Poll: Abortion legality belief spectrum

[NM11046]

I'd like to add:

• Teaching young men responsibility
  
• Empowering young men
  
• Education for young men
  
• Supporting young men who find themselves about to be a father
  
• Increasing access to families for healthcare & family PLANNING
  
• Promoting open discussions on adoption and other options for pregnancy - joint decision making
  
• Education on budgeting and needs assessment for parenting, together or solo for both mom and dad
  

I know that you likely feel this way too BRB, but I had to make the point.  Along with the stigma of the actual decision to terminate a pregnancy, put a child up for adoption or raise it is the stigma of all the education and correctional efforts needing to be on behalf of and focused on the woman.  

 

[TGHusker]

I am completely against greatly politicizing the issue.  For me, the issue lies in that we need to be doing what is necessary to greatly reduce the NEED for abortions.  This is in:

Education

Birth control

Empowering young women

Supporting women who find themselves pregnant

Increasing (not decreasing) access for women to healthcare

Promoting adoption as a major option and stop stigmatizing a woman who gets pregnant and gives the child up for adoption

Supporting young moms who find themselves raising children by themselves because of dead beat dads

Finding more ways that force dead beat dads to support the children they help produce

....etc.

If we would all concentrate on those issues, the need to debate legality of abortion is GREATLY reduce

I'd like to add:

• Teaching young men responsibility
  
• Empowering young men
  
• Education for young men
  
• Supporting young men who find themselves about to be a father
  
• Increasing access to families for healthcare & family PLANNING
  
• Promoting open discussions on adoption and other options for pregnancy - joint decision making
  
• Education on budgeting and needs assessment for parenting, together or solo for both mom and dad
  

I agree with both of these.  Also adding supporting crisis pregnancy centers that do help the mother to carry the baby to term and find adopting parents if needed.   I'm not a woman and would hate to be placed in that decision point.  

Another issue I want to bring up is that the Republican party has 'plantationed' this discussion among the Christian right.   It has been the topic to keep conservative Christians on the plantation.  Of course this is true somewhat  on the other side.  Pro-life Dems are a rare breed as is a Pro-choice Republican.  This topic should not be the political hot potato that it is - which is the reason so much isn't resolved about it.  It is kept alive as a 'red meat' issue and it has kept good meaning people on both sides from working together.

I come from the strongly pro-life side. I didn't like some of  the choices above because they come without substantiated meaning - Define 'health of the mother' or social /economic reasons or fetal impairment.  If it is codified into law with those restrictions, it would have to get fairly specific. 

Overall I probably lean to a reserved # 5 and BRB probably expressed my views the best.  I'm also concerned wt devaluing life.   A child in the womb is still life - not just 'potential life"  with a beating heart, etc.  It is still the 'other person' in the equation.   I can understand allowing the issues noted in # 5 with clear cut guidelines.  Children with 'Downs Syndrome' can be a great blessing - is that a fetal impairment??  Those are some of the hard issues one has to consider.  Part of life is protecting the weakest and most vulnerable among us.   I find the Economic/Social idea pretty hard to swallow - I think it cheapens life.  Most of us wouldn't be on this forum if our parents had to consider their financial accounts or social status before we were born. 

In the end, I wish this was a cut and dry issue, not political.  In reality, it comes down to the woman, the man if he remains involved, & doctor.  Counselors (religious or non-religious counselor) may give guidance but ultimately it comes down to the woman and the man and not the politicians.   

 

[Fru]

I agree with both of these.  Also adding supporting crisis pregnancy centers that do help the mother to carry the baby to term and find adopting parents if needed.   I'm not a woman and would hate to be placed in that decision point.  

Another issue I want to bring up is that the Republican party has 'plantationed' this discussion among the Christian right.   It has been the topic to keep conservative Christians on the plantation.  Of course this is true somewhat  on the other side.  Pro-life Dems are a rare breed as is a Pro-choice Republican.  This topic should not be the political hot potato that it is - which is the reason so much isn't resolved about it.  It is kept alive as a 'red meat' issue and it has kept good meaning people on both sides from working together.

I come from the strongly pro-life side. I didn't like some of  the choices above because they come without substantiated meaning - Define 'health of the mother' or social /economic reasons or fetal impairment.  If it is codified into law with those restrictions, it would have to get fairly specific. 

Overall I probably lean to a reserved # 5 and BRB probably expressed my views the best.  I'm also concerned wt devaluing life.   A child in the womb is still life - not just 'potential life"  with a beating heart, etc.  It is still the 'other person' in the equation.   I can understand allowing the issues noted in # 5 with clear cut guidelines.  Children with 'Downs Syndrome' can be a great blessing - is that a fetal impairment??  Those are some of the hard issues one has to consider.  Part of life is protecting the weakest and most vulnerable among us.   I find the Economic/Social idea pretty hard to swallow - I think it cheapens life.  Most of us wouldn't be on this forum if our parents had to consider their financial accounts or social status before we were born. 

In the end, I wish this was a cut and dry issue, not political.  In reality, it comes down to the woman, the man if he remains involved, & doctor.  Counselors (religious or non-religious counselor) may give guidance but ultimately it comes down to the woman and the man and not the politicians.   

To the bolded parts, (this may come off as dickish, but I am genuinely asking) do you have concerns about devaluing or cheapening life in other areas of our political world as well, and do you take that into account when voting? Or are you only concerned about cheapening life when it comes to abortion?

The reason I ask is that it seems the "Pro Life" crowd only cares about "life" when it's in the womb. We've had a dozen or so school shootings this year and our illustrious leader is yet to comment on any of them. Doesn't that sound like devaluing life?

There's lots of things that cheapen and devalue life. Why does abortion concern you? 

 

[BigRedBuster]

To the bolded parts, (this may come off as dickish, but I am genuinely asking) do you have concerns about devaluing or cheapening life in other areas of our political world as well, and do you take that into account when voting? Or are you only concerned about cheapening life when it comes to abortion?

The reason I ask is that it seems the "Pro Life" crowd only cares about "life" when it's in the womb. We've had a dozen or so school shootings this year and our illustrious leader is yet to comment on any of them. Doesn't that sound like devaluing life?

There's lots of things that cheapen and devalue life. Why does abortion concern you? 

I think I can easily say ( and TG would agree) life should be valued no matter if in the womb or out.  This is a good reason why both of us are conservative....but not Republican.

Many of the views Republicans have contradict each other.

 

[TGHusker]

To the bolded parts, (this may come off as dickish, but I am genuinely asking) do you have concerns about devaluing or cheapening life in other areas of our political world as well, and do you take that into account when voting? Or are you only concerned about cheapening life when it comes to abortion?

The reason I ask is that it seems the "Pro Life" crowd only cares about "life" when it's in the womb. We've had a dozen or so school shootings this year and our illustrious leader is yet to comment on any of them. Doesn't that sound like devaluing life?

There's lots of things that cheapen and devalue life. Why does abortion concern you? 

I have no problem answering that.  First it is wrong to assume as too many do that Pro-life in regards to abortion means that is all prolifers are (that we only care about abortion).  We are just as likely to be volunteering in a soup kitchen, giving financial counseling, help in a homeless shelter as we are in standing for the life issues of the unborn.  I've done all of those things and more - because I believe in life period.  To be pro-life should mean and it does mean to me - at all stages of life - womb, childhood development, adult, and end of life issue (elderly people should be treated with respect and not treated as cattle in some retirement home as some are).  The reason I said the Economic/Social issue concerns me in the abortion issue isn't because I don't care of the economic disadvantaged, it is because I think that is a poor reason to make a decision about a viable life - the baby in the womb. The economic issues can be addressed by many means but you cannot 'unring the bell' as Paul Harvey use to say. Once the baby is aborted it is final.  But I understand the basis of your question so therefore I don't think you are coming off dickish.  Too often our prolife ticket has been stamped by the republican party that has been lacking in all of the other 'pro life' issues that Dems are typically strong on.  So the basic view is that Prolife = Republican = Zero Compassion for other life issues.   This is why I wish this wasn't such a political issue.  I really do believe the Dems could capture most of the prolife vote if they had a more open tent and were not so solidly  pro-choice.  Can a person be a pro-life liberal? - I believe they can be and perhaps should be  but the Dem party isn't opening up to them.   Even now more than ever, wt the repugnant Trump in the WH, Pro-lifers with a moral conscious could flock to the Dem party if the party was open to them.   I think it would be very easy to be pro-life and liberal on most other social areas and conservative from an economic policy area. 

 

[Landlord]

I believe late term abortions are disgustingly reprehensible and I think (correct me if I'm wrong) there has been bipartisan support in either making them illegal or limiting greatly their use.  I do support that.

I do too. I think a good starting point would be (except in cases of the mother's and/or babies' health or life) that you can't have an abortion past the point of the earliest pre-term baby that has survived. 

The good news is, even though that (late-term abortions past the point that babies have survived outside the woom) is a legal option in most states, only 1.5% of abortions occur after 21 weeks. 

 

[hskerholic]

I picked other. As a male it’s not  my Body so not my choice. But if the Mother wants to put the child up for adoption the Father should be given the right to Adopt if he wants to keep it. 

 

[Kiyoat Husker]

Pro-life Dems are a rare breed as is a Pro-choice Republican.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/07/on-abortion-persistent-divides-between-and-within-the-two-parties-2/

Actually there is more diversity than you may think, despite the party's best efforts.  Here is a Pew Research Poll from July of this year that shows 54% of moderate Republicans believe abortions should be legal in all/most cases.  Even 27% of self-identifying "conservative" Republicans believe that.

61% of moderate Democrats and 91% of liberal Democrats also believe in legal abortions.  So there is more diversity within the party on this issue than between moderates of both parties.  Sounds pretty diverse to me. 

Maybe the rhetoric is failing to polarize the average American, mainly riling up those that are more passionate about it?

 

[Mierin]

I'm a pro-life Independent who disagrees with the GOP almost all of the time.

However I'm a 4.5 on that scale. There is no way in hell someone should be able to tell me I can't have an abortion if I'm raped. I had no choice in the matter, and some pretty s#!tty things can happen to the mothers of these children. For instance being forced to let the rapist have visitation with the child. That doesn't mean I would have an abortion, but it should be 100% up to me.

I also don't think men should be making decisions on abortion. Any decisions on abortion should be made by committees that have at least 50% women.

(I'm guessing most pro-life Christians would say I'm not pro-life based on the above).

 

[Big Red 40]

The sticking point with many Christians is the whole idea that life begins at conception,  and eliminating it, from that point on is murder . Thus the government intervention . 

I don’t believe that though I think prevention /education etc needs more attention so less bad situations arise . A set point also needs to be established (there already is?) where the fetus could be removed , and live unassisted . Anything after that is illegal, and anything before is between the woman , the doctor , and God .

 

[Mierin]

The sticking point with many Christians is the whole idea that life begins at conception,  and eliminating it, from that point on is murder . Thus the government intervention . 

I don’t believe that though I think prevention /education etc needs more attention so less bad situations arise . A set point also needs to be established (there already is?) where the fetus could be removed , and live unassisted . Anything after that is illegal anything before is between the woman , the doctor , and God .

Yep. People arguing with Christians need to realize they think it's murder - so saying things like "it's a woman's body" just rolls off them. To them the woman is deciding for 2 people.

Anyhow, the thing that will never make any sense to me is Christians who are vehemently anti-abortion but are also anti sex education/condoms, and are okay with lowering/eliminating funding to things like CHIP

 

[JJ Husker]

Ha, I think every off season there is a new abortion megathread. Good way to occupy some time.

 

[RedDenver]

I voted other. I believe that both beginning of life and end of life can be decided based on brain activity. Before the fetus develops brain activity, it's just a bunch of cells like any other cells in the human body, and I have just as much concern of removing it as I do an appendix. The "life" argument holds no weight with me because we can't exist without killing something (plant or animal), so we're really talking about "human life"; that's how I get to brain activity - minimum requirement to be human. The "choice" argument holds very little weight with me. You aren't legally allowed to choice to not care for for kids, so I don't see how that changes anything about being born or not.

However, I'd be more open to anti-abortion arguments and compromise if they also came with the same degree of concern for the already born people in society, especially children. Until all the kids in America are fed, clothed, sheltered, and educated, I really don't care at all about trying to "save" them before their even born since we can't "save" the ones already here.

 

[JJ Husker]

I don't believe in abortion morally, but its not the laws job to dictate the morals of America to that extent. It should be a personal decision, not something the government should have a say in. 

Ditto to Neb.  My body my decision.   

I agree 100% with Nebfanatic but I can't stand the "my body my choice" argument or approach. Your body had the choice to prevent that pregnancy so substituting murder for responsible behavior is not a good argument IMO.

Morally I am opposed to abortion but I just can't see where it does any good to make it illegal. If a person wants to terminate their pregnancy they will find a way to do it. It might as well be done in a clean and safe medical environment. My preference would be to take all of this outlawing abortion effort and put it into education, contraceptives, help for unwed mother's etc. But I will always feel that abortion is murder because it is killing a life. I see no clarifying difference between that life being in the womb or not. However, I do feel there should be some point in the development of the embryo that it does become illegal. I just don't have a good argument to make as to when that is because I do believe life starts at contraception but there should be some cutoff point. And then of course I would always allow it in cases of rape, incest, mother's health in danger. I don't believe we can legislate morality but we certainly can and should set a time development limit.

 

[NM11046]

I agree 100% with Nebfanatic but I can't stand the "my body my choice" argument or approach. Your body had the choice to prevent that pregnancy so substituting murder for responsible behavior is not a good argument IMO.

Morally I am opposed to abortion but I just can't see where it does any good to make it illegal. If a person wants to terminate their pregnancy they will find a way to do it. It might as well be done in a clean and safe medical environment. My preference would be to take all of this outlawing abortion effort and put it into education, contraceptives, help for unwed mother's etc. But I will always feel that abortion is murder because it is killing a life. I see no clarifying difference between that life being in the womb or not. However, I do feel there should be some point in the development of the embryo that it does become illegal. I just don't have a good argument to make as to when that is because I do believe life starts at contraception but there should be some cutoff point. And then of course I would always allow it in cases of rape, incest, mother's health in danger. I don't believe we can legislate morality but we certainly can and should set a time development limit.

Easy for you, as a man to say.  You will never become pregnant due to rape or incest.  You will never know what it's like to have your life at risk if you birth a child. You will never know what its like to be alone, and responsible for raising a child.  You will never be in a situation where you have to think through the risk of

bringing a genetically unhealthy child to term. 

I appreciate that you dont agree with my thoughts on terminating a pregnacy -  but your attempt at saying that all situations where an abortion is considered are methods of birth control or are a fix for “irresponsible behavior” is just ignorant.