Poll of the Day > Why are leftist so radical about abortion rights?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Especially about keeping Roe V Wade in place?

I'm prolife, but I do understand that there is a necessity in having access to abortion, which is why that if it were to remain legal, then women should have access to it until the fetus is capable of surviving outside of the womb(which is 5 months since conception). Yet there are some people who want abortions to be legal until at least 6 months of pregnancy, even though there have been instances of 6 month old fetuses being born early and surviving due to medical care.

---

They lack responsibility and some even think abortions are a status symbol like owning a pony or an NWC gold cart.
---

A person should have a choice to carry a child to term regardless of circumstance. It's their body.

---

Access to abortions lowers the poverty rate for one.

---

They draw the line at 99% survival rate rather than 20%.

Yes, I made those numbers up.

Why are righties so radical about restricting abortion rights completely? It's almost like they're different ideologies.

---

thedeerzord posted...

Especially about keeping Roe V Wade in place?

I'm prolife, but I do understand that there is a necessity in having access to abortion, which is why that if it were to remain legal, then women should have access to it until the fetus is capable of surviving outside of the womb(which is 5 months since conception). Yet there are some people who want abortions to be legal until at least 6 months of pregnancy, even though there have been instances of 6 month old fetuses being born early and surviving due to medical care.

I'm pro choice, and kinda anti-life - I'd allow abortions up to the the point where it would legitimately be safer to birth the kid and then euthanize it afterwards (hyperbole, just trying to set the threshold here)

and... I like that your statement is a little more nuanced than most prolifers.

I also don't understand how the rad left glorifies abortions themselves and not the power to choose, I mean - there's no shame in getting an abortion, but it's not a mark of pride either - it's an operation, you don't celebrate your Root Canal.

I also don't understand why Roe v. Wade is cited since that's the WRONG CASE! Roe v. Wade is for medical privacy and the subject matter was abortions. The actual case people should be debating is the Santoro case

---

IronBornCorps posted...

It's their body.

You can literally apply that logic to anything.

Don't wanna show up for jury duty, well I won't because its my body.

Wanna do drugs? I can because its my body.

Don't wanna feed your new born baby? You don't have to because its your body your choice.

IronBornCorps posted...

A person should have a choice to carry a child to term regardless of circumstance.

Even if it meant murdering a baby even though its well and capable of surviving outside of the womb weeks before the end of its term?

shadowsword87 posted...

Access to abortions lowers the poverty rate for one.

I understand that, which is why I think it should be OK to have an abortion up to 3 or 4 months since the fetuses conception. But 5 months or after is just straight up murder.

---

thedeerzord posted...

I understand that, which is why I think it should be OK to have an abortion up to 3 or 4 months since the fetuses conception. But 5 months or after is just straight up murder.

Are you even a woman? What about women who develop medical conditions or the fetus won't be viable after 4 months?

---

Which side has people that literally murder doctors and bomb abortion clinics

---

Mead posted...

Which side has people that literally murder doctors and bomb abortion clinics

The stupid side

---

Jen0125 posted...

Why are righties so radical about restricting abortion rights completely? It's almost like they're different ideologies.

Because in our view(or at least mine), aborting a baby is murder.

But again, I understand why people need to have access to an abortion. But it should be aloud no sooner than 3-4 months. Because fetuses can survive outside of the womb 5+ months after conception.

Jen0125 posted...

Are you even a woman?

No I am not.

Jen0125 posted...

What about women who develop medical conditions

While I disagree that women should be able to have an abortion in the case of medical conditions(only lethal ones however). I still cannot support abortions of 5+ month old fetuses. Because it is murder.

Jen0125 posted...

or the fetus won't be viable after 4 months?

Then abortion would be forbidden, because as I stated before. A fetus that is abortion 5+ months after conception is akin to murder.

---

So, you think women should be forced to die or give birth to dead babies?

That's wild.

---

Far-Queue posted...

The stupid side

I am not on that side(even though it is incredibly small), and I don't condone any form of murder or violence unless it in the case of the defense of others or in self-defense.

---

Jen0125 posted...

So, you think women should be forced to die or give birth to dead babies?

That's wild.

Die or give birth to dead babies?

If the baby is dead they can go ahead and get it removed.

No sense in keeping a still born baby inside your body.

EDIT: I just realize I misread your quote. My bad.

---

thedeerzord posted...

Don't wanna show up for jury duty, well I won't because its my body.

Jury duty is an obligation to which you agree by being a citizen. If you don't want to, you can always renounce your citizenship and leave. If you shirk it without doing so, then you're penalized not because you don't have a right to bodily autonomy, but because you failed to uphold your end of a contract.

thedeerzord posted...

Wanna do drugs? I can because its my body.

Sure, go for it. There's a fair amount of overlap between the pro-choice crowd and those in favour of decriminalizing drug use.

thedeerzord posted...

Don't wanna feed your new born baby? You don't have to because its your body your choice.

Except then you're killing another person. Harming other people is where bodily autonomy stops being respected.

---

thedeerzord posted...

Die or give birth to dead babies?

If the baby is dead they can go ahead and get it removed.

No sense in keeping a still born baby inside your body.

After a certain point you can't do that. That's why it's easier to have an abortion as soon as you find out it isn't viable. Otherwise you have to give birth to it. If you don't understand these concepts you shouldn't be so confidently shouting your opinion.

---

thedeerzord posted...

I am not on that side(even though it is incredibly small), and I don't condone any form of murder or violence unless it in the case of the defense of others or in self-defense.

nobody cares what stupid shit you think

if a woman wants to get an abortion then that is none of your damn business

---

Jen0125 posted...

After a certain point you can't do that. That's why it's easier to have an abortion as soon as you find out it isn't viable. Otherwise you have to give birth to it. If you don't understand these concepts you should be so confidently shouting your opinion.

As I said. I misread your quote.

adjl posted...

Except then you're killing another person.

That's exactly what having an abortion on a fetus that is 5+ months old is: The killing of another person.

---

thedeerzord posted...

As I said. I misread your quote.

I didn't see your edit. So what is your opinion? Should it be available for unviable fetuses and women at risk of dying during childbirth?

---

thedeerzord posted...

You can literally apply that logic to anything.

Don't wanna show up for jury duty, well I won't because its my body.

Wanna do drugs? I can because its my body.

Don't wanna feed your new born baby? You don't have to because its your body your choice.

Jury duty should be optional, where you can choose to opt out. There should be an incentive provided to doing it (twice minimum wage pay at the very least).

Drugs should be legal and taxed.

Feeding your baby is the outlier because you're looking after another person that can't look after themselves.

---

thedeerzord posted...

That's exactly what having an abortion on a fetus that is 5+ months old is: The killing of another person.

Which is why most people don't advocate for abortions of fully-viable fetuses (although personhood generally doesn't get applied until delivery). At that point, you can just induce labour and put the kid up for adoption, really. Late-term abortion requests aren't exactly common anyway. Most people know within a few weeks of learning that they're pregnant whether or not they want to keep the baby.

That said, when there's a time limit placed on abortions, it's not uncommon for local governments that want abortion to be illegal to introduce a bunch of red tape people have to wade through to get them such that women spend 3-4 months just doing that. In that way, those governments are making it practically illegal, so while "it shouldn't be legal after this reasonable point" sounds reasonable on paper (and generally is), it's often used as a means of making abortions unavailable without explicitly making them illegal. That's something to watch out for.

---

Jen0125 posted...

Should it be available for unviable fetuses

If by unviable you mean less than 5+ months old or considered to be dead, then yes.

Jen0125 posted...

women at risk of dying during childbirth?

I would understand why people would want to have an abortion is a scenario such as that. But I still cannot advocate for the murder of an innocent child.

Either way though, you can just do a preterm birth to save both the babies and the mothers life.

Mead posted...

nobody cares what stupid shit you think

A significant portion of the country and the world think otherwise.

Mead posted...

if a woman wants to get an abortion then that is none of your damn business

You can also apply that logic to anything.

If a police officer wants to murder an unarmed black man than that is none of your damn business.

If someone wants not believe in Climate Change and be against any Anti-Global Warming and Climate Change procedures and policies, then that is none of your damn business.

If someone decides to that he wants to get rid of the ACA for everyone, then that's none of your damn business.

All these issues above are my business, because the well being of everyone is very important to me, including unborn fetuses that are capable of being alive and well outside of a women's womb.

---

thedeerzord posted...

ther way though, you can just do a preterm birth to save both the babies and the mothers life.

It doesn't work that way lol

---

I'm not going to argue this point, been there too many times. I just want to throw out that this discussion is often framed as women's right, when it is in fact reproductive rights. Some men and others genders can get pregnant as well.

If you are able to become pregnant, then I feel your opinion should have more sway on this issue of being forced to carry a child to term.

---

thedeerzord posted...

Don't wanna show up for jury duty, well I won't because its my body.

you know this is stupid right

---

Jen0125 posted...

It doesn't work that way lol

Ok then.

But I still cannot advocate for the murder of an innocent life.

I understand that you might be upset that women might have to risk their life in order to fully carry a baby. But you are literally carrying a human life in your body.

The right thing for any person to do would be to carry that baby to full term, even if there life is at risk.

---

IronBornCorps posted...

A person should have a choice to carry a child to term regardless of circumstance. It's their body.

It's not their body though, it's the babys body

---

thedeerzord posted...

The right thing for any person to do would be to carry that baby to full term, even if there life is at risk.

the conservative and biblical stance is actually to abort the baby if the mothers life is at risk from the pregnancy, that's the only outlier though

---

Wanded posted...

the conservative and biblical stance is actually to abort the baby if the mothers life is at risk from the pregnancy, that's the only outlier though

Can you show me the verse?

---

thedeerzord posted...

Ok then.

But I still cannot advocate for the murder of an innocent life.

I understand that you might be upset that women might have to risk their life in order to fully carry a baby. But you are literally carrying a human life in your body.

The right thing for any person to do would be to carry that baby to full term, even if there life is at risk.

It's easy for you to say that as a man who never has to face this problem. It's cowardice.

---

IronBornCorps posted...

A person should have a choice to carry a child to term regardless of circumstance. It's their body.

It's not their body. It's another person's body growing inside of them.

thedeerzord posted...

All these issues above are my business, because the well being of everyone is very important to me, including unborn fetuses that are capable of being alive and well outside of a women's womb.

too bad, we win you lose

most people agree women should have access to a safe and legal abortion if they want one, so shut the fuck up and move on

---

Rightys attack women going into legitimate health facilities to tend to their reproductive help. Rights murder doctors and attack the facilities with guns and bombs

It's leftists who are radical?

Fuck off. Fuck right off hypocritical trash, no anti-abortionist is pro-life they only care about "life" until it's born then it immediately becomes a moocher.

Jen0125 posted...

It's easy for you to say that as a man who never has to face this problem. It's cowardice.

You're right. Going through pregnancy must unbelievably hard. But its still the right thing to do no matter how hard it might be. I must be on par with taking a bullet wound.

Tell me Jen, is there anyone in your life that you would take a bullet for? Your dog, your ex perhaps?

---

BlackScythe0 posted...

Rightys attack women going into legitimate health facilities to tend to their reproductive help. Rights murder doctors and attack the facilities with guns and bombs

It's leftists who are radical?

Fuck off. Fuck right off hypocritical trash, no anti-abortionist is pro-life they only care about "life" until it's born then it immediately becomes a moocher.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell

thedeerzord posted...

But its still the right thing to do no matter how hard it might be.

wouldnt the right thing to do be for you to adopt some kids from a group home that dont have any family? Why are you selfishly posting on potd instead of doing the right thing

---

thedeerzord posted...

You're right. Going through pregnancy must unbelievably hard. But its still the right thing to do no matter how hard it might be. I must be on par with taking a bullet wound.

Tell me Jen, is there anyone in your life that you would take a bullet for? Your dog, your ex perhaps?

No. I wouldn't take a bullet for anyone.

And there is no "right" thing to do. You don't get to choose what is right for other people.

And the fact you think losing your life is on par with a bullet wound is completely insane.

---

Jen0125 posted...

No. I wouldn't take a bullet for anyone.

Then that is mighty cowardly and selfish of you wouldn't you say? To preserve your life first and foremost before someone else?

Like holy shit Jen, I understand that your life might be hard right now, but there is no need to think that way. You can serve others before yourself, I promise you that your life will improve if you were to do so. I'll be praying for you Jennybear.

Jen0125 posted...

And there is no "right" thing to do. You don't get to choose what is right for other people.

Sorry, but due to my religious upbringing and the fact that I have spent a significant portion of my life reading, playing, and watching a bunch of hero protagonist's do the right thing numerous times. I can't help but do what I have been seeing as the right thing my entire life. I was born and raised this way, and I am proud of it.

Jen0125 posted...

And the fact you think losing your life is on par with a bullet wound is completely insane.

You're right, that statement was a bit over the top.

---

thedeerzord posted...

Then that is mighty cowardly and selfish of you wouldn't you say? To preserve your life first and foremost before someone else?

Human instinct is self preservation.

thedeerzord posted...

Sorry, but due to my religious upbringing and the fact that I have spent a significant portion of my life reading, playing, and watching a bunch of hero protagonist's do the right thing numerous times

Grow up.

---

The moan's choice comes when she chooses to open her legs. If it's rape or if the mother or baby are going to die, then it's fine to abort.

I think it's just wrong to kill a baby just because you were irresponsible. It's not just your body, it's an entirely separate life. If it has different DNA than you, it's not your body, therefore not your choice.

---

Jen0125 posted...

Human instinct is self preservation.

Still doesn't change the fact that self preservation before others is a selfish act, and I want to try my best to not be selfish for the rest of my life.

Jen0125 posted...

Grow up.

lol no

---

thedeerzord posted...

Still doesn't change the fact that self preservation before others is a selfish act

you cant help anyone if you cant even take care of yourself first

to some extent being selfish is a basic responsibility

---

Every time deerzord posts, Im going to personally give 7 abortions.

---

SirPikachu posted...

The moan's choice comes when she chooses to open her legs. If it's rape or if the mother or baby are going to die, then it's fine to abort.

I think it's just wrong to kill a baby just because you were irresponsible. It's not just your body, it's an entirely separate life. If it has different DNA than you, it's not your body, therefore not your choice.

dude you talk like you were raised in Oklahoma in the 1890s

by some real dipshits

---

Men always blame women for sex and unplanned pregnancy. Never the men, who also participated. But they want a say in what happens with the pregnancy without taking actual responsibility for their own actions.

---

I'm going to be real honest here.

Thinking/hearing about abortions makes me sad sometimes. It's also none of my business. It's not my life, it's not my body. I don't get people acting like it's a whole ass other person. It's literally living off a host.

Stuff happens. People can use every precaution they can and still end up in this situation. Even if not, a baby should not be a punishment for having sex. In what universe does that not have the massive potential to turn out horribly wrong?

Like even if it was straight up lack of/poor planning? So they didn't use protection but now they're guaranteed to be capable of following all the pregnancy rules and either being able to go through the process of putting the kid up for adoption or raising them. It makes no sense.

But ahh, yes, let's just fill the world with unwanted kids because people made mistakes (or didn't even and something went wrong') because they have to be punished for it. That makes perfect sense.../s

Never mind finding out that they may be born in massive pain and die shortly after or something. Stuff happens all the time, I've heard of pregnancies that started fine and went horribly wrong in development. Let's just punish people who are already suffering. That'll teach them to not see the future I guess.

Another thing is people with uteruses should be allowed to get tubes tied or uteruses removed without jumping through hoops, and even then still often being denied. Want less abortions? Let those people do things to absolutely prevent pregnancy.

People aren't walking incubators. Babies shouldn't be punishment for sex.

thedeerzord posted...

If by unviable you mean less than 5+ months old or considered to be dead, then yes.

Even after 5+ month, if it's unviable, then there's not point in keeping it...

thedeerzord posted...

I would understand why people would want to have an abortion is a scenario such as that. But I still cannot advocate for the murder of an innocent child.

Most people would probably be fine with the abortions if the choice is there wife/girlfriend/partner or the unborn baby. I mean, I don't see why the child's life (who hasn't even been born yet) is more important then the one that would have to give birth. Especially if they didn't want children, or want them yet...

thedeerzord posted...

The right thing for any person to do would be to carry that baby to full term, even if there life is at risk.

Nope. That's dumb. Why should they give up their life for a baby they didn't want? What makes the baby's life special? Or worth more than the mother's life? What if the father passed away, and the mother already has kids that she has to take care of?

thedeerzord posted...

Then that is mighty cowardly and selfish of you wouldn't you say? To preserve your life first and foremost before someone else?

Not always. Depends on the life, though. Why should I save the life of someone who assaults me everyday but giving up my life? That being said, for a baby, why give up my life and possibly hurt the rest of my family by not being there? Especially the kid. Not to mention putting the child through that. Even if they don't mean to, the rest of the family might end up resenting the child that took the life of the mother...

SirPikachu posted...

I think it's just wrong to kill a baby just because you were irresponsible

That's not always the case. Other than abstinence, no birth control is 100%...

thedeerzord posted...

I want to try my best to not be selfish for the rest of my life.

The go adopt a bunch of kids. Or go the abortion clinics and tell them you'll take care of their child if they have it. That would be the right thing to do. AFAIK, adoption centers are like overcrowded. So, go help by adopting all those kids. I mean, it would be the right thing to do...
---

This topic is a nice reminder for how fucked up religion is

---

men can't get pregnant. litterally impossible
---