08-01-2015, 04:37 PM
(08-01-2015, 04:07 PM)username Wrote: I agree with Maggot in that many "pro-choice" advocates view ANY limitations on abortion as an attack on a woman's right to control her reproduction etc.
Any limitations put on abortion are restricting a woman's right to control her reproduction though. That's a fact.
(08-01-2015, 04:07 PM)username Wrote: The same scare tactics used by some gun groups are similarly used with regards to abortion. Put in limitations and next thing you know, we lose ALL rights.
And I agree that a lot of right to lifers use the argument that "life begins at conception ergo, ALL abortions are immoral and should be illegal".
Those of us in the middle on most of these issues (I consider us the sane ones) are fucked.
That's a fair comparison. I agree that sometimes the loudest and most passionate voices (which often makes them the most influential ones) are on the extremes.
I support some national gun safety controls via federal legislation, and I wouldn't object to a national cut-off point for abortions (way past 8 weeks though), after which medical exception would be required.
A national late-term restriction would affect a very small percentage of women seeking abortions anyway. But, at present (as with gun restrictions), abortion restrictions are mostly left to the states.
What rubs me way wrong are the politicians who continue attempting to cut off (by any means possible) female health services to millions across the country because those politicians are morally/religiously opposed to all abortions. On that I agree with Duchess -- it's short-sighted, callous, illogical bullshit.