have been granted the absolute power to legally terminate all of them at their sole discretion. This is not a right or power that should be given to anyone. Woman ultimately decide who lives and who dies - who's valuable and who is not, and many people have absolutely no problem with this. At one time I didn't either, but then I never thought about this issue in these terms.


Many pro choicer's suggest woman can be trusted with such absolute power. Still, there are over 1,000,000 abortions taking place in this nation annually, an estimated 850,000 of which could have been prevented absolutely by being more responsible. I realize that what people do in the bedroom is not my business (thank God). However, if a couple do not want an unwanted pregnancy, it can be prevented. There are quite a few options that will never result in pregnancy. Abstinence being one of many. Also, there are no contraceptives that offer 100% pregnancy prevention. That's an important thing to consider also, but I digress.


While woman's personal issues are not my business either, granting any human absolute power to determine the value of, and the authority to terminate unborn human life at their sole discretion is my business as an American citizen. This issue is about human rights. It's about granting human entities far too much power. It's about ethics and even morality for some. Heck, I'd prefer deliberate and well focused genetic engineering over the haphazard method of determining human value utilized by some, and that's a VERY frightening proposition. It's unethical too. Many pro choicer's suggest woman should be fully trusted and able to retain this undeniably unequaled liberty and power. I Am now in disagreement. Yesterday I was on the fence. The day before I was pro-choice.


You can thank those with fictitious and hostile arguments that are irrelevant to the discussion thrown against people who actually care about everyone involved. You can thank those who outright deny and sugar coat the harsh reality of abortion, their unwillingness to discuss the issue honestly, their want to suppress responsible behavior, their indirect encouragement of irresponsible behavior, their indirect encouragement of accountability avoidance, and the fact that all this threatens not only the human rights of woman, but the human rights of everyone else in this nation, as well as the future of the entire human race. I thank them for opening my eyes. There is no room nor chance for compromise between the opposing views. I understand this now. This issue is going to back to court as it needs to.


Furthermore, many pro choicer's have the gall to mock those who place trust in God. I find this quite ironic being that 850,000 woman annually have proven themselves (some over and again) to be terribly irresponsible when it comes to this issue (abusive even). The unequaled and absolute power granted to them over unborn human life is being abused without question. None of us should have this kind of power. Not you, not me, not our government, not woman, not men, not anyone ... Ever (.) If a woman's right to choose is to remain a right, very real limitations of that power need to placed upon them. Otherwise, Roe vs. Wade should be overturned indefinitely, which is where this issue is heading and at a very rapid pace. If woman have the absolute power to determine the value of, and the authority to terminate all unborn human lives at their sole discretion, then the future of humanity is at stake and placed solely on the character of woman, many of whom have proven themselves over and again to be abusive of this power.

Whether or not abortion is wrong is a philosophical issue. every person must decide for themselves what hey think is right or wrong, which is why I think that pregnant women should have the right to choose. I don't think there is anything morally wrong with abortion, but that is not why I support choice. I support choice because I believe that it is a matter of choice, and nobody should be forced to have moral decisions made for them. some people may say that there is a life at stake, but that is when the metaphysics comes in. is there really a life at stake? does it count as alive it it is not yet sentient? these aare wuestions that everyone must answer for themselves.