Question for anti-choice DUers...

I've heard republicans get asked this, but I've never heard a Dem response....

(1) Should abortion be illegal?

(2) What should be the penalty for the mother if you said yes to (1)? 10 years in prison? 20? What?

Thanks!

Usually the opposite of Pro - Choice is Pro - Life which always did bother me. Being Pro-Choice doesn't mean one is Pro - Abortion or Anti - Life.

I don't think anyone, no matter how 'liberal' or 'pro - choice' wants to see more abortions happening.
It would be great if every pregnancy was wanted.
But here, in the real world, that's just not gonna happen.

Abortion should be safe, legal and rare - to quote a cliche.

I dunno where I've been, but I hadn't heard the term 'Anti - Choice', but I think I like it better than the usual terms used.

Mighta been Kos... Not sure...

an effort to have placed permenantly for their cause--because of all the logical reasons that you named. It's damaging to the pro-choice movement to have the label of anti-life, because the other side chooses to call themselves pro-life.

It's more honest to say anti-choice. Because we aren't anti-life, and the suggestion that pro-choicers are anti-life is misleading, and again dishonest. :hi:

If you visit pro-choice websites, you will find this is the terminology they use.

that is exactly what they are. My own is "anti-choice, pro-forced birth woman-haters"

pro-life . . . and pro-choice, whereas anti-choicers tend to be pro-death when it comes to the death penalty and war. anti-choicers should never be called pro-life. this is just another example of the rw control of the language.

ellen fl

should be no talk of penalties or legalities. By not having funerals, the religions and states prove that a fetus is not a person.

something that even a cursory google search would have told you.

maybe I haven't been paying attention.

Don't recall where, and can't search, but I know I've seen it more than epsilon-ishly often.

Don't know how many are still around, to be honest. But there are more than I even knew of.

I went rounds with one that refused to deem their option as anti-choice, insisting that DU'ers that support choice be known as anti-life. It got ugly. Thankfully, many more pro-choicers showed up and squashed the argument. :hi:

You're fortunate you've missed their presence. It's not always pleasant...

I have young onset parkinsons disease. Stem Cell Research is the best hope I have at a normal life. Why should i suffer or be jailled for your religious beliefs?

if such a law stands?....the woman just dies...or gets butchered. I'm not well-versed enough in the history, to recall any doctor being imprisoned. Maybe loss of their license?...

conspirator to murder or some other laww-breaking...

But that's partly what I was hoping to get clarification on from the anti-choicers with us.

anything in terms of prosecution. I came of age in the early 70's, and abortions were legal. It was something I never even questioned...the law. I didn't have a clue that there were all these freaks until the late 90's, when I saw a panel on C-Span. I wonder what happens when women need a D&C...do they have to prove their not pregnant?

... But Ohio is trying to one-up South Dakota (you HAVE heard of what's going on in SD, right?) by making it a felony for a woman to cross state lines for the purpose of having an abortion. The woman would be punished with an unspecified amount of jail time. Presumably, this works out to forcing the woman to remain pregant by imprisoning her.

I just wanna know what penalties anti-choice DUers think a woman who conspires to "murder her baby" should get. I'd rather not guess and put words in their mouths. I'd rather hear it straight from them so I don't get it wrong.

require that all Ohio women who leave the state have a pregnancy test at the state line before leaving and returning?

you see I personally don't like the idea of abortions but pregnancy happens and I wouldn't want some gray haired old man on capitol hill decide for me whether I could have one or not. It is a personal choice and it is medical.

I am now too old to conceive but I would have had a hard time choosing abortion. However, I have been happily married for nearly 31 years, so I had a husband and a family to support me if I had an unintended pregnancy. I also had great parents who would have helped me and supported me had I gotten pregnant as a teen or before I was married. And I have never been raped or faced the dilemna of a pregnancy being dangerous to my health.

So while I never considered abortion, I realize every woman has different circumstances. For some, abortion is the best alternative. I do know 2 women who were told they would die if they carried their babies to full term.

So I am strongly pro choice.

...a while back (on a different board). You can acknowledge a woman's right to make her own choice while not ever having an Abortion yourself (if faced with a difficult decision). And that is how I think it should be....Someone thinks abortion is wrong - fine but don't take the choice away from all women because of personal beliefs.

Think abortion is wrong - don't have one
Think stem cell reseacrh is wrong - don't use it, even if faced with a difficult disease.

This might be a simplistic approach, but I'm sick and tired of people trying to push their personal beliefs on other people.
Until the Pro - Lifers give a damn about children AFTER they're born - I find their agendas somewhat hypocritical anyhow....

Having said that, however, I believe abortion to be the equivalent of the nuclear option.

I have a gnawing suspicion that abortion is all to often used as an escape from responsibilities of an earlier choice.

n/t

I've heard republicans get asked this, but I've never heard a Dem response....

(1) Should abortion be illegal?

No.

(2) What should be the penalty for the mother if you said yes to (1)? 10 years in prison? 20? What?

I didn't say yes to (1), hence, no penalty.

and does your gnawing suspicion translate into jail time? And, if the woman is punished surely the man should have his dick cut off...No?

No jail time. Not illegal.

Responsibility to engage or not engage in an act that has consequences.

Man and woman. Takes 2 to tango.

I don't believe abortion should be a solution of convenience.

I'm an orphan...and have a distinctively personal passion for this issue. Life is full of unintended consequences. If your purpose in life is to restrict the choices of other human beings, or sit in judgement of their choices, I believe you are the problem.

WHY are you spewing the reichwing BS about abortion? it isn't something a woman chooses lightly, and anybody who says so is lying through their teeth.

by the way, be good enough to provide RELIABLE, LEGITIMATE statistics on these abortions of convenience" and non responsible choices.

thank you in advance.

But as abhorrent and arrogant as I find his views, as long as he doesn't want them legislated, I feel that it's a free country - he can think want he wants.

I sorta had respect for your raising this issue in a fairly intelligent way.

However....

You don't know me and you have no idea as to my views (except that I used a term like "responsibility">)

But then you drag up imagery of "welfare queens" with a bit of simplistic sarcasm. You're just as bad a knee-jerk reactionary as that niyad person.

of women, I have no problem with the abominable beliefs you expressed. Live and let live, I always say.

Can you name for me those "abominable beliefs" I purportedly expressed?

You asked if we believed that abortion should be illegal.

I answered no.

You asked what penalty should someone who got an abortion get.

I answered none.

I alluded to some anecdotal experiences in my life and you and your buddy riyad went off on me.

And I think the key word was "responsibility".

Again, I ask you -- name the "abominable beliefs".

"I don't believe abortion should be a solution of convenience."

I have been responsible for several pregnancies. The woman's choice, in each case, was to have an abortion. At that time, none of these women told me that it was a difficult decision for them. And, it certainly wasn't a difficult for me (i.e., I didn't try to persuade them otherwise.)

Before we were married, my wife had had an abortion (before I knew her.) She did not say that it was a difficult decision for her.

These are the facts.

What could each of these women have gained by carrying to full term?

I do know that several of these women did not want to be single mothers. I'm not sure if they had considered adoption. I also know that all of them would have been inconvenienced (as to their life style) by carrying to full term.

It was certainly convenient for me, as I did not have to make any decisions.

I personally regret those instances where marriage or pair-bonding was not discussed. As I have gained in some wisdom over the years, I would have married the first woman (or at least agreed to share all the burdens I could with her, regardless of how it impacted my life and my career.

These arer the reflections.

Three years ago, my eldest daughter got drunk at a party and had a brief fling with the college star basketball player. They hardly knew each other. He is African-American and she is not. She is, however severely bipolar. She never considered abortion as an option. He never considered abortion as an option. He lost a valuable scholarship for it, and she left school. After the baby was born, my daughter (having been in out of treatment centers for her bipolar disorder) shares custody with the father, though they don't particularly care for each other.

There is no one in this world who would wish that beautiful girl had not been born. Not her father, not her mother, and not her extended family (it takes a village to raise a child).

The parents both rose to the responsibility of their irresponsible actions, regardless of any inconvenience to their life plans.

If that is abhorrent, then so be it.

"I do know that several of these women did not want to be single mothers. I'm not sure if they had considered adoption. I also know that all of them would have been inconvenienced (as to their life style) by carrying to full term."

So, what is your point? It sounds to me like they didn't want to be burdened by a mistake for the rest of their lives, and they made the decision that was right for them, and you now have a problem with it.. Do I have it right?

the previous poster when I responded to your post.

I don't want to discuss this with you until I find out what is "abhorrent" in my experiences and reflections.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I am pro life

only in that I am against the death penalty, I'm not pro abortion (nor do I think anyone is)
I don't believe abortion should be made illegal

so I can't answer number 2

terms Pro-Life/Pro-choice/Anti-choice etc. are all subjective and self-selecting.

They are innseparable from one's opinions on the substantive issue.

"The terms Pro-Life/Pro-choice/Anti-choice etc. are all subjective and self-selecting."

"Pro-Choice" means respect for the rights, upheld by the Supreme Court, of women to privacy in obtaining reproductive health care.

"Anti-Choice" means self-styled "pro-lifers" who would deny women that fundamental privacy and their rights to reproductive health care.

"They are innseparable from one's opinions on the substantive issue."

People's personal opinions of what they would do in their own life are separate-- or should be-- from their personal need to inflict those opinions on the lives and Constitutional rights of others.

:patriot:

greatest respect, you have just proven my point.

You think that:

"Pro-Choice" means respect for the rights, upheld by the Supreme Court, of women to privacy in obtaining reproductive health care."

No problem.

But that is an entirely subjective view of what the phrase "pro-choice" means. To another person "pro-choice" = "pro murder".

Furthermore, it is self-selecting in that you choose to give your own meaning to the phrase.

It's not really a big issue, just semantics.

It's so simple, yet so hard for many to grasp (with DU respect).

The statemtent: means RESPECT for the RIGHTS of women to PRIVACY

"Pro-Choice" means respect for the rights, upheld by the Supreme Court, of women to privacy in obtaining reproductive health care."

You say:

"No problem."

There IS a problem when people cannot comprehend that their own personal opinions do not supercede those fundamental rights. And only because this is about women's bodies, do busybodies and church "fathers" believe they have the right to impose their own "opinion" on another human being-- in fact, an entire gender.

"But that is an entirely subjective view of what the phrase "pro-choice" means. To another person "pro-choice" = "pro murder"."

That's fine if they want to think that and keep it to themselves. And RESPECT the RIGHTS of women to PRIVACY

"Furthermore, it is self-selecting in that you choose to give your own meaning to the phrase."

No-- that's what it means. "Pro-Choice" means supporting the rights of women to make private medical decicions, privately.






The terms Pro-Life/Pro-choice/Anti-choice etc. are all subjective and self-selecting.
They are innseparable from one's opinions on the substantive issue.

How can somebody be opposed to abortion as a medical option for women, yet say that it should be legal?

Certainly, I cannot imagine that many such people are on this site, especially since polls suggest they are a minority in the country in general.