g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 127,128
- 70,864
- 2,605
Dear G: And what if the way to prevent abortion is not by approaching it this way you describe? What if the way to prevent it is to prevent ALL forms of relationship abuse
and coersion, to provide nonjudgmental social support for women and children,
and also teaching men and boys to take responsibility instead of dumping this on women?
Wouldn't it be our social responsibility to prevent all causes of abortion on all levels?
Absolutely, and this is exactly where I am coming from.
But for this to happen, a lot of misunderstandings need to first be removed.
I think you are assuming that imposing a choice on someone is a better way to enforce a principle than educating people on what is the reality in rape and abortion cases, and teaching people to prevent all causes in advance before they ever get to that point.
If you look at all the Prolife people, can you name ONE that requires abortion to be illegal or banned "by law" in order to know it should be prevented at all costs?
I find people are more truly convicted in their beliefs if they have freedom to arrive at their beliefs themselves, by their own reasoning and free will.
I do have a moral obligation to make sure people have "fully informed" and correct information when they make their choices, but not to "depend on" imposing this by law, especially where the decisions to prevent abuses of relations and of sex take place long before the point of pregnancy. Preventing abuses on all levels requires full respect for free choice. If consensus can be formed on that level, not by imposition but fully informed consent, then legislation would not be a battle, but would follow naturally.
The fact we have such unresolved points, means we haven't finished all the groundwork to build legislation on a solid foundation; so bullying or imposing one view over another is not going to change that, but make communication more difficult. There are no shortcuts. We need to isolate and resolve each point, and write better legislative agreements that we can all agree across the board address and prevent the problems without introducing more.
As a pro-lifer, I believe abortion is the taking of a human life and it should be against the law just as killing your parents is against the law.
So before we get to the penalty phase of the discussion, this one point must be crystal clear. Coming from the point of view that killing your unborn child is the same as killing your parents means I come from the point of view that all abortions are my business.
At the same time, I believe we should exert all possible means to prevent crimes from being committed in the first place. I am real big on prevention.
This is why I constantly bring up the issue of the proper and consistent use of birth control as a key element to bringing down the number of abortions. If there is no uninteneded pregnancy, there is no abortion. If there is no abortion, there is no taking of a human life.
I'm not the kind of person who stomps my feet about "abortion is murder" and does not progress the conversation beyond that point.
There is too much concentrating on being right, and not enough effort put into getting actual results that work.
So...birth control is a key element. From that point, the debate can center around how to achieve that. Education, accessibility, who pays for it, etc.
I believe if we get proper and consistent use of birth control, the number of abortions can be cut in half.
That's better than the minimal reductions we have seen since Roe v. Wade while everyone has been fighting over who is right and getting nowhere.
When abortions are cut in half, they become more socially unacceptable, which leads to even less abortions.
Win/win for everyone.
.
Last edited: