Political Crossfire Forums

[Ch33kY]

Selfish_Meme wrote: Ch33kY wrote: I feel, as in Australian politics, that it should be left to a conscience vote.

Technically abortion is illegal in Australia, according to the 1861 British Assault against the person act. However each of the states legislates independantly. So in the ACT it is legal and in Victoria it is subject to case law. Just because the police don't prosecute something doesn't mean it is legal. It was illegal to be homosexual in Tasmania until recently and it only changed because the police forced the issue by arresting someone (for good reasons, they thought it was a stupid law). What conscience vote would you be talking about? Abortion clinics operate quite openly in most places (I have been to one) and you can even get a medicare (National Health for American and UK citizens) rebate.

The conscience vote means that Members of Parliament vote for themselves, rather than the usual party-discipline where Backbenchers fall into line with party policy.

The abortion issue has only recieved any media attention in the last 2 or 3 years over an abortion pill that gets Medicare rebates, but possibly harms the person who takes it.

Abortion hasn't - and shouldn't! - become a major part of Australian politics. I'm just checking this forum section to see why people are so over-zealous (ie. abortion clinic shootings/bombings etc.) about the whole Abortion issue.

And about the laws you stated above, there are so many laws which Australia has that are outdated and simply aren't enacted because they have become redundant (look in the International Politics / Australia section for my posts on the Australian Constitution).

P.S. I'm not planning on having an abortion any time soon.

[Korimyr the Rat]

Coral wrote: If the government can force people to give birth they can get away with trashing just about any right you presently take for granted.

They can do that anyway; they don't need to prohibit abortion to do so, and they take away all of our other "rights" and still leave abortion strictly alone.

I can't really think of any legal principle that abortion laws violate, except the general idea that the law shouldn't bother people without a good reason to do so.

[Gdawg007]

Sailor Moon wrote: UrielsFyre wrote: You forgot the "I'm a man who feels that abortion is morally reprehensible, even though I don't plan on having children myself" option.

I am against abortion, both morally and ethically, because I feel that it is ending a life which has not yet been given the chance to live. Yes, I believe that life begins at conception. However, I do not feel that abortion should be outlawed because I am not presumptuous enough to tell a woman that she should not be allowed to have an abortion, regardless of my feelings about her choice.

BUT...

Do you believe in God?

Because if you do, then you should not support abortion. Being "lukewarm" in your (love?) for God, and show gratitude for what you have, and you should glorify him. You should, if you believe in and love God, push for his word to be served with righteousness.

Maybe youre not religious?

Why then, do you say "Its wrong, but I refuse to oppose it"? A bit hypocritical, dontcha think?

His word says nothing about being anti-abortion. Who are you to say what you should/shouldn't do if one believes in God? Sheer arrogance is blinding you on this and any others who think this way.

[Plodder]

all of the respnses are loaded statemants, my response is that, since I belive that life begins at conception, abortion is essentially murder and it is my duty to protect the life of all, bothe the young and the old.
Quote: His word says nothing about being anti-abortion. wrong, somewhere in the OT there is a passage that says eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. That passager is referring to an abortion and what should happen to the one responsible.

[steen]

Plodder wrote: Quote: His word says nothing about being anti-abortion. wrong, somewhere in the OT there is a passage that says eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. That passager is referring to an abortion and what should happen to the one responsible. You know, it would REALLY help if you actually knew the Bible before trying to quote it. What you are talking about is Exodus 21:22-25, where a miscarriage is reimbursed as loss of property as loss of a thing, while the death of a woman is punished as murder.

So what you quote in the Bible is actually directly contradicting your argument.


[22] "When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
[23] If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,
[24] eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
[25] burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

[cadillacricket]

Coral wrote: The abortion debate is an important one to everyone. If the government can force people to give birth they can get away with trashing just about any right you presently take for granted.

What you are trying to say is "no government can make me take responsibility for my actions as long I am not harming anyone recognized as a human", isn't it?

I don't think the abortion debate has as much to do with what the government "can or can't get away with" as it has to do with our comfort levels with desensitization....

I don't like being desensitized, and hearing people rave about compassion on one thread and talk about killing a 6 month along unborn fetus on another thread is getting old....

[LDA]

One aspect that I have always been curious about: why is the father never consulted, concerning an abortion? Yeah, yeah, it's "her" body, I know. He put in half of that fetus, so I don't see why his opinion is always neglected.

[cadillacricket]

steen wrote: Plodder wrote: Quote: His word says nothing about being anti-abortion. wrong, somewhere in the OT there is a passage that says eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. That passager is referring to an abortion and what should happen to the one responsible. You know, it would REALLY help if you actually knew the Bible before trying to quote it. What you are talking about is Exodus 21:22-25, where a miscarriage is reimbursed as loss of property as loss of a thing, while the death of a woman is punished as murder.

So what you quote in the Bible is actually directly contradicting your argument.


[22] "When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
[23] If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,
[24] eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
[25] burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

So according to Exodus a miscarriage (the death of an unborn fetus) is punishable with fines even if "no harm follows"?

Wouldn't that mean that the old testament frowns upon abortion (also the death of an unborn fetus)?

The only difference being of course that the woman isn't "striving together" with anyone else...

[steen]

cadillacricket wrote: So according to Exodus a miscarriage (the death of an unborn fetus) is punishable with fines even if "no harm follows"? Yes, No harm to the woman, the one who actually matter here.

Quote: Wouldn't that mean that the old testament frowns upon abortion (also the death of an unborn fetus)? Only as a loss of value, a loss of property. You can get rid of property all you want, but others can't take it from you. That's all.

Quote: The only difference being of course that the woman isn't "striving together" with anyone else... And what she does with her own bodily resources is her own business, yes.

[anselfir]

steen wrote: Plodder wrote: Quote: His word says nothing about being anti-abortion. wrong, somewhere in the OT there is a passage that says eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. That passager is referring to an abortion and what should happen to the one responsible. You know, it would REALLY help if you actually knew the Bible before trying to quote it. What you are talking about is Exodus 21:22-25, where a miscarriage is reimbursed as loss of property as loss of a thing, while the death of a woman is punished as murder.

So what you quote in the Bible is actually directly contradicting your argument.


[22] "When men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that there is a miscarriage, and yet no harm follows, the one who hurt her shall be fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
[23] If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,
[24] eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
[25] burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Anyways, as far as this segment is concerned, the life of a child is valued less than that of an adult, however, as children are generally valued less than adults in the Bible, this is not to say the unborn status of a child matters.

of course this segment refers to accidental damage, while premeditated destruction of the child is anotehr story. obviously if the wooman believed that she was killing a child, then she is guilty of murder, but I am ont sure what happens if she convinces herself that the object of destruction is not a child.

[AmericaFirst]

Coral wrote: The abortion debate is an important one to everyone. If the government can force people to give birth they can get away with trashing just about any right you presently take for granted.

Force people to give birth - wow, what a bizzare and troubling statement.

As a father (of soon to be two), I CANNOT COMPREHEND "terminating" a life. Yeah, I know, I'm a guy, it's a womans "right" :roll: I have no right to have an opinion - heard it all before.

I have NO say over what someone else does unless it somehow effects me. That said, it is none of my business except for the callous disregard SOME people have for human life. I know for some women, probably a lot (if not most) of them, it is a horrible "decision" to have to make. My stance against abortion is not the fact that I find it morally and ethically reprehensible, which I do. Besides ending a life, the statistics bother me:

# There are approximately 46 million abortions conducted eacy year, 20 million of them obtained illegally.

# There are approximately 126,000 abortions conducted each day.

# 47% of abortions are performed on women who have already had one or more abortions.
# Age - The majority of women getting an abortion are young.

#52% are younger than 25 years old and 19% are teenagers. The abortion rate is highest for those women aged 18 to 19 (56 per 1,000 in 1992.)

# Marriage - 51% of women who are unmarried when they become pregnant will receive an abortion. Unmarried women are 6 times more likely than married women to have an abortion. 67% of abortions are from women who have never been married.

http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm

If it weren't such a common thing but done out of desperation and less frequently, I might be able to stomach it slightyly better. Not much, but a little.

Taking a life shouldn't be so easy.

[Selfish_Meme]

AmericaFirst wrote: Force people to give birth - wow, what a bizzare and troubling statement.
But what making abortion illegal would actually entail. Judging by the statistics you quoted below the illegal abortion rate would skyrocket. Unless something is done to alleviate the reason's why abortion is the preffered option.

AmericaFirst wrote: I know for some women, probably a lot (if not most) of them, it is a horrible "decision" to have to make.
Amen!

AmericaFirst wrote: # There are approximately 46 million abortions conducted eacy year, 20 million of them obtained illegally.

# There are approximately 126,000 abortions conducted each day.

# 47% of abortions are performed on women who have already had one or more abortions.
# Age - The majority of women getting an abortion are young.

#52% are younger than 25 years old and 19% are teenagers. The abortion rate is highest for those women aged 18 to 19 (56 per 1,000 in 1992.)

# Marriage - 51% of women who are unmarried when they become pregnant will receive an abortion. Unmarried women are 6 times more likely than married women to have an abortion. 67% of abortions are from women who have never been married.

http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm

If it weren't such a common thing but done out of desperation and less frequently, I might be able to stomach it slightyly better. Not much, but a little.

Taking a life shouldn't be so easy.
Maybe what you should be saying is keeping a life shouldn't be so hard.

As your statistics show, young un/never-married women are the major contributors to abortion. Social Stigma, and financial hardship I would think would be the deciding factors. 'Most' women I know in succesful stable married relationships would be quite happy to have babies.

Does this mean that if we were to actively fight the social stigma of unmarried pregnant women being seen as 'tramps' by parents and peers, that there was good financial support for single mothers, better contraceptives, that mothership education and training was made available, and safe housing was sourced that we could reduce the abortion rate significantly?

I think so, getting someone to pay for it is another matter.

[cassandrabandra]

steen wrote: cadillacricket wrote: So according to Exodus a miscarriage (the death of an unborn fetus) is punishable with fines even if "no harm follows"? Yes, No harm to the woman, the one who actually matter here.

Quote: Wouldn't that mean that the old testament frowns upon abortion (also the death of an unborn fetus)? Only as a loss of value, a loss of property. You can get rid of property all you want, but others can't take it from you. That's all.

Quote: The only difference being of course that the woman isn't "striving together" with anyone else... And what she does with her own bodily resources is her own business, yes.

another perspective might be that a woman who contrives to have an abortion may be seen as damaging her husband's property.

In terms of the fact that a father had rights to dispose of his children as he saw fit (including selling them into slavery) a woman who denied her husband his rights as a patriarch would be as guilty as the men who strove against her and caused miscarriage. And should also be duly punished, one would expect.

[bubblybuddy]

UrielsFyre wrote: Sailor Moon wrote: UrielsFyre wrote: You forgot the "I'm a man who feels that abortion is morally reprehensible, even though I don't plan on having children myself" option.

I am against abortion, both morally and ethically, because I feel that it is ending a life which has not yet been given the chance to live. Yes, I believe that life begins at conception. However, I do not feel that abortion should be outlawed because I am not presumptuous enough to tell a woman that she should not be allowed to have an abortion, regardless of my feelings about her choice.

BUT...

Do you believe in God?

Because if you do, then you should not support abortion. Being "lukewarm" in your (love?) for God, and show gratitude for what you have, and you should glorify him. You should, if you believe in and love God, push for his word to be served with righteousness.

Maybe youre not religious?

Why then, do you say "Its wrong, but I refuse to oppose it"? A bit hypocritical, dontcha think?

No, not hypocritical at all.

You make the assumption that I am a Christian. Not true, I am a Wiccan (or a Witch if you prefer). My beliefs dictate that life is precious, and thus abortion is wrong. However, my beliefs also dictate that I have no right to force my beliefs, morality, or religious ideals on another. I may feel that what you are doing is wrong, but it would be just as wrong for me to try to forcefully change your morals or ideals to fit the standards I believe.

In addition, I am a Libertarian. The Libertarian ideal is that of freedom of choice. I can find your choice to be reprehensible, but it is still your choice to make.

A big thumbs up to you UreilsFyre. You have echoed my opinion except I'm not a Wiccan.

[steen]

AmericaFirst wrote: Coral wrote: The abortion debate is an important one to everyone. If the government can force people to give birth they can get away with trashing just about any right you presently take for granted. Force people to give birth - wow, what a bizzare and troubling statement. I am pleased that you have concerns over this pro-life goal.

Quote: As a father (of soon to be two), I CANNOT COMPREHEND "terminating" a life. Yeah, I know, I'm a guy, it's a womans "right" :roll: I have no right to have an opinion - heard it all before. You can have an opinion all you want. And if you don't like abortions, don't have one.

Quote: I have NO say over what someone else does unless it somehow effects me. That said, it is none of my business except for the callous disregard SOME people have for human life. Yes, some pro-lifers are so increadibly callous that they unfeeelingly argue for the enslavement and oppression of women. I share your disgust with such a misogynistic disregard for women's rights.

Quote: I know for some women, probably a lot (if not most) of them, it is a horrible "decision" to have to make. My stance against abortion is not the fact that I find it morally and ethically reprehensible, which I do. And which, of course, would have no bearing on the attitude, rights and actions of other persons, yes.

Quote: Besides ending a life, the statistics bother me:

# There are approximately 46 million abortions conducted eacy year, 20 million of them obtained illegally. Yes, most of which are in 3rd world countries. And the illegal abortions have been shown to be incredibly harmful to women. I am glad such a high number of illegal abortions are bothering you.

Quote: # There are approximately 126,000 abortions conducted each day.

# 47% of abortions are performed on women who have already had one or more abortions.
# Age - The majority of women getting an abortion are young.

#52% are younger than 25 years old and 19% are teenagers. The abortion rate is highest for those women aged 18 to 19 (56 per 1,000 in 1992.)

# Marriage - 51% of women who are unmarried when they become pregnant will receive an abortion. Unmarried women are 6 times more likely than married women to have an abortion. 67% of abortions are from women who have never been married.

http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm I am not sure why the latter are concerning to you?

Quote: If it weren't such a common thing but done out of desperation and less frequently, I might be able to stomach it slightyly better. Not much, but a little. Well, if you want the number to go down, I suggest you start advocating for much better, earlier and more scientifically accurate sex-ed. And then you can push for better, more available and cheaper (or free) contraception.

And finally, you can puch for better support of pregnant women.

Quote: Taking a life shouldn't be so easy. Oppressing and enslaving a woman's life shouldn't be so easy.

[AmericaFirst]

In an ideal world, S.M., we would be able to take care of everyone and when someone became pregnant unintentionally, we could be there for them financially and as a society. But it is FAR from an ideal world. I recall taking a graduate level Sociology course a ways back. One of the texts we had to read was by an author who excused teenagers having babies as "needing something to love". Bunch of crap if I ever heard it - get a PUPPY, not a baby. A large reason for poverty is people having kids they can't afford. I read somewhere in the last few years, the average age for someone becoming a first time grandparent is like 47. 47!!!!! I am 40 and cannot BEGIN to comprehend being a grandparent. Especially since people like me didn't become a parent until I was 36, let alone a grandparent. That means there are an AWEFUL lot of people becoming grandparents at 37 or 40 too.

Anyway, the same logic can be applied to the abortion issue. People (yes, women AND men) are careless and thoughtless in their words and actions. HUGE numbers of abortions happen because as a society we have become FAR too promiscuous and permissive. Parents ALLOW their 13 and 14 year old kids to have sex and think it's "cute". Kids are "dating" and "going steady" in elementary school - absurd. I am 40, my wife is 34. Things are a LOT different even from when she was in school to when I was in school.

When society says it's ok for a man to impregnate women all over and be the biological father of 4, 5, 8 kids - there's something SERIOUSLY wrong. When a LARGE number of people, men or women, start becoming parents at 15 or 16 (or younger) and no one bats an eye, SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG.

Do I want women to have to seek illegal abortions? NO, certainly not.

Do I want it to be a rarer occurance? Definitely.

[steen]

cassandrabandra wrote: steen wrote: cadillacricket wrote: So according to Exodus a miscarriage (the death of an unborn fetus) is punishable with fines even if "no harm follows"? Yes, No harm to the woman, the one who actually matter here.

Quote: Wouldn't that mean that the old testament frowns upon abortion (also the death of an unborn fetus)? Only as a loss of value, a loss of property. You can get rid of property all you want, but others can't take it from you. That's all.

Quote: The only difference being of course that the woman isn't "striving together" with anyone else... And what she does with her own bodily resources is her own business, yes. another perspective might be that a woman who contrives to have an abortion may be seen as damaging her husband's property. Yes, bronze-age beduin societies were not big on women's rights, were they? Now, today you would be hard presssed to find anybody outside of the pro-life community accepting grown, independent women as property.

Quote: In terms of the fact that a father had rights to dispose of his children as he saw fit (including selling them into slavery) a woman who denied her husband his rights as a patriarch would be as guilty as the men who strove against her and caused miscarriage. And should also be duly punished, one would expect. Those were the rules back then, yes. And, if I remember right, the principle of setting any kid under 40 days out for the hyenas if it had deformities etc, was also relatively common.

[cassandrabandra]

Selfish_Meme wrote: AmericaFirst wrote: Force people to give birth - wow, what a bizzare and troubling statement.
But what making abortion illegal would actually entail. Judging by the statistics you quoted below the illegal abortion rate would skyrocket. Unless something is done to alleviate the reason's why abortion is the preffered option.

AmericaFirst wrote: I know for some women, probably a lot (if not most) of them, it is a horrible "decision" to have to make.
Amen!

AmericaFirst wrote: # There are approximately 46 million abortions conducted eacy year, 20 million of them obtained illegally.

# There are approximately 126,000 abortions conducted each day.

# 47% of abortions are performed on women who have already had one or more abortions.
# Age - The majority of women getting an abortion are young.

#52% are younger than 25 years old and 19% are teenagers. The abortion rate is highest for those women aged 18 to 19 (56 per 1,000 in 1992.)

# Marriage - 51% of women who are unmarried when they become pregnant will receive an abortion. Unmarried women are 6 times more likely than married women to have an abortion. 67% of abortions are from women who have never been married.

http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm

If it weren't such a common thing but done out of desperation and less frequently, I might be able to stomach it slightyly better. Not much, but a little.

Taking a life shouldn't be so easy.
Maybe what you should be saying is keeping a life shouldn't be so hard.

As your statistics show, young un/never-married women are the major contributors to abortion. Social Stigma, and financial hardship I would think would be the deciding factors. 'Most' women I know in succesful stable married relationships would be quite happy to have babies.

Does this mean that if we were to actively fight the social stigma of unmarried pregnant women being seen as 'tramps' by parents and peers, that there was good financial support for single mothers, better contraceptives, that mothership education and training was made available, and safe housing was sourced that we could reduce the abortion rate significantly?

I think so, getting someone to pay for it is another matter.

good points.

America firsts stats are also interesting - and probably reflect the figures you see in many developed western nations (although some wil have considerably lower rates - especially of teen pregnancies - mainland europe for example)

what I would like to see however is a breakdown according to socio economic variables.

If you want to do something about abortion you probably have to find out who is having them, and start asking why. Then you may be able to start addressing the problem from the other end.

I think the anti choice lobby with their emphasis on the unborn child, but in most instances neglect of both mother and child post natally are really barking up the wrong tree.

as to what happens when you make abortion illegal - in the seventies, backyard abortions were the major cause of death among women in the 15 - 44 age group in some central American countries. Catholic countries where necessity rather than religion was the determining factor in people's choices (sorry no reference - I read this over thirty years ago - from a reputable source at the time).

[AmericaFirst]

steen wrote: AmericaFirst wrote: Coral wrote: The abortion debate is an important one to everyone. If the government can force people to give birth they can get away with trashing just about any right you presently take for granted. Force people to give birth - wow, what a bizzare and troubling statement. I am pleased that you have concerns over this pro-life goal.

As hard as it must be for you to comprehend, some people actually believe it is a JOY to have a child - and not just us evil, "oppressive" males.

steen wrote:
Quote: As a father (of soon to be two), I CANNOT COMPREHEND "terminating" a life. Yeah, I know, I'm a guy, it's a womans "right" :roll: I have no right to have an opinion - heard it all before. You can have an opinion all you want. And if you don't like abortions, don't have one. No new material? Didn't think so.

steen wrote:
Quote: I have NO say over what someone else does unless it somehow effects me. That said, it is none of my business except for the callous disregard SOME people have for human life. Yes, some pro-lifers are so increadibly callous that they unfeeelingly argue for the enslavement and oppression of women. I share your disgust with such a misogynistic disregard for women's rights.

Womens rights. Huh. So, a man and a woman have sex, she becomes pregnant. It is her RIGHT to kill the life in her - the guy has NO say.

A guy and a woman have sex, she gets pregnant and has the child - the man provides financial support. 5 years later he has a paternity test and finds out the kid isn't his and a judge FORCES him to keep paying for it, despite the irrefutable evidence.

Yeah - rights. Great. Glad to see they only apply ONE WAY. I know it doesn't happen that often but if fair was fair, IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN AT ALL!

steen wrote:
Quote: I know for some women, probably a lot (if not most) of them, it is a horrible "decision" to have to make. My stance against abortion is not the fact that I find it morally and ethically reprehensible, which I do. And which, of course, would have no bearing on the attitude, rights and actions of other persons, yes.

If you'll get off your high horse for a minute, you'll see the topic of this thread is essentially "why do you have the views on abortion that you do". Now don't you feel silly for being so self-righteous and smug?

steen wrote:
Quote: Besides ending a life, the statistics bother me:

# There are approximately 46 million abortions conducted eacy year, 20 million of them obtained illegally. Yes, most of which are in 3rd world countries. And the illegal abortions have been shown to be incredibly harmful to women. I am glad such a high number of illegal abortions are bothering you. You're sick, plain and simple.

Quote: # There are approximately 126,000 abortions conducted each day.

# 47% of abortions are performed on women who have already had one or more abortions.
# Age - The majority of women getting an abortion are young.

#52% are younger than 25 years old and 19% are teenagers. The abortion rate is highest for those women aged 18 to 19 (56 per 1,000 in 1992.)

# Marriage - 51% of women who are unmarried when they become pregnant will receive an abortion. Unmarried women are 6 times more likely than married women to have an abortion. 67% of abortions are from women who have never been married.

http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abortionstats/a/aaabortionstats.htm I am not sure why the latter are concerning to you?

Quote: If it weren't such a common thing but done out of desperation and less frequently, I might be able to stomach it slightyly better. Not much, but a little. Well, if you want the number to go down, I suggest you start advocating for much better, earlier and more scientifically accurate sex-ed. And then you can push for better, more available and cheaper (or free) contraception.

And finally, you can puch for better support of pregnant women.

Quote: Taking a life shouldn't be so easy. Oppressing and enslaving a woman's life shouldn't be so easy. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: [/quote]

46 MILLION MURDERS A YEAR AND YOU MOCK MY POINTS - you really, truly need serious psychiatric help.

I don't push for more birth control because people don't use it. "Forget" to take it, men decry the feeling of a condom, "it'll be ok just this once" :roll: That is a LAME argument and if you had half an idea of what you are talking about beyond "asserting womens rights" you would know that.

And WHY the latter is is of concern to me is because of the HUGE number of people with illegitimiate kids COSTS ME MONEY. You liberals whine about the war or government spending (which I disagree with right along side you) but have NO problem shelling out cash to support people who aren't in control enough or don't care enough to not have kids they can't support.

[steen]

AmericaFirst wrote: In an ideal world, S.M., we would be able to take care of everyone and when someone became pregnant unintentionally, we could be there for them financially and as a society. But it is FAR from an ideal world. Which, of course, is why abortion is so prevalent in the US of today. Now, in most European countries, they HAVE managed to progress society to such a point and the number of abortions indeed is much less.

Quote: I recall taking a graduate level Sociology course a ways back. One of the texts we had to read was by an author who excused teenagers having babies as "needing something to love". Bunch of crap if I ever heard it - get a PUPPY, not a baby. Well, I know many teens who themselves hold this view. They generally are rather intellectually unsophisticated and with a very short event horizon. They generally don't make good mothers.

Quote: A large reason for poverty is people having kids they can't afford. I read somewhere in the last few years, the average age for someone becoming a first time grandparent is like 47. 47!!!!! I am 40 and cannot BEGIN to comprehend being a grandparent. Especially since people like me didn't become a parent until I was 36, let alone a grandparent. That means there are an AWEFUL lot of people becoming grandparents at 37 or 40 too. So it is time to make kids affordable, don't you think?

Quote: Anyway, the same logic can be applied to the abortion issue. People (yes, women AND men) are careless and thoughtless in their words and actions. HUGE numbers of abortions happen because as a society we have become FAR too promiscuous and permissive. Ah, so the heavy thumb of Government oppression is what will fix this problem? Somehow that hasn't seemed feasible so far. But on the other hand, under the economic upswing under Clinton's presidency, the abortion rate dropped quite a bit, and under Bush's transfer of wealth back to the more wealthy, we have seen the rate go up again. If you get more wealth in the hands of the poor, or at least lower their expenses, you will see the number go down.

Quote: Parents ALLOW their 13 and 14 year old kids to have sex and think it's "cute". Hmm, I must admit to never actually have run into this, other than among some sick parents who decide to have their kids have sex so they can watch. Needless to say, these kids end up in fostercare and are rather messed up, while the parents end up in the already very expensive prison systems.

Quote: Kids are "dating" and "going steady" in elementary school - absurd. I am 40, my wife is 34. Things are a LOT different even from when she was in school to when I was in school. Well, most of elementary school dating doesn't involve sex. They can get together, go steady and split up all over one summer by e-mail only and never actually meet over the summer.

Quote: When society says it's ok for a man to impregnate women all over and be the biological father of 4, 5, 8 kids - there's something SERIOUSLY wrong. When a LARGE number of people, men or women, start becoming parents at 15 or 16 (or younger) and no one bats an eye, SOMETHING IS SERIOUSLY WRONG.

Do I want women to have to seek illegal abortions? NO, certainly not.

Do I want it to be a rarer occurance? Definitely. So better sex-ed, more contraception and better support for pregnant women certainly would go a long way to help on that.