Political Crossfire Forums

[_Kev_]

5 years ago my wife and I went to a woman's clinic to see about an abortion. We were both under twenty and in college and were simply scared. We didn't go through with it and there are no words in any language which can describe how thankful I am that we made that decision and how guilty I still feel for even considering it. My son is my life and I cannot imagine a world without him. Children are a blessing no matter what the circumstances. Adoption should always be the first option for any mother who fears for her child's future in her care.

That being said, I believe abortion is morally wrong for all the obvious reasons, yet I am not so arrogant to impose my beliefs on others and thereby deny them their own life choices. This is simply none of the government's business. It is not the job of government to dictate morality on what is clearly a "gray" issue to most people.

Where the country is divided on an ethical question, the Feds should stay home and keep their opinions to themselves. The states too are in no position to legislate religious ideals onto its supposedly free citizens.

Of course there is a point where the fetus is more than a fetus and it should be protected by the same laws which protect us. When that point is however is obviously not an easy question. I think most people could agree that third-trimester abortions cross that line and should not be allowed. Before that, however, I'll leave it to the doctors to figure out.

South Dakota is not alone, by the way. Several states are trying to do the same thing, including my own Louisiana (passed La. House, not yet to La. Senate). They know it's "illegal" under current constitutional law but that's the only reasons they're doing it: to force a case up the chain and try their hand with a different court. It's possible that Roe could be overturned and abortion left to the states to decide, but unlikely. What troubles me with this possibility is that Roe is based on the right to privacy and if overturned, where does that leave our contitutional right to privacy?

[Ek0nomik]

KRiche2 wrote: 5 years ago my wife and I went to a woman's clinic to see about an abortion. We were both under twenty and in college and were simply scared. We didn't go through with it and there are no words in any language which can describe how thankful I am that we made that decision and how guilty I still feel for even considering it. My son is my life and I cannot imagine a world without him. Children are a blessing no matter what the circumstances. Adoption should always be the first option for any mother who fears for her child's future in her care.

That being said, I believe abortion is morally wrong for all the obvious reasons, yet I am not so arrogant to impose my beliefs on others and thereby deny them their own life choices. This is simply none of the government's business. It is not the job of government to dictate morality on what is clearly a "gray" issue to most people.

Where the country is divided on an ethical question, the Feds should stay home and keep their opinions to themselves. The states too are in no position to legislate religious ideals onto its supposedly free citizens.

Of course there is a point where the fetus is more than a fetus and it should be protected by the same laws which protect us. When that point is however is obviously not an easy question. I think most people could agree that third-trimester abortions cross that line and should not be allowed. Before that, however, I'll leave it to the doctors to figure out.

South Dakota is not alone, by the way. Several states are trying to do the same thing, including my own Louisiana (passed La. House, not yet to La. Senate). They know it's "illegal" under current constitutional law but that's the only reasons they're doing it: to force a case up the chain and try their hand with a different court. It's possible that Roe could be overturned and abortion left to the states to decide, but unlikely. What troubles me with this possibility is that Roe is based on the right to privacy and if overturned, where does that leave our contitutional right to privacy?

For the record, adoption rates have been on the decline.

Put more and more children up for adoption, thus creating a smaller and smaller chance for that child to be adopted?

[Izzibeth]

my mother works for the department of social services and i know, first hand (as i went with her on many occasions to pick up abused children or play with foster children who were perhaps on their 5th or 6th home) what fostering and that whole process does to children. one of my best friends lived in a home with her mother who took care of foster kids (i would never put my children in that home... but the children were taken care of MUCH better than they were in their original homes...) and i remember this one little girl named Jocelyn. she lived with them for.... 3 years or so? maybe more. she was eventually taken away kicking and screaming from my friends house while my best friend cried on the doorstep. Jocelyn was brought back to her druggie mother. and i'm sure she's having a wonderful life in the ghetto. THAT is how the system works. not very well at all for adopted, neglected children.

Alula, if you feel what you did was for the best, then most likely it was for the best. let's say, looking back on it, you felt it was NOT for the best... well... in life we make choices and those choices have consequences that we have to live with. if you did not want to bring a potentially disabled child into this world under mentally distraught parents or perhaps let it's fate be decided by "the system" where the child could potentially be shipped off to 12 or 13 foster homes because each home "didn't want them" or end up in a home where the child was abused or neglected... i do not blame you at all. i understand completely. even if your reasoning was one of selfishness. pure selfishness. that was your decision to make. you made it and you live with the consequences. i don't. and neither do the conservatives who are so quick to judge the decision that you made. in fact, they would have never even known that an embryo growing inside of you was aborted if you had not told them.

abortion is a choice. i have known many women who have either chosen to have one or chosen to keep their baby and i have been supportive of all of them. my former roommate has a beautiful baby boy who looks exactly like her and when she was trying to figure out what she was going to do, i was there for her. whatever her decision was going to be. she just happened to be Portuguese with a HUGE family and lots of support so (after being disgusted by another woman we knew and her complete lack of regard for her own multiple abortions) she decided to keep her baby and move back in with her mother. it all worked out and i am extremely happy for her. had she chosen to abort her child, i would not have been happy... but i would have been supportive. as it was her decision to make and not mine.

my point is it's not always as simple as people make it out to be when not faced with the decision themselves. and children are discarded just as easily once they are born if no one wants them.

[Ek0nomik]

Izzibeth wrote: my mother works for the department of social services and i know, first hand (as i went with her on many occasions to pick up abused children or play with foster children who were perhaps on their 5th or 6th home) what fostering and that whole process does to children. one of my best friends lived in a home with her mother who took care of foster kids (i would never put my children in that home... but the children were taken care of MUCH better than they were in their original homes...) and i remember this one little girl named Jocelyn. she lived with them for.... 3 years or so? maybe more. she was eventually taken away kicking and screaming from my friends house while my best friend cried on the doorstep. Jocelyn was brought back to her druggie mother. and i'm sure she's having a wonderful life in the ghetto. THAT is how the system works. not very well at all for adopted, neglected children.

Alula, if you feel what you did was for the best, then most likely it was for the best. let's say, looking back on it, you felt it was NOT for the best... well... in life we make choices and those choices have consequences that we have to live with. if you did not want to bring a potentially disabled child into this world under mentally distraught parents or perhaps let it's fate be decided by "the system" where the child could potentially be shipped off to 12 or 13 foster homes because each home "didn't want them" or end up in a home where the child was abused or neglected... i do not blame you at all. i understand completely. even if your reasoning was one of selfishness. pure selfishness. that was your decision to make. you made it and you live with the consequences. i don't. and neither do the conservatives who are so quick to judge the decision that you made. in fact, they would have never even known that an embryo growing inside of you was aborted if you had not told them.

abortion is a choice. i have known many women who have either chosen to have one or chosen to keep their baby and i have been supportive of all of them. my former roommate has a beautiful baby boy who looks exactly like her and when she was trying to figure out what she was going to do, i was there for her. whatever her decision was going to be. she just happened to be Portuguese with a HUGE family and lots of support so (after being disgusted by another woman we knew and her complete lack of regard for her own multiple abortions) she decided to keep her baby and move back in with her mother. it all worked out and i am extremely happy for her. had she chosen to abort her child, i would not have been happy... but i would have been supportive. as it was her decision to make and not mine.

my point is it's not always as simple as people make it out to be when not faced with the decision themselves. and children are discarded just as easily once they are born if no one wants them.

Aside from some of the written English language rules, a great post if I do say so. :)

Your explanation towards the complexity of abortion is what strongly fuels my viewpoint. It's very rarely as easy as the "have the baby or don't" functions. That's why I strongly agree with keeping the ruling as is, to give people the benefit of the doubt to make the absolute best decision for their life.