who supports right to choose

[Carrie_C 9]

My mother has 2 babies right now. They are almost 2. She has had them since they were 3 months old. She has had numerous babies in foster care that weren't adopted.

[Carrie_C 9]

If abortion were illegal, patty, do you actually think that there wouldn't be any doctors preforming them?? There would be numerous unsafe back ally abortions. At least now, with it legal, it is a lot safer than it would be if it were illegal.

[pattygreen 5]

My mother has 2 babies right now. They are almost 2. She has had them since they were 3 months old. She has had numerous babies in foster care that weren't adopted.

So what. Isn't she happy doing foster care? If every child got adopted, she'd be out of a job there, now wouldn't she? I did foster care for 20 years, and I know all about children that don't get adopted. This is not a good enough reason to kill them. Nothing you say about the problems associated with unwanted babies will make killing them acceptable.

[pattygreen 5]

If abortion were illegal, patty, do you actually think that there wouldn't be any doctors preforming them?? There would be numerous unsafe back ally abortions. At least now, with it legal, it is a lot safer than it would be if it were illegal.

When people break the law, there are consequences that go along with it. If the woman chooses to have a back ally abortion and kill her child, then she will reap those consequences. I don't feel any remorse for people who break the law. Also, the no abortion law would be put into affect to save babies from murder. Do you feel sorry for those who break the law and kill others? why should we be concerned about making things 'safer' for murderers?

[Carrie_C 9]

So what. Isn't she happy doing foster care? If every child got adopted, she'd be out of a job there, now wouldn't she? I did foster care for 20 years, and I know all about children that don't get adopted. This is not a good enough reason to kill them. Nothing you say about the problems associated with unwanted babies will make killing them acceptable.

Of course she's happy doing foster care. But as you should know, kids in foster care get moved around all the time and don't stay in one home. And for your information, she did adopt one child who is 13 now.

[jalomum 1]

I thought it was usually the courts and child welfare/protection systems that say the babies are better off with their natural parents and it is the rights of those parents to have their children with them whatever their circumstances, attitudes or adictions. Blah blah blah...

Many infertile couples would happily raise and love any unwanted child regardless of colour or creed. Adoption authorities often insist that children or babies are adopted by culturally suitable/appropriate families and these days often insist on the adoptive family maintaining ties and contact with the childs birth family through regular letters and photos. This is more like long term babysitting and leaves the adoptive family unable to lay the adoption process to rest and be a complete family.

It is only aesthetically orientated people who want babies that need to be perfect and pristine and preferably in a matching, rather than contrasting shade.

Some men seem to prefer a child whose appearance fits in and so can easily pass for the product of their own loins rather than one who is (and these are the words spoken to my friend, who has 2 adopted children, by her brother in law) obviously someone elses b*****d.

I am anti-abortion rather than pro-life. There are instances where abortion is justified and in less medically advanced or equiped countries womens bodies would often not carry to full term any foetus that was not developing as it should.

Terminating lives for little or no reason is not good, but I think there is also a line where prolonging life that should have naturally expired is not good either, death is part of the natural cycle.

I feel that anyone who has multiple abortions for non medical reasons ought to be sterilised, as should those who give birth to a drug or alcohol addicted baby. They really are past caring and should not be allowed to procreate especially with the way the 'do gooders' insist on maintaining their rights over the rights of the vulnerable children they produce.

Modern values seem to be materialistic and self orientated. I never wanted children and finding I was 4 months pregnant at 32 was like my world was ending. It didn't of course, it just entered a new phase, one which I would not want to give up or trade. Since the moment I found out I was pregnant it was never about me, it was about us! I got over it and got on with it.

I am adopted and could easily have ended up a blood stain in a bucket if my birth mother had opted for abortion. Some say that would have been a good thing, given my strong opinions on anything related to adotion/ abortion and child protection:cursing:, but then my beautiful children would never have had the chance to exist and the world would be a little less bright as a result.

These are my opinions and as usual you are all welcome to them...no charge!!:smile2:

[BJean 16]

patty: "You are soooo into your position on 'choice' that you can't even fathom the oppositions reasoning behind saving a life. It is therefore useless to debate the issue of abortion, because you are blinded to the truth about the baby in the womb as a real, live human being created by God. When you can't see that, you can't see anything."

No patty, you're quite wrong. I do believe that a fertilized egg is life and I do believe that it is human. I just don't believe that it is a human being that should be given all the rights to live and be treated as a person - because it is not a person. And that's what I believe - just as you believe that it is placed in a mother's womb by God. You won't change my belief system and I won't change yours. But my beliefs are just as valid as yours. Just as you think you're backed up by the Bible, I believe I am backed up by science.

But my real point is that no matter what you or I or the Pope or your preacher or anyone on this thread or anyone else believes - the point that I fight for - my true Quest in all this is that it should not ever be a government controlled issue!

That is my argument, pure and simple. I fight for people's right to believe whatever THEY believe. Not what you or I believe! I have no desire to control other women's bodies. You, on the other hand, think it is your right because you have that belief.

Well my answer to that is that if you do not believe in abortion you should never have one. And the way it stands now is that the government will not force you to have an abortion for any reason. Even if we become overrun with babies and have no food for them. The government will not, as in some other countries, tell you that you must have an abortion if you become pregnant.

And that is what it should never, ever do. No matter what you or I believe. And you should, for one minute, since you want me to put myself in someone else's position - you should put yourself in the position of the government telling you that you MUST have an abortion if you become pregnant. No matter what. Because to me, having the government intervene in people's lives in that way is no different than having the government intervene in people's lives who might find it necessary to have an abortion.

That's what I fight for. No government intervention in people's reproductive lives. People can protect themselves and their babies however their God and their hearts tell them. It is not for our government to legislate such things.

[pattygreen 5]

That is my argument, pure and simple. I fight for people's right to believe whatever THEY believe.

People may 'believe' whatever they please, until that 'belief' destroys someone elses life. That's why we have laws against murder. If your philosophy were true, then those who believe it is okay to take what others have without asking them first should not be breaking any laws.

you should put yourself in the position of the government telling you that you MUST have an abortion if you become pregnant

Both are wrong for the governemnt to do. The gov. should not enforce abortions (or) allow them.

[tdslf1 0]

The point is we haven't been fighting the point that it is or is not a sin. Our point has been all along whether or not I or you or the church or legislator or anyone else has the right to choose what I or any female does with their body. Sure, you Catholics call it a sin, so would I if I belonged to the Catholic church. I argue that this is a country of choice and I have that choice right along with anyone else the things I allow or don't allow into my body. You or no one else, not even the govenment or a church has that right. Only I have that choice over my body. I can choose to have sex or not. I can choose to have a baby or not. My choice. That is the argument.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

If the white birth mother would have had an abortion if it were legal, she didn't want the baby, therefore she would have put it up for adoption. See, plenty of white babies for those who want a white one.

If she had an abortion she did not have an emotional attachment to it and didn't consider it her baby. After pregnancy, labor and birth and holding the baby, she usually chooses to keep it. The stigma of an unwed mom is mostly gone. Unless you force her to give up the baby the supply of healthy white babies is not there. THESE ARE JUST THE FACTS.

Also there are 36 couples for every available baby.

So, unless you want to enact another law that says all unwed mothers must put their babies up for adoption, please stick with the facts and the reality that is out there.

[pattygreen 5]

But the government doesn't give people the choice to murder others. So it shouldn't here as well. I know some of you don't believe that it is murdering a life, but take a look at some new technology and sonograms of babies in the womb and tell me that its not alive. Pro choicers like to say it's not a life because then it makes what they want to be able to do acceptable.

[tdslf1 0]

You have beliefs that say its a sin. I don't. I say there is a choice and never the twain shall met. Thus, you are not wrong and neither am I and because I live here right along with you in this country, I get that choice to do or not to do just as you do or not do.

[~Michelle~ 0]

I am pro choice as long as it is within the first trimester.

[BJean 16]

I don't believe that anyone believes this:

patty: "I know some of you don't believe that it is murdering a life, but take a look at some new technology and sonograms of babies in the womb and tell me that its not alive. Pro choicers like to say it's not a life because then it makes what they want to be able to do acceptable."

How can anyone say that human cells that comprise a sperm and an egg aren't life or living? They can't and they don't.

But that doesn't mean that the blob of cells is a person. For all your videos of babies moving in a womb, there is science that shows that until a certain stage, a fertilized egg cannot survive without its' host and hasn't actually developed into the stage where it can be called a complete human being. The promise is there, the biology is not.

If you were arguing against murdering a child that a woman (or man) was holding in front of his or her body, totally independent of each other, then no one would disagree with you. But this situation is very different and you and others who do not believe it is a woman's choice, know it full well. You make the argument about it being pure and simple murder because it is the only argument that could ever possibly make a case for government legal intervention.

Reproduction may be a religious matter to you, but scientifcally it is a fact that a fertilized egg must have certain very specific conditions met for it to become a person. It is not a person until those conditions are met.

And most people know that the science is there, but the religious part of it is dependent on faith.

Do not get faith and government intertwined because when you do, you run the risk of taking away the freedom to be an American that we all love and depend on.

If you want to live in a religious country for a while, go to one and you will quickly learn why you love this country and what it promises you. You will quickly learn that as long as their government's laws agree with your faith, you can live a full life. But once the theocratic government's laws go against your faith, you will want to rebel and possibly take up arms against it. As they do in several nations like Iran.

[rodriguezequal 3]

I understand that you feel killing a baby is not as high a priority as being able to decide whether you will have to carry it and deliver it, but there are many people who feel that it is just as wrong to kill a baby in the womb as it is to kill one laying in a bed beside its mothers belly. Now, you may be as insensitive as you want with your mocking us, but if you will just once imagine, just imagine for a moment if you felt that way about an abortion how it would put you in a defense mode for these babies. You are soooo into your position on 'choice' that you can't even fathom the oppositions reasoning behind saving a life. It is therefore useless to debate the issue of abortion, because you are blinded to the truth about the baby in the womb as a real, live human being created by God. When you can't see that, you can't see anything.

How are you any different? You cannot once put yourself on our side of the issue so why in the world should we do the same?