At first glance the common statement made that we cannot or should not tell a woman what to do with her body sounds just and fair but in the case of abortion there is more to it. In the case of an abortion there are three subjects involved, the mother to be, the father to be and the unborn child. All three have a degree of ownership for if any one subject was missing there would be no case or no justice to solve. Both parents contribute to the creation of the unborn child and once the unborn child is created it also attains some ownership of itself.In many cases or jurisdictions the abortion laws do not recognize the contributions of each player involved which I argue is an injustice. Our divorce laws do recognize the contributions of each player and the property shares are divided accordingly when a termination of the relationship occurs. Abortion laws in many jurisdictions only recognize one player. This is a failure in the principles of justice.

Check out the Gosnell movie!

I started a group for people who are pro-life and want to learn more about how to answer questions about being pro-life. [slug.com]

I know that many people paticularly on the left from my experience believe that abortion occurs before a human being is truly formed except in extreme cases. This presents a moral dilemma, what degree of trauma to either the mother or child justifies ending the life of a human being. I have yet to see an honest discussion about this that doesn't end in semantics or ad hominem. Would it be the same with a discussion about suicide or euthanasia or is there a level of cognitive dissonance associated with the unborn?

I don't believe government should have a say over abortions, I believe it should be up to the women.

I just feel like it could create so many unintended consequences.Forcing the women to go through something she does not want sounds pretty tyrannical.

She should know about her pregnancy fairly early and if she decided to do nothing about it at that time then she should probably keep it. If they regret their abortion let them regret it.
Women should have a right to change their mind over having the baby.

I think believe that demonizing this choice is pushed too far.

kidnapping happen, rape happen, there are crazy people and for the few crazies that might enjoy forcing a women to have their babies all they would have to do is keep them until the law protects the baby. Will exceptions need to be made for this kind of victims ? Sure the baby is not to blame but the women would stuck with a baby she can't necessarily love.
 

• If people can't get rid of their babies legally, those who will really want that to happen will have to do it under the table. That opens so many scary doors to black market. Btw fetus parts (organs, limbs,wtv) already has a market.

• I just don't want the law come into the way of a worst case scenario for the women.

If people really care about protecting children lives than they should go adopt orphans, or donate local charity.

• I would feel better if this fight never ended.

One group keep people on their toes for their decisions, but the government "acts" like its doing something about it without any real change. Next topic for the fight might be worst than the one of abortion.

im not for things that are crazy like "Post-natal abortion".

I make short videos that answer just one question. This one answers your question

It's difficult to change someones perception when they don't see something as human.

You can not tell people to search the moral values of the human life. They must do this for themselves. But i find useing the real time Abortion clock usful when debating post it first thing note the number of abortions at the start of the debate. In the post. Towards the end check the clock and post since we been talking there have been ----- abortions world wide. This is shocking to some laughable to other's and thinking post to many. Best i can do.

This is such a huge issue. Truth is we don't know the origins of consciousness, what it actually is or when it starts. We do know that the fundamental blueprint (DNA) of a human being is created at the moment of conception. I think this is one of those issues that when viewed historically will be on par with many other instances of genocide that have occurred. We, as a society, can agree it's ok to kill people (and/or fetuses). I don't make much of distinction between "people" and "fetuses" because because both represent potential. All that potential (and the benefits that may accrue to society) die when "aborted".One of our strongest values is to care for those who can't care for themselves (the helpless). When we agree to kill the most helpless we violate one of our most important societal values. Everything has a price - I shudder to think what price we will pay.

"We dehumanized the most human, the most innocent among us. We lied to ourselves. And then we built walls around that lie. We lied about the science. We falsified anti-scientific arguments about the origin of life. We pretended that human beings were not actual human beings." - Ben Shapiro, March for Life

No their point is not valid. What kind of cowardly monster abandons young women to make a choice to murder her children that she will probably regret for the rest of her life? Those people aren't men.

Obviously science and medical advances have helped to bring clarity to this issue. However, abortion has been institutionalized and therefore has been able to fight against even that. I think their is a sway towards pro-life in America which is why States like New York and Virginia created laws to fully support abortion. They are trying to set things in stone before public debate changes and abortion is made illegal in most cases. But I think, if we are pro-life, we need to start giving the child the same rights as the mother. We need to fight pro-choice with pro-child.