Velociworld

I'll have to check that. Did I use the word support?

I do not support abortion. But I can't use my personal handbook to govern the land.

That was my Constitutional opinion coupled with my gut reaction.

You said:

I [reluctantly] think a mother should have the right to request a child be removed from her person at any point.

At any point. We can argue about whether this constitutes support, but I've already said I don't discuss abortion as a rule.

...but you're a rule breaker, right? ; )

If I wanted to be unrealistic in my requests, I'd wave a magic wand and remove abortion as an option for birth control. There would be no such term, no such thing. The medical equivalent would be known as a d and c, and it would be for medical emergencies only.

Given that that won't be happening, I humbly request that before sucking to pieces or extracting the brains of these infants, doctors be required to at least ATTEMPT a live delivery.

And yes, I am aware of and appreciate the ban on partial birth murder, but I believe a child can not only be saved anytime in the third trimester (if he or she isn't murdered on the way out), but occasionally in the second, as witnessed in the article I linked.

The other thing I argue is, why shouldn't abortion be shamed at any gestational point and as a rule? I fear many have grown desensitized during the preoccupation with choice v. life as a political issue, as well as a *GAG* symbol of female progression.

(Incidentally, several people whom I know and love have had abortions. They ain't proud, and it's no joy to live with. I've seen more tears...)

Gawd, you're making me think tonight.

(I'm taking the rest of the night off!)

V-man, I'm thinking you stepped on it. Your larger point is of course correct, if'n I'm reading this post as you meant it. But, for your nuances on the smaller (or is it?,) parts, no pun intended I swear, maybe best leave that to the ladies.

Just read Key's second to last comment before I posted this. V-man, in trying to respect your preference not to discuss this subject and obviously ignoring it, as you did bring it up, I am mightily conflicted on the issue. My wife and I were using all available means to prevent (in the 70's) and still ran into the issue. We chose what we chose. I'm not saying its right, I'm not saying we were right, I'm not saying its moral, I'm just saying it's what people do, and there is evidence that people have been doing it for ten's of thousands of years, in one way or another.

I would hope that we will figure out a way someday that satisfies everyone. Until then, I think women get to decide.

And, yes, just to reiterate, we do have to watch that ratio.

I too don't support the use of abortion as a form of birth control method, but I also strongly believe that it should never be outlawed. If it were, expectant mothers would only find another means to accomplish their goal, which would no doubt be medically unsound for the majority them. I believe to get an abortion you must first be subjected to a minimum of a 5-day waiting period. During this time the woman would be given information about adoption options (this would only be a minimum requirement). If they still want to pursue aborting their pregnancy, by all means let them proceed. Because lets face it, a woman that doesn't want the baby in the first place will never take care of the child prior to or after being born. This is my politically correct version. Albeit in rough draft form, still a foundation. What I would do in addition to the above is require all women receiving an abortion be placed in a national database. Once the same woman has had a pre-determined number of abortions, she would be required by law to be sterilized. Why should we have to be subjected to the stupidity of these people? Wouldn't the gene pool be better off without them?

I basically withhold opinion on the matter. It is extremely personal, and I don't have a uterus.

Does that make you less of a parent, Velociman?

For every pregnancy, there is a man who is entitled to AT LEAST an opinion.