Changing My Mind About Abortion "rights"

Slowly Moving further Right.

Published on October 9, 2005 By Moderateman In US Domestic

After much debate {internal} and external, I am slowly changing my mind about abortion "rights".

I feel that abortion is an abused procedure, in too many cases a child is destroyed like an animal because it's inconvenient to give birth at this time.

I have never liked abortion, but have supported a woman's right to choose, I no longer support that position.

I believe except for extreme cases, IE: mothers life at risk, rape, incest, abortion should be banned on the federal level and left up to individual states.

The greatness of America is your right to choose where you live, exercise that right.

It seems that there are so many other choices a woman can make besides abortion, but with clinics everywhere performing abortion at breakneck speed it has become just to darn easy to abort {murder in my eyes}.

Partial birth abortion is an abomination, if you waited a few minutes more and that child took one breath, and you killed it then ,you would be charged with murder.

I no longer see the difference between murder and abortion.

If you do not like your states abortion law, move to a state that allows abortion or keep your legs closed, use preventive measures.

In the future any candidate for public office that supports abortion I will not vote for, {yes including ARNOLD}.

Comments (Page 3)

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

28 by Dr. Guy
Monday, October 10, 2005

I know how you like fight straw men).

"fight straw men" liberal speak for "how dare you disagree with me"

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

29 by Leauki
Monday, October 10, 2005

And what does it mean when you say "banned on the federal level and left up to individual states"? Do you think abortion should be banned on the federal level XOR do you think it should be left up to individual states? The two are mutually exclusive.

means exactly what is says, banned as some kind of right that the federal gov, gives through SCOTUS, and left up to individual states to decide.

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

think outlawing abortion (except when medically necessary) and allowing gay couples to adopt and streamlining the adoption process could be a good compromise.

Thisa could be a SOLUTION but I do not agree with allowing gays to adopt either.

Leauki

on Oct 10, 2005

This could be a SOLUTION but I do not agree with allowing gays to adopt either.

There is no fundamental reason that would contradict that solution, assuming our principle here is personal responsibility.

Whether or not to allow gay couples to adopt is a question that must be dealt with, but it is not on the same level as the abortion question, as there is no question of life and death.

If we argue that personal responsibility should govern our position, we must accept gay adoption, as it does not contradict personal responsibility; abortion arguably does.

But then you obviously understood my point as you admit gay adoption as a solution in theory.

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

34 by Leauki
Monday, October 10, 2005

If we argue that personal responsibility should govern our position, we must accept gay adoption, as it does not contradict personal responsibility; abortion arguably does.

But then you obviously understood my point as you admit gay adoption as a solution in theory.

agreed. now the context I was using gay adoption for was about the left says abortion is a right, all these unwanted children, blah blah blah, The left also are proponents of gay marriage and they should be allowed to adopt like any other married couple, I was wondering why the left cannot tie these 2 sets of circumstances together, If you want gays to adopt, stop aborting children because they are "inconvenient" and let gays adopt.

btw I disagree with gay marriage, civil unions, fine. marriage, no!

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

35 by little_whip
Monday, October 10, 2005

you make my argument so much more concisely and eloquently.

I hate you!

heh

Leauki

on Oct 10, 2005

btw I disagree with gay marriage, civil unions, fine. marriage, no!

If this "civil union" is legally the same as marriage tax- and resposibility-wise, I'm fine with that. I think that religion should be removed from government here anyway.

Let the government create civil unions and the religions can than marry these people according to their beliefs if they want to.

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

38 by Leauki
Monday, October 10, 2005

btw I disagree with gay marriage, civil unions, fine. marriage, no!

If this "civil union" is legally the same as marriage tax- and resposibility-wise, I'm fine with that. I think that religion should be removed from government here anyway.

Let the government create civil unions and the religions can than marry these people according to their beliefs if they want to.

perfect, esactly how I feel it should be, give the homo's the same rights as a married couple, everything, Cept adoption btw} Marriage should be reserved for one man and one woman and is a religious ceremony, the two should be seperate.

Dr Guy

on Oct 10, 2005

Let the government create civil unions and the religions can than marry these people according to their beliefs if they want to.

Another convert! And what I started, and others now seem to be agreeing with me on. (well, I did not start it, I was just the first - that I know of - to state it on JU).

Leauki

on Oct 10, 2005

Another convert!

Not really. I have been thinking this for some time.

Incidentally, this is close to how many western countries handle it. In Germany there are separate state and church ceremonies. It would only take the renaming of the first and the system would be in place.

Leauki

on Oct 10, 2005

But what about religions that allow gay marriage? Should they be forbidden to practice their ceremonies or forced not to call the result a marriage?

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

40 by Dr. Guy
Monday, October 10, 2005

Let the government create civil unions and the religions can than marry these people according to their beliefs if they want to.

Another convert! And what I started, and others now seem to be agreeing with me on. (well, I did not start it, I was just the first - that I know of - to state it on JU).

That has been my belief since before the massa chew shit supreme court decided gay marriage is ok.

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

41 by Leauki
Monday, October 10, 2005

well now we do think and believe on many things don't we?

Moderateman

on Oct 10, 2005

#42 by Leauki
Monday, October 10, 2005

But what about religions that allow gay marriage? Should they be forbidden to practice their ceremonies or forced not to call the result a marriage?

if it's forbidden by the folks in charge of that particular religion, that's fine, The government should have NO SAY in church practices, ever.

drmiler

on Oct 10, 2005

But what about religions that allow gay marriage? Should they be forbidden to practice their ceremonies or forced not to call the result a marriage?

Please inform me on what religion allows that?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!