would anyone be against this abortion concept/law ?

[Buster T]

lets take a show of hands, for a pretend law that would ban abortions EXCEPT for medical reasons of the baby or mother andfor rape or incest pregnancies. Those abortions other than the above would not be allowed, and in conjunction with this pretend law, the govt starts a program for Americans to MUCH more easily adopt babies/newborns/children



Would anyone here be against the above ?

[Red Lion]

I could likely support something of the sort.

[badshotbob]

I may have missed a thread or two due to being too busy (work, arghh), but yes, I would be against the said faux law.

[Buster T]

badshotbob why ?

[badshotbob]

Why? Simple. Abortion in any capacity is murder in my book.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted by Admins]

[Red Lion]

ORIGINAL: cma3366a

Here's one vote against the law. I don't think that the government should be in the buisness of regulating ethics or morality.

I think that the process and act is disgusting, and in some cases immoral, But I don't think that it is my place, or the governments, to be projecting my beliefs and morals onto other people, with a different set of Ideals.

A country governed by moral and religious ideology can quickly become a dangerous place. I think the two should remain separate, (and, no, I don't need a history lesson about how many of this country's founders were religious)

So you are just pro-choice then?

[david m]

i wouldn't want it.

i'm pro-choice.

[Buster T]

badshotbob you do understand that passing such a law, would result in saving the lives of probably 900,000 + babies a year, right ?

You'd be AGAINST that ?

cma3366a law/Supreme Court ruling - your choice. Basically a faux repeal of Roe vs Wade replaced with a compromise between all abortions or no abortions - why wouldn't it work ?

BTW I believe if such a law WAS passed, those babies being killed for the excepetions would be terrible, but knowing 900,000 + babies WOULDN"T die would make it a bit easier.

Eye