Pro Life Obama

[MTBMaven]

I'm sure this will cause an up rising but that is not my intention. I merely want to expand people's considerations and not cause a heated debate on pro life versus freedom of choice. Life is rarely black and white; we need to be pragmatic about these things and leave our emotions aside.

http://www.prolifeproobama.com/

[ChariotsOfTires]

Just curious if Infanticide counts as pro-life?
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...fanticide.html

I am posting cause I think people needs to be informed.

[chupacabra]

Originally Posted by MTBMaven

I'm sure this will cause an up rising but that is not my intention. I merely want to expand people's considerations and not cause a heated debate on pro life versus freedom of choice. Life is rarely black and white; we need to be pragmatic about these things and leave our emotions aside.

http://www.prolifeproobama.com/

Looking at the issue from the other direction. I hadn't heard this argument before, but I think its got some real merit.

[mottmcfly]

Man this is such a slippery slope for me. While I am a firm supporter of pro choice, I cannot help but agree that any baby that exits the womb with vital signs deserves the same treatment as anyone that enters an emergency room does. As a human being I don't think I will ever be OK with any decision. What I do know is that this is not a matter for government (republican or democrat) to decide. They can't even get a budget right, how can they possibly be expected to make a meaningful decision in something like this?

[dirtyjeff]

Originally Posted by mottmcfly

Man this is such a slippery slope for me. While I am a firm supporter of pro choice, I cannot help but agree that any baby that exits the womb with vital signs deserves the same treatment as anyone that enters an emergency room does. As a human being I don't think I will ever be OK with any decision. What I do know is that this is not a matter for government (republican or democrat) to decide. They can't even get a budget right, how can they possibly be expected to make a meaningful decision in something like this?

Although I didn't watch the videos, as I think ALL politicians are F.O.S., I agree. I think everyone deserves the right to life,from the time of conception on, but as a male, I have never been raped, my uncle didn't molest me at 13, and I didnt get "knocked up" when I was still a kid. All circumstances I think I might consider abortion as the last alternative. Sometimes adoption will work or maybe the family can help raise the child, but sometimes adding another human to this complicated mess we all call life can be detrimental to all involved and make a situation worse. Just my $.02 , I am sorry if i offend anyone, it's just my opinion

[dirtvert]

i don't need to watch the video. maybe we could just teach our kids--starting at home--a little sex education to prevent the need for abortions. nobody wants to have to get an abortion, but, like prohibition, making it illegal won't stop it from happening, it will just make it unsafe for the mothers and get more babies dropped in dumpsters.

[wgb]

I do not support abortion for I believe that life starts when the sperm penetrates the egg, or as they say.....conception.

Granted, I understand that in extreme cases, such as; rape, life/death (baby &/or mother), molestation of a minor, that it should be an option. BUT, those are the only reasons in my book. What I view abortions as (outside of murder) is irresponsibility. Most abortions occur for selfish reason (the woman doesn't want the baby, can't afford the baby, etc), when if both she and the father had taken the responsibility of using some form of birth control then they would probably not be in that situation. One of the dumbest excuses that I have heard for not using some form of birth control, "...it feels better without the condom.", or "...it was in the heat of the moment.", and "...I didn't want my parents to find out that I was having sex, so I didn't go to them about getting on the pill" I grew up in the south and was told "...if you grown enough to lay down and do the do, then be man enough to take care of what comes out 9 months later."

Now I know that this may offend some folks, but oh well. However I understand that the choice to have an aborotion is available and as Maven's first post suggested, the best way to curb is to step up sex education so that these young people understand it.

Oh, another thought. I know that its the woman that has to carry the child, but I think that its BS that she can make the decision to terminate the pregnancy without any consent from the father. I have known several guys who were in committed relationships who had this to happen to them. These guys were devastated, because they never were offered to opportunity to take the child in. Just because the mother doesn't want the child, doesn't mean that the father won't take and raised the child.

[bigpete61]

Originally Posted by wgb

I do not support abortion for I believe that life starts when the sperm penetrates the egg, or as they say.....conception.

Granted, I understand that in extreme cases, such as; rape, life/death (baby &/or mother), molestation of a minor, that it should be an option. BUT, those are the only reasons in my book. What I view abortions as (outside of murder) is irresponsibility. Most abortions occur for selfish reason (the woman doesn't want the baby, can't afford the baby, etc), when if both she and the father had taken the responsibility of using some form of birth control then they would probably not be in that situation. One of the dumbest excuses that I have heard for not using some form of birth control, "...it feels better without the condom.", or "...it was in the heat of the moment.", and "...I didn't want my parents to find out that I was having sex, so I didn't go to them about getting on the pill" I grew up in the south and was told "...if you grown enough to lay down and do the do, then be man enough to take care of what comes out 9 months later."

Now I know that this may offend some folks, but oh well. However I understand that the choice to have an aborotion is available and as Maven's first post suggested, the best way to curb is to step up sex education so that these young people understand it.

Oh, another thought. I know that its the woman that has to carry the child, but I think that its BS that she can make the decision to terminate the pregnancy without any consent from the father. I have known several guys who were in committed relationships who had this to happen to them. These guys were devastated, because they never were offered to opportunity to take the child in. Just because the mother doesn't want the child, doesn't mean that the father won't take and raised the child.

+1 on the thoughts above

[Chewyeti]

or people could be responsible.....

its your risk and responsibility. Have sex ---> if you get pregnant---> live with it. If you arent ready for a kid..... then use protection and be ready for the slight chance you could crank out a little dude.....

abortion = shedding your responsibilities...... (kind of like getting bailed out.... HMMMMMM)

[Nagaredama]

Can Bush and McCain be considered Pro-Life?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/op...condoms&st=cse

October 9, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Can This Be Pro-Life?

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
The Bush administration this month is quietly cutting off birth control supplies to some of the world’s poorest women in Africa.
Thus the paradox of a “pro-life” administration adopting a policy whose result will be tens of thousands of additional abortions each year — along with more women dying in childbirth.
The saga also spotlights a clear difference between Barack Obama and John McCain. Senator Obama supports U.N.-led efforts to promote family planning; Senator McCain stands with President Bush in opposing certain crucial efforts to help women reduce unwanted pregnancies in Africa and Asia.
There is something about reproductive health — maybe the sex part — that makes some Americans froth and go crazy. We see it in the opposition to condoms to curb AIDS in Africa and in the insistence on abstinence-only sex education in American classrooms (one reason American teenage pregnancy rates are more than double those in Canada). And we see it in the decision of some towns — like Wasilla, Alaska, when Sarah Palin was mayor there — to bill rape victims for the kits used to gather evidence of sex crimes. In most places, police departments pay for rape kits, which cost hundreds of dollars, but while Ms. Palin was mayor of Wasilla, the town decided to save money by billing rape victims.
The latest bout of reproductive-health madness came in the last couple of weeks when the U.S. Agency for International Development ordered six African countries to ensure that no U.S.-financed condoms, birth control pills, I.U.D.’s or other contraceptives are furnished to Marie Stopes International, a British-based aid group that operates clinics in poor countries.
The Bush administration says it took this action because Marie Stopes International works with the U.N. Population Fund in China. President Bush has cut all financing for the population fund on the — false — basis that it supports China’s family-planning program.
It’s true that China’s one-child policy sometimes includes forced abortion, and when traveling in rural China, I still come across peasants whose homes have been knocked down as punishment for an unauthorized child. But the U.N. fund has been the most powerful force in moderating China’s policy, and a State Department team itself found no evidence of any U.N. involvement in the coercion.
Mr. Bush’s defunding of the U.N. Population Fund — backed by Senator McCain — has persisted since 2002. What is new is the extension of that policy to a leading private family-planning organization like Marie Stopes International.
“The irony and hypocrisy of it is that this is a bone to the self-described ‘pro-life’ movement, but it will result in deaths to women who just want to space their births,” said Dana Hovig, the chief executive of Marie Stopes International. The organization estimates that the result will be at least 157,000 additional unwanted pregnancies per year, leading to 62,000 additional abortions and 660 women dying in childbirth.
That may overstate the impact. Kent Hill, an official of the U.S. aid agency, insists that there will be no increase in pregnancies because the American contraceptives will simply be routed to other aid groups in Africa.
That will work to some degree in big cities. But it’s a fantasy in rural Africa. Over the years, I’ve dropped in on a half-dozen Marie Stopes clinics, and in rural areas there’s typically nothing else for many miles around. Women in the villages simply have no other source of family planning.
“This nearsighted maneuver will have direct and dire consequences,” a group of prominent public health experts in America declared in an open letter, adding that the action “will translate almost immediately into increased maternal death and disability.”
Proponents of the cut-off are not misogynists. They are honestly outraged by forced abortions in China. But why take it out on the most impoverished and voiceless people on earth? Mr. McCain seems to have supported Mr. Bush, mostly out of instinct, and when a reporter asked him this spring whether American aid should finance contraceptives to fight AIDS in Africa, he initially said, “I haven’t thought about it,” and later added, “You’ve stumped me.”
Retrograde decisions on reproductive health are reached in conference rooms in Washington, but I’ve seen how they play out in African villages. A young woman lies in a hut, bleeding to death or swollen by infection, as untrained midwives offer her water or herbs. Her husband and children wait anxiously outside the hut, their faces frozen and perspiring as her groans weaken.
When she dies, her body is bundled in an old blanket and buried in a shallow hole, with brush piled on top to keep wild animals away. Her children sob and shriek and in the ensuing months they often endure neglect and are far more likely to die of hunger or disease.
In some parts of Africa, a woman now has a 1-in-10 risk of dying in childbirth. The idea that U.S. policy may increase that toll is infuriating.
I invite you to visit my blog, www.nytimes.com/ontheground, and join me on Facebook at www.facebook.com/kristof.

[wgb]

not that its funny or anything, but one the guys that I new in college was in a pretty long term relationship with his HS sweetheart. Well she got pregnant and had an abortion and didn't tell him for like several months. When she finally mentioned it to him, he became seriously pissed and broke up with her. She comes to me expecting sympathy and says that she doesn't know why he broke up with her. I was like WTF?

[dirtvert]

abortion=women having control over their bodies/lives. i think it's more of a problem when women (especially teens) get pregnant, and the boyfriend doesn't want a baby but he still gets stuck with 18 years of payments. it just creates a cycle of single moms--lack of education--poverty. repeat. that's the world i teach in.

[Elisheva]

As previously alluded to, too often we look primarily at the "woman's choice" and not the father's, nor his consent; especially when the parties are unmarried.

Personally, I have known 3 men who were DEVASTATED by the unknown abortion of their children. One is now 45 yrs. old, unmarried, and does not have a child. He still grieves over this loss and wonders if he'll ever be a father. He also has had to work through bitterness and resentment towards the ex-girlfriend that made the "choice."

As a woman, I am reminded that men, too, are affected by abortion just as much as women and should NEVER be left out of the equation unless, of course, pregnancy arises out of rape or incest.

[jeff^d]

Is it possible to separate political definitions of pro-life/pro-choice from religious, philosophical, emotional, etc, definitions? Just curious of others' opinions. FactCheck states that Obama's stated reasons for opposing pro-life legislation is to preserve abortion rights, or to preserve what the Supreme Court ruled with Roe v. Wade.

Personally I'm conflicted, and felt this way with Kerry. Can someone personally believe that abortion is killing, immoral, etc, while still believing that the government should not have the right to tell you whether or not you can do it?

It's a similar conflict to gay marriage, for example, can you believe that homosexuality is unnatural yet at the same time feel that it's not the Government's place to say who and who cannot marry.

Just thinkin' aloud.

[dirtyjeff]

Originally Posted by jeff^d

Is it possible to separate political definitions of pro-life/pro-choice from religious, philosophical, emotional, etc, definitions? Just curious of others' opinions. FactCheck states that Obama's stated reasons for opposing pro-life legislation is to preserve abortion rights, or to preserve what the Supreme Court ruled with Roe v. Wade.

Personally I'm conflicted, and felt this way with Kerry. Can someone personally believe that abortion is killing, immoral, etc, while still believing that the government should not have the right to tell you whether or not you can do it?

It's a similar conflict to gay marriage, for example, can you believe that homosexuality is unnatural yet at the same time feel that it's not the Government's place to say who and who cannot marry.

Just thinkin' aloud.

You said it brotha ! These should be personal decisions, not any business of the government. This isn't Russia , is it ?

[Winger]

Ugh.

Just Ugh.

This thread isn't going to end well...

[dirtvert]

it's really simple. believe what you want in your home or church. but let other people decide what is best for them and their families. a little empathy goes a long way.

[Impy]

A rather interesting article from 2006 - a tad bit dated although interesting esp as now we know who the pres candidates are....anyway, overturning roe v wade could lead to some pretty interesting political repe