Which are you in favor of? Pro-Choice or Pro-Life

Women should have the right to decide whether or not they feel competent and ready to bring a baby into the world. I'm especially passionate about this subject when it comes to rape victims who become impregnated. They should be able to terminate all remembrance of the event, if possible. I am, however, in favor of a "point of no return" policy. I agree with pro-choice at or before 3 months/the first trimester. I think I would consider anything beyond that murder.

What do you think?

What is "right"?... "And I'm not afraid to take a stand for injecting some "right" into this world."

Just because you have an opinion doesn't necessarily make it right, Dave. No, I don't believe abortion is right, but I don't think we should get rid of it either. I think keeping it is right. It's healthy for the mothers and it'll keep some children from living a shitty life. Not every kid is going to have food or a toy to play with. I'm willing to bet that more than half of them would probably have crack-head mothers who are willing to starve their child for a hit of whatever.

Just because I believe in letting women have a choice, doesn't make me any less right.

...so where does that leave us now?

I remember an episode of House where he kept calling the fetus "it", until during an operation the futus reached out and grabbed his finger. After that, House started calling the baby "he". Even House is willing to have an open mind. Since we're quoting fictional doctors:

Dr. Foreman: This is definitely different.

Dr. Chase: It looks almost like...

Dr. Cameron: ...He's caring.

A puzzling situation for you all:

China has a 24 week upper limit to abortions.

Last year in Miami, a baby named Amillia Taylor was born at 21 weeks. She weighed 10 oz at delivery. And she's doing well, she just turned 1. (wordpress.com/tag/amillia-taylor)

Here's the question: Does it strike you odd that "fetuses" can be aborted with a clean conscience at 24 weeks in one part of the world, and delivered as "babies" in another at 21 weeks?

To take it a step farther, what happens in America as this "preemie delivery date" is pushed, (which scientific advances are sure to make happen)?

When a 15 week old fetus is delivered? 10 weeks? Do we re-evaluate what "life" is.... or...... should we take the high road and do it now? Again, it's all about drawing a line. And the line is always moving.

Wish we could ask House about that one. He may be brutal, but at least he's willing to be honest about it...

House: "You're religious."

Dr. Cameron: "You have to be religious to believe the fetus is alive?"

House: "There seems to be a correlation."

it is even less right to bring unwanted children into lifelong suffering..

Less right? In America??? Really? The poor people in America still live like royalty compared to three quarters of the world. Same with Europe (both the largest numbers of abortions). Let's get perspective. So let's not presume that we're doing the babies a favor.. that's condescending, and some way to justify in our minds some horrible things. A guy named Kevorkian had the same sympathy for people who were better off dead.

Truth is, babies don't realize they're poor. Give them a ball to play with, something to eat, and they are FINE. They're better than fine, they're HAPPY. It's we big people that get bent out of shape about money.. not what true life is all about anyway.

You're right, making abortion illegal isn't going to prevent it. And unsafe practices are a huge problem. But subsidizing the current norm only ensures that it will continue unchanged- or get worse.

There are things in this world that need to change, and change is always painful. But that doesn't mean it's not worth it, or it's not right. And I'm not afraid to take a stand for injecting some "right" into this world.

Let the babies choose.

Deeper roots... In reference to China, it seems like somewhat of a backwards example, yet still emphasizes my point. Any country will probably continue to use the methods they're used to. Fortunately, in the US, that's legal abortion.

I'm not going to waiver on the fact that we need a safe system in place, because whether I agree with abortion or not, the ugly truth is that it's going to continue to happen regardless.

Of course abortion isn't right. But it is even less right to bring unwanted children into lifelong suffering and to strip women of their choice. Making abortion illegal is not the way to prevent it. There is a much larger picture that starts with much deeper roots. ~Anonymous

A parallel situation...... China has a bigtime population issue. So families are penalized if they have too many children.

So, a lot of families have unwanted baby girls, or deformed babies. And, many of these are abandoned or killed.

Perhaps we apply the same principles, and provide a safe, and sterile way to "abort" these unwanted babies. I'll bet it won't change the stats.

Extreme example? Maybe. But the only thing separating these babies and the millions aborted are a number of months and days. That's it.

Step out from the "that's just the way it is" thinking, Ashley, and join me in a bit of idealism... it feels good. After all, it (terminating a baby) may be inconvenient, it may be happening all the time, but that doesn't make it right.

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. - Mark Twain

The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke

Not sure of the validity on the statistics, but it's worth a read: msnbc.msn.com/id/21255186

We need a safe outlet.

I wish we lived in a world where everyone was capable of making good and moral decisions. This, however, is obviously not the current scenario. Of course I'm an advocate for weighing decisions, thinking things through and doing the right thing, but the fact of the matter is that there are plenty of people out there that take the more spontaneous route.

So yes, I wish I could tell every teenage girl in the world to use her head and practice self control, but:

1. Teenagers aren't usually prone to listening; therefore
2. They tend to do what they want and often act irrationally

I also believe that having a safe and sterile way to abort a baby (if desired) is a good idea. If a woman seriously doesn't want a baby, there are many things she can go about getting rid of it. There are horror stories everyday in the news of teenage girls trying to flush their newborns down a toilet or suffocate them. Even worse are techniques used to damage a fetus while still in the womb. These methods can lead to serious and dangerous risks for the carrying mother that are unnecessary. We need some sort of system in place that can "take care of this" in a healthy environment. Without it, these self-aborting techniques would probably skyrocket. I don't foresee the absence of being able to have an abortion affecting pregnancy rates significantly, but then again, I've been wrong before.

I guess we hit the point where we're going to have to agree to disagree.

and unfortunately this decision must come after the woman is already pregnant.

Must is a strong word here. I suppose I also am pro-choice- let women decide if they should, or should not carry a child- but I believe the decision MUST come BEFORE conception!

Don't we want our children to learn to sit down, count the cost, weigh things out BEFORE they get into a difficult, or damaging life situation?

If they rush in on their emotions/desires/hormones, and ASSUME someone will bail them out, it is destined to be repeated, over and over... and the impact of consequences fall to the ground.

I don't think your beliefs are any less credible if you're a man. In actuality, the way you feel about abortion matches many of my beliefs. As contradictory as it may sound, I'm not Pro-Abortion. I can't think of a situation where I would have an abortion. I'd even probably look down a little on people that have had one. All I'm advocating is pro-choice. Women should have the option to decide if they want the child or not, and unfortunately this decision must come after the woman is already pregnant.

Double Standards... Well, let me pull back the curtain to reveal... I'm a guy.

And I realize that in some eyes, this knocks down my credibility to speak on the issue, because:

1. men don't get pregnant (despite what Oprah says)

2. the social standards make it easier for men to be rewarded for sexual conquest, not be shunned.

3. a lot of guys can be elitist jerks on the topic

4. the " I don't want some old white guys in Washington telling a woman what she can do with her body" sentiment.

And truthfully, I fully acknowlege all these. And I won't pout if my arguments aren't taken as seriously as a women.. you guys take he brunt of the child carrying/birth/rearing thing, no doubt. I applaud women for this.

But here's my $.02 on it- part of the problem is men are not being MEN. Taking our own responsibility, being self controlled, being led by our convictions rather than our impulses. Taking our role in society to raise strong boys, into strong men. The lack of strong men in America is nothing short of an epidemic. And this needs to change. But everything I've written above does not negate the fact that there is a moral (not dealing with religion, but rather humanity) that there MUST be other ways to deal with this issue than stopping a life.

If we can step outside the fact that I'm a guy, and people have tough lives, and babies aren't convenient..

by the time a baby (fetus) is 10 weeks... it has fingers. The fingers can curve around an object placed near them. They have not just eyes, but eyelids. The heart's been beating for over a month. They not only have unique DNA, but unique fingerprints are developing. Teeth are developing under the gums.

I'm not trying to guilt people out, and I'm not trying to enforce a "man's double standard".

But couldn't we a agree that this (little) person has a right to keep on developing, keep on living... that this is more valuable than the convenience of the parents?

That while we can sympathize and offer support to an "un-ready" mother (who IS ever ready?) we can sympathize and offer support to her baby at the same time?

I'm just sayin'.

• A guy named Dave

Risks and Consequences... I agree that, with anything in life there are risks and consequences, but self control to an extreme is hard to come by. I'm not particularly fond of death so does this mean I should avoid planes for fear of crashing, or food for fear of chocking? Give me a break!

I also believe that it is much easier for men to preach the "Don't spread your legs" philosophy (I'm not sure of your gender; therefore, this is just a general comment). Men can essentially have sex with whoever they please with limited consequences. I'm aware that it's physically impossible for a man to become pregnant, but isn't this some kind of double standard?

the fine line... Sorry, but I don't buy the "what, are we expecting women to never have sex?" argument. Like anything in life, there are risks and consequences- and one of them is if you have sex you might get pregnant. If you're not ready to have a baby, then not having sex is a really good choice. Or is self control totally off the table? Really?

If abortion is ok to someone, then there's a line they have to draw. When is it ok to stop a developing life. Just before it's delivered? First trimester? 12 weeks? 6 weeks? All arbitrary lines someone came up with. Does this line make it ok? What if my line is 35 weeks? Does this make it ok?

I'm not an angry, vengeful pro-life rally kind of person. I genuinely want to understand the justification in folks' minds, civil discourse and all. I mean that, and I'll listen.

But I can't shake that this tiny, living, growing, developing thing is ALIVE! I was that small. It was my DNA. It was ME! Being small, being in development doesn't change that, and I sure didn't become "me" in the beginning of the second trimester.

I don't want to be grim, but I ask you to consider something. In any atrocities in this world, the only way mass killings can be tolerated by our minds is to de-humanize. Early settlers considered Native Americans "savages", and their slaughter was justified. Hitler convinced a nation that jews were "inferior" to the supreme race, and over 6 million we executed. Slaves in america were given the legal status of 3/5 of a person. Now consider that we tolerate over 46 million "terminations" of life each year in this world... good thing they aren't "human" or we might lose some sleep.

If science can precisely determine whether a fetus has grown to the point where it has gained consciousness of itself and its environment (and that it can send and receive information to its nervous system), then abortion should not be an option. Before that happens... abortion is only taking away the potential for life.

A woman doesn't have to "spread her legs" to become pregnant. All other forms of impregnation are just solely for the purpose of reproducing.

And just because a woman decides to have sex doesn't necessarily mean she's ready to have a baby. What about women who never want a baby? Are they never supposed to "spread their legs" for fear of having to terminate a child? I admit that as a woman, it would be severely difficult for me to agree to an abortion, but I still believe that women should have the right to decide for themselves.

As for stopping a beating heart, a fetus doesn't even have a beating heart until the 5th or 6th week of development. I realize that women have abortions beyond this stage, but it's possible to terminate before this occurs.

Women should decide..... Women should have the right to decide about carrying baby. It's their body. And that decision comes when they decide to whether or not to spread their legs for a guy. (still the ONLY way to make a baby).

After that, it's just a matter of dealing with consequences. And stopping a beating heart is a poor way to do this.

[Now is the time everyone brings up rape and incest.] TOUGH decisions, NO DOUBT. But these make up less than ONE PERCENT of all abortions, people! MOST abortions are simply a convenient birth control. Stick up for the baby girls' rights.