I would like to see a Federal Law that states that although abortion is a State mandated issue, it is reclassified medically as an “elective” procedure, and not covered by health insurance policies, with several exceptions. 1. Mother’s life; 2. Incest; 3: Rape. We need to ensure that the American taxpayer no longer funds ANY ENTITY that provides these services and make the procedure truly “elective”. In the vast majority of cases, irresponsibility of 2 consenting adults caused the issue, and those 2 consenting adults can opt to pay for the “elective” procedure at their own cost, just like any other “elective” procedure. I am sure many reading this will flip out over it, but that’s life. I firmly believe in the women’s choice if the state allows it, and they are otherwise eligible for the procedure, they just need to pay for it.
Killing the most vulnerable beings on earth, the unborn, is the most abhorrent, barbaric, practice on earth. We need to teach the sanctity of life. soooo many women have chosen their child’s life over their own. That is love. Our culture continues to devalue life. Devaluing life affects so many aspects of our culture, human trafficking-using people, violence against each other, all due to lack of respect for the preciousness of life.
Should probably add an exception for birth control failure. Some people are being responsible using/purchasing birth control.
Also should change the wording on medical procedures like DNC’s. I often hear that as an argument for abortion rights. DNC’s should not be classified as an abortion procedure.
Birth control for both sexes should be accessible, affordable and covered by insurance country wide.
What I find is the most pressing and valid issue relating to abortion is dealing with the terminology. As is in the medical field, women who mis-carry are classified as women who had an abortion. Miscarriage of a baby is heart breaking and horrible but by classifying it as an abortion to have the resultant non-viable fetus removed to prevent issues due to already dead tissue is ridiculous. There needs to be a clear definition of these procedures and the cases that deem them medically necessary. That way doctors can give care to women without fear of repercussions. It is all about terminology. Someone decided to lump all these cases in with abortions when Roe Vs. Wade was in effect out of either ease or to protect the right to contraception by abortion years ago. This misclassification needs to be addressed and fixed!stop arguing over semantics and just update and protect rights to these services that do not harm sentient viable babies period.
Disagree. No birth control method is 100% effective. And in the context of a brand new human created, what you call “failure” is actually success.
I understand what you are saying, the wording I used is a common phrase “my birth control failed”.
I know birth control is not 100%. Vasectomy’s fail too, but I think if people are taking responsible steps trying to prevent pregnancy to begin with they should have that option to abort EARLY on in the pregnancy if they want to. It shouldn’t matter if you or I agree with their choice, ultimately that’s between them and God (if you or they are religious)
There needs to be some compromise between pro-life and pro-choice if we are going to get anywhere with this. Currently both sides are trying to force their ideas and values on to the other and that’s what’s keeping abortion rights as a major issue politically.
At the end of the day God gave us freedom to choose right and wrong, and we ultimately have to answer to Him. It’s not our place to judge what choices they make.
I think He would see us working toward something good. If we can get something passed now that both sides agree on, then maybe down the road hearts will change, and people will value life a little bit more and naturally choose not to abort their babies. At least abortions would happen less under this bill if we can get it passed.
Abortion is literally NOT just a choice between them and God.
It involves an innocent, unwilling baby. Abortion forces your deadly beliefs onto another person. Pro-lifers aren’t forcing anything on you. We didn’t get the woman pregnant. She and the father did that themselves.
Sex = reproduction. It means you are actively participating in the impregnation process.
It is NOT “responsible” to actively participate in the impregnation process, if your intention is to just kill the child you create. Birth control does not give parents a pass from your responsibility. A child is a child.
I’m an atheist and I do not care for what your co-opted version of God has to “say.” That kind of gas-lighting is what turns people off to the pro-choice movement. That same “God” is what endowed humans with a biologically-ingrained aversion to the idea of grotesque violence against vulnerable children. Without this evolutionary, protective instincts, mothers would have killed off their offspring in one generation.
To be clear, I’m actually pro-life. I’m a mother myself and it breaks my heart that anyone would want to take the life of their child. It’s not a choice I would personally make.
I just try to look at both sides and a common argument we hear for pro-life is based on religious standings that’s why I brought that up. I was brought up in a religious home but I’ve lost faith in religion it’s self.
On the pro-choice side you see the argument that women should have the right to body autonomy and they don’t believe that a fetus is human life. (Despite scientific evidence)
I read the proposal you sent me, and I’m still reading and researching the additional information you provided. Overall I like your proposal and am leaning more towards supporting your proposal. I agree there needs to be a lot more education around everything that you mentioned, and that would go a long way in preventing abortions.
But I still think that there should be an exception for people that are proactively trying to prevent a pregnancy through birth control.
I think that with proper education as you have proposed that the number of people that would use that exception would dramatically decrease. But for those that are absolutely dead set on not having children would have that option. Even if I whole heartedly disagree with their decision.
We are willing to make exceptions for rape and insist, but at the end of the day it is still an innocent, unwilling baby. Why should the baby suffer for the crimes of their parents?
At the end of the day abortion is terrible and none of the proposed exceptions justify it. However I do think your proposal would get more public support with the exceptions you have outlined, and then likely a little bit more from my suggestion too.
I can agree to disagree, at the end of the day we both want the same thing, we just have different ideas of how to go about it. Your proposal is the most detailed and thorough that I have seen thus far and I do hope that the vast majority of Americans can come to an agreement on policies regarding abortion.
Whether or not someone tried birth control has nothing to do with the child’s over-riding right to life and the parents’ duty to care for the child that they created. It doesn’t make your child any less of a child, or any less deserving to life, or take away your parenting responsibility.
Technically, all unplanned pregnancies happen because whatever birth control method they were trying didn’t work 100%, so your idea of an exception defeats the whole purpose of being pro-life, and there are very few ways that you can prove that you took birth control and used it according to perfect use anyway.
Except for rape, every child was created because both parents actively and repeatedly chose to participate in the child creation process, more typically referred to as sex/reproduction. Pregnancy isn’t necessarily caused by not using any form of birth control. It’s caused by sex. Birth control doesn’t give any person a right to irresponsible sex, or a pass, when you your reproductive efforts succeeded in creating a child.
The pro-choice side has almost nothing to do with “bodily autonomy” because they grant no bodily autonomy to the child. The child didn’t choose you to be their mom; you chose them. By “bodily autonomy” pro-choicers usually just mean “avoiding parenting responsibility.” Every time they say “bodily autonomy,” just replace that phrase with “avoiding parenting responsibility” and then their dehumanizing ideology stops sounding like nonsensical gibber garble. And their claim that parents have a right to [avoiding parent responsibility] is a made up right. They made it up. They have the exact same position as anti-child support, men’s rights activists. MRA’s claim that the mother “forced” him to be a dad (even though he enfathered himself when he caused her pregnancy) and they say child support is “slavery.” Pro-choicers and MRA’s are two sides of the same coin.
They don’t actually think a fetus isn’t human. Genocide-supporters simply enjoy dehumanizing the victims to fend off their inner personal conflict for supporting trash positions.
You are correct to say that no exception justifies abortion. Elective abortion is ALWAYS wrong. However, we are not positioned to save every child. We can only save as many as we can. Most people, including pro-lifers, instinctively understand the inherent psychological torment caused by a rape-induced pregnancy, and an ongoing connection with her rapist. Most people, while understanding that all elective abortion is wrong, do not feel compelled to get in the way of rape victim’s intense desire to escape that suffering and feeling that abortion is the only way for her, for a pregnancy that unlike everyone else, she did NOT voluntarily create. Additionally, rape/incest accounts for 0.5% of all abortions, whereas voluntary participation in the child creation process accounts for 99.5% of all healthy pregnancies. Most people support rape exceptions and they attack pro-life laws even more when they don’t include rape exceptions.
If workable exceptions help make state pro-life laws successfully pass and successfully withstand a challenge by pro-abortion state ballot measures and legislators, well then it’s better to try to save 99.5% of all potential abortions, than none at all. It’s not about “punishing” babies conceived in rape. It’s about NOT punishing the 99.5% of viable babies that we have a chance at saving, as opposed to saving 0% of potentially aborted babies because of the rape example that pro-choicers commonly cite as an excuse to justify blanket abortion laws. A pro-life law that allows rape exceptions is simply an attempt at saving as many viable babies that we can.