Do you own your body?

[BabyBoomer50s]

Does that mean that you're pro-choice then? After all, a pro-choice position leaves the decision of whether to have an abortion or not up to the women involved to act according to their conscience when it comes to their own private business. That was once the majority opinion within the Republican Party, like the 68% of Republicans in a 1972 Gallup poll who were pro-choice, whereas in 2023 only 21% of Republicans are pro-choice. In the same time period, Democrats have gone the other way, 59% pro-choice in 1972 and 84% pro-choice in 2023.

Gallup polling shows only a third of Americans are pro choice.

 

[RandyRebecca]

Gallup polling shows only a third of Americans are pro choice.

No. 52% according to the link upthread.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/244709/pro-choice-pro-life-2018-demographic-tables.aspx

 

[TastySuckToy]

Does that mean that you're pro-choice then? After all, a pro-choice position leaves the decision of whether to have an abortion or not up to the women involved to act according to their conscience when it comes to their own private business.

In the context of the overall debate and labels people throw around, I would be considered firmly in the 'pro-choice' camp.

My main issue would be I don't like either label and consider both labels a deliberate form of drawing lines to provoke conflict on the issue.

And despite me being in the 'pro-choice' group, I still find it the group that is most violent, irrational, hostile, hypocritical and distasteful over the entire issue. I'd feel much more comfortable and at ease surrounded by 'pro-lifers' than 'pro-choicers'. At least you can talk and debate with them, rather than get named called and attacked if you don't 100% agree with every point/argument they make.

 

[Bn2f]

In the context of the overall debate and labels people throw around, I would be considered firmly in the 'pro-choice' camp.

My main issue would be I don't like either label and consider both labels a deliberate form of drawing lines to provoke conflict on the issue.

And despite me being in the 'pro-choice' group, I still find it the group that is most violent, irrational, hostile, hypocritical and distasteful over the entire issue. I'd feel much more comfortable and at ease surrounded by 'pro-lifers' than 'pro-choicers'. At least you can talk and debate with them, rather than get named called and attacked if you don't 100% agree with every point/argument they make.

JesusFChrist. You have 671 posts but managed to have crammed in 1256 bad takes including this one here filled them.

 

[TastySuckToy]

JesusFChrist. You have 671 posts but managed to have crammed in 1256 bad takes including this one here filled them.

Talk about proving my point!

 

[Bn2f]

Talk about proving my point!

I am not a progressive liberal here to debate you. You know that. I far more enjoy insulting your disingenuous ass.
It’s 2023 and I am way beyond giving anyone who comes to this topic the benefit of the doubt.

 

[neci]

once upon a time i lived in a country where women had no option, so they preformed home remedies under duress and put their lives at risk. i live here once again, and find myself hearing of remedies that will risk the lives of people i love. women will always have a choice. the state has the ability to make that choice safe or unsafe. i now live again in an unsafe state, no longer once upon a time.

 

[TastySuckToy]

I am not a progressive liberal here to debate you. You know that. I far more enjoy insulting your disingenuous ass.
It’s 2023 and I am way beyond giving anyone who comes to this topic the benefit of the doubt.

Name calling and insulting is the pursuit of the mentally feeble who lack substance of thought and argument.

By all means continue, it's useful when people show who they really are.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

No. 52% according to the link upthread.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/244709/pro-choice-pro-life-2018-demographic-tables.aspx

See post #2,200.
About two thirds of Americans (64%) believe abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances or not legal at all.

About a third (34%) believe it should legal under any circumstances.

About half the country (51%) represent the middle ground (legal only under certain circumstances).

If “pro-choice” means a woman can make her own choice at any stage of pregnancy for any reason, then only a third of the country is pro choice.

If pro-choice means there are restricted time windows and restricted conditions for allowing abortions, then yes, most Americans are pro choice.

At least some of the contributors to this thread have made it clear they believe pro choice means no pregnancy stage constraints and no conditions. Basically abortion any stage, any reason.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

 

[Bn2f]

Name calling and insulting is the pursuit of the mentally feeble who lack substance of thought and argument.

By all means continue, it's useful when people show who they really are.

I’ve debated you and ran circles around you. You are not my equal. You vote for politicians who take away rights from women and vote against the laws protecting them from harassment, domestic violence, and rape. Yet claim to now be pro choice. Yes, you’re an ass on other subjects and a dumbass now.

 

[TastySuckToy]

I’ve debated you and ran circles around you.

I don't even remember debating you, you must have been quite the bore. But if the encounter in burned into your memory, good for you.

You are not my equal.

I would certainly hope not, I wouldn't wish that low a level on anyone.

You vote for politicians who take away rights from women and vote against the laws protecting them from harassment, domestic violence, and rape. Yet claim to now be pro choice.

Again, no idea what you're referencing. But like I said, you're not on my radar, gimme a couple hours and I'll easily forget I even interacted with you here.

 

[Bn2f]

Because you said it wasn't your business ...



Around 30% of women have had an abortion - I'll let you to the math

I apologize SG for toe stepping but this a-hole had not and was not going to give you straight answers and I got tired of it. Again, my apologies to you if you were needling him to get him to admit yet even more eye rolling hypocrisy.

 

[neci]

i just read an article about a woman who had to carry twins with undeveloped lungs and hearts to term, knowing they would die within hours of birth. the babies died. her two other children attended a funeral for the premature undeveloped babies, because state law would not allow the mother to terminate the already terminal fetus’. she had to walk around for months, planning a funeral, while people in the street congratulated her and her growing belly. this is inhumane. this is treating women worse than livestock in the name of Jesus, who by the way, is legally supposed to be separate from matters of the state. if you want to go to hell, go to church. leave doctors and health care out of your religious fetish.

pretty sure that’s all i have to say about that.

 

[Bn2f]

i just read an article about a woman who had to carry twins with undeveloped lungs and hearts to term, knowing they would die within hours of birth. the babies died. her two other children attended a funeral for the premature undeveloped babies, because state law would not allow the mother to terminate the already terminal fetus’. she had to walk around for months, planning a funeral, while people in the street congratulated her and her growing belly. this is inhumane. this is treating women worse than livestock in the name of Jesus, who by the way, is legally supposed to be separate from matters of the state. if you want to go to hell, go to church. leave doctors and health care out of your religious fetish.

pretty sure that’s all i have to say about that.

Please, it’s my humble opinion, that you need to continue speaking. This tactic served well in another place and time but today those opposed take you not continuing to lend your voice as affirmation to their point as they continue shouting loudly.

 

[Bn2f]

No. 52% according to the link upthread.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/244709/pro-choice-pro-life-2018-demographic-tables.aspx

You and I will not necessarily agree on much, but but I hate the outright hostility, misogyny, and condescending behavior that many of the females here, and especially in this thread, have to continually put up with.
You don’t deserve this.
Ugh! I’m off to bed. Gn.

 

[adrina]

Bullshit twisting of numbers above. The usual interpretation to suit their needs. Even though they will never ever be in the position of needing an abortion, they somehow believe they know better than the medical community.

85% believe abortion should be legal in some or all instances.

13% believe abortion should be illegal in all instances.

52% are pro-choice. 44% are "pro-life".

Hardly the statement against abortion they'd like it to be. But wishful thinking, histrionics and dishonesty are par for the course.

 

[neci]

Please, it’s my humble opinion, that you need to continue speaking. This tactic served well in another place and time but today those opposed take you not continuing to lend your voice as affirmation to their point as they continue shouting loudly.

i vote. i advocate locally.
certain groups believe that the louder they are, the righter and more righteous they are. i do not ascribe to that thought.
many years ago, i visited a liberal college campus on the west coast and talked to a planned parenthood group, who were out holding a “protest.” i asked them what their thoughts were on my home state, a state that is now under a total ban. these educated kids said their time was better spent in their own back yards. who would want to travel to where i lived? Backwaters. (they didn’t know i lived there - i was just asking questions) i will continue to live here, in the red, and offer my support locally, where it is needed. if you have the privilege to scream all day, by all means, do so. i will choose my words and actions for where they serve their best, so i can preserve the limited energy i have. the goal is not to create more noise, but to rise above and create clarity and vision. the goal now is to offer support to those who need it. we are now critical. maternal mortality rates are rising. women are dying. doctors are leaving. it will only get worse.

 

[stickygirl]

I apologize SG for toe stepping but this a-hole had not and was not going to give you straight answers and I got tired of it. Again, my apologies to you if you were needling him to get him to admit yet even more eye rolling hypocrisy.

None needed - I got bored of him and I was suddenly busy. Sorry if that obligated you to pick up the cudgels.

 

[RobDownSouth]

If pro-choice means there are restricted time windows and restricted conditions for allowing abortions, then yes, most Americans are pro choice.

At least some of the contributors to this thread have made it clear they believe pro choice means no pregnancy stage constraints and no conditions. Basically abortion any stage, any reason.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

You've oversimplified things to smugly push what you insinuate is your "morally superior" position.

The real world is not so black and white rendering your "either you support abortion to 9 months or you're not REALLY 'pro-choice'" false equivalency comically irrelevant.

Why? Because there is one bright shining line in the sand here:
Fetal Viability.

Prior to Fetal Viability, the state (in a perfect world) should have ZERO interest in terminating a pregnancy. NONE.
ANY restrictions on abortion prior to fetal viability are not based on anything more than patriarchal desire to control women.

Fetal Viability is generally accepted to have occurred somewhere around the 23rd week of pregnancy.

After fetal viability, the state may or may not choose to insert itself as a limited party. That's a topic for another thread. There is no generally accepted standard for "limited fetal rights" so this can be hashed out at the state level imho.

THIS is the hill I choose to die on: I define "pro choice" as ZERO state interest prior to fetal viability. Abortion should be available for any reason without restriction prior to fetal viability..

Come at me, bro. I fucking dare you.

 

[dkovic77]

You've oversimplified things to smugly push what you insinuate is your "morally superior" position.

The real world is not so black and white rendering your "either you support abortion to 9 months or you're not REALLY 'pro-choice'" false equivalency comically irrelevant.

Why? Because there is one bright shining line in the sand here:
Fetal Viability.

Prior to Fetal Viability, the state (in a perfect world) should have ZERO interest in terminating a pregnancy. NONE.
ANY restrictions on abortion prior to fetal viability are not based on anything more than patriarchal desire to control women.

Fetal Viability is generally accepted to have occurred somewhere around the 23rd week of pregnancy.

After fetal viability, the state may or may not choose to insert itself as a limited party. That's a topic for another thread. There is no generally accepted standard for "limited fetal rights" so this can be hashed out at the state level imho.

THIS is the hill I choose to die on: I define "pro choice" as ZERO state interest prior to fetal viability. Abortion should be available for any reason without restriction prior to fetal viability..

Come at me, bro. I fucking dare you.

How can he be “morally superior”, he’s backing the Nazi for the ‘pub ticket? His morals left him a long time ago.

 

[adrina]

CAN ANYONE FIND A SINGLE DOCUMENTED INSTANCE OF AN ELECTIVE ABORTION IN THE LATER STAGES (7th, 8th and especially the 9th month) OF PREGNANCY?

Pardon for raising my voice but the hysteria around this one non-issue is taking up a ton of oxygen in the reproductive rights debate.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

You've oversimplified things to smugly push what you insinuate is your "morally superior" position.

The real world is not so black and white rendering your "either you support abortion to 9 months or you're not REALLY 'pro-choice'" false equivalency comically irrelevant.

Why? Because there is one bright shining line in the sand here:
Fetal Viability.

Prior to Fetal Viability, the state (in a perfect world) should have ZERO interest in terminating a pregnancy. NONE.
ANY restrictions on abortion prior to fetal viability are not based on anything more than patriarchal desire to control women.

Fetal Viability is generally accepted to have occurred somewhere around the 23rd week of pregnancy.

After fetal viability, the state may or may not choose to insert itself as a limited party. That's a topic for another thread. There is no generally accepted standard for "limited fetal rights" so this can be hashed out at the state level imho.

THIS is the hill I choose to die on: I define "pro choice" as ZERO state interest prior to fetal viability. Abortion should be available for any reason without restriction prior to fetal viability..

Come at me, bro. I fucking dare you.

You’ve made my point. People use the labels “pro-choice” and “pro-life” without defining them.

Your definition draws the line at “around 23 weeks”, the generally accepted as the point where fetal viability begins. I’m not sure everyone who identifies as pro-choice accepts that definition. I’ve seen many posts here that indicate a pro choice view means there should not be any restrictions on a woman’s choice.

Many people who call themselves “pro-life” are ok with legal abortion up to 15 weeks. Indeed I’ve seen other polls that show a plurality of Americans accept that. If the difference between pro choice and pro life was only a matter of 8 weeks, the issue would be far less divisive.

The problem is there are loud minorities on both sides of the issue who either want unrestricted abortion or zero abortion have the loudest voices. Most Americans hold views somewhere in between.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Your definition draws the line at “around 23 weeks”, the generally accepted as the point where fetal viability begins. I’m not sure everyone who identifies as pro-choice accepts that definition. I’ve seen many posts here that indicate a pro choice view means there should not be any restrictions on a woman’s choice.

You have? Funny I'm here to, and I haven't. Put up or shut up Boomer. You know the drill you made the claim, post em.

 

[ll74]

Ohio Issue 1 proposal wording: (for info)

The proposed amendment would:

• Establish in the Constitution of the State of Ohio an individual right to one’s own reproductive medical treatment, including but not limited to abortion;
• Create legal protections for any person or entity that assists a person with receiving reproductive medical treatment, including but not limited to abortion;
• Prohibit the State from directly or indirectly burdening, penalizing, or prohibiting abortion before an unborn child is determined to be viable, unless the State demonstrates that it is using the least restrictive means;
• Grant a pregnant woman’s treating physician the authority to determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether an unborn child is viable;
• Only allow the State to prohibit an abortion after an unborn child is determined by a pregnant woman’s treating physician to be viable and only if the physician does not consider the abortion necessary to protect the pregnant woman’s life or health; and
• Always allow an unborn child to be aborted at any stage of pregnancy, regardless of viability if, in the treating physician’s determination, the abortion is necessary to protect the pregnant woman’s life or health.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Ohio Issue 1 proposal wording: (for info)

Note,

. I’ve seen many posts here that indicate a pro choice view means there should not be any restrictions on a woman’s choice.

Boomer is stating Lit posts...I am calling him on that.