Sexual Relationships 
Sexual Health 
If abortion becomes illegal, its going to continue to happen. But it'll be unsafe and without doctors. Just like there are illegal drugs and guns still being sold and used, abortions will still occur. Which is damaging to the mother and the fetus if it happens to survive.
Women are going to end up dying because they had an unsafe (which may mean unclean) abortion, or the pregnancy is life threatening.
Sometimes women also get abortions because the baby will be born with autism or another health defect due to pregnancy complications. Sometimes women get abortions because their BD left them and they can't do it alone.
Sometime women get abortions because they were raped. Sometimes women get abortions because they can't afford the baby or simply don't want it. Or they're too mentally or physically unfit to care for the baby. I am pro choice, but you can't say women can't abort a baby if birth control will be harder to access and everyone decides to start adopting and never have a baby of their own.
We're already overpopulating the earth. Besides, I respect if you would never get an abortion. That is YOUR choice. That's the reason I am pro choice. You can decide to keep the fetus or rid of it. The fetus is usually aborted within the first 3 months.
The only time a late term termination happens is if the mother will die. You can't say she can't get rid of it, have her die but the baby live. You aren't being pro life you're being pro birth, but that doesn't mean you'd take care of their kid.
When a fetus is to be aborted it will not and cannot feel any pain. It is injected with a needle and safely removed. It is not torn apart limb from limb because it will not be developed enough to even have limbs.
If you're going to support or protest anything make sure you do your own damn research, don't rely on photos or articles on Facebook. Besides, having a baby is a choice for a woman, not a necessity. Don't take my word for it tho, I'm just a woman who never wanted kids. Do your research and then come back to me.
*side note: you CAN be pro life personally but pro choice politically. Meaning you'd never get an abortion yourself but you understand other women should have the choice.
Also, this is not meant to spark a debate. You can state if you agree or disagree but do not start fights or you'll be immediately blocked. I respect your opinion, just respect mine and everyone else's.
#prochoice
What Girls & Guys Said
27 36Bravo Lady! I fully agree with this! You're on point :)
Why would you NOT WANT your baby just because they have a birth defect... that is just heartless
Some women can't handle children with severe autism. I've even seen husbands leave their wives for refusing to put the Autistic child up for adoption. Everyone in my family avoids the poor kid. I feel sorry for him so I usually talk to him, but it's not a good life for them. Some of the autistic children grow up fine, but when a mother and father aren't prepared for them it's damaging. He feels like neither of his parents love him and it is heartbreaking.
Exactly what @Genocide said. And I mean any birth defect that is harmful to the babies health or way of life. My step brother has slight autism and it is extremely difficult handling him. I'm just his sister but its hard for me, imagine how hard it is for his mom and my step dad. When my mom was pregnant with my baby sister, she had a massive swelling on her head (the baby) when she was about 4-5 months. If it didn't go down, it'd cause some serious brain injury and possibly death. My mom had the option to abort the baby because it would also hurt my mom if she gave birth to the baby with the swelled mass. She didn't because the doctors saw it go down and get better. My sister is now almost 1 years old and healthy, but she ran the risk of having severe brain trauma in some form, or even dying before or after birth. That is why I included autism/birth defects. Not everyone has an easy "yes/no" answer for that type of situation. Not everyone can handle an autistic or dying baby.
That is good to hear though your little sister is alive and healthy :)
Thanks, she's learning to walk and is honestly my world lol
Your very welcome and I wish you and your family the best!! :) <3
Considering all of the alternatives, it is regretfully the best option available to women in incredibly difficult circumstances. The moment a worthy alternative pops up, I am all for abolishing the act (ectogenesis, perhaps), but until then, I can't, in good conscience, force people to not.
Well I'm against abortion. Getting pregnant is a choice a woman makes as she choose to have sex and even with the best contraception is a risk.
And what about the man? He has no responsibility in this?
Which is it? One minute you don't want to have a say and the next you want him to take responsibility?
I NEVER said anything about men except they shouldn't make abortion illegal. It should just be an OPTION. If we are going to be forced to have a child because MEN made abortion illegal, then the MEN should also be held accountable for the child. It takes 2 to make a baby.
Choice of the male to not use the limited options available to him, one of which being the condom and spermicidal lube, both of which are cheap and readily available. I agree with your point. Males have a small role to play. After all, half the baby comes from them.
Well which is it? If women have the choice to abort a child's life because she doesn't want to be a parent and the father has no say surely it's fair that a man who doesn't want to be a father should be able to abort his parental and financial responsiblI ties?
I see your point.
The answer is neither.
@iraqvetran666 I believe a man has that right currently anyway. Should the woman choose to carry the child to term instead of ending the pregnancy. When the biological father wished it to end, then he has the right to absolve himself through the courts of his parental rights and responsibilities. ( At least that is what I have heard and read is currently happening in such cases). If the woman chooses to keep her child at that point the child is her responsibility 100%. Else she could give the child up for adoption then both are absolved of their parental rights and responsibilities, yielding them to the adoptive parent (s). No, nothing about such a situation is clear cut or easy.
@SammyGurl funny because then they come looking for child support payments for 18 years and if you can't pay your thrown in the slammer
@iraqveteran666 See above respons to your misspelled name. oops!
I believe that is why the absolution of parental rights and responsibilities exists, to take care of cases such as this.
PRO CHOICE, eat a dick up to anyone who says different!
Pro-lifers should watch this video and this video should be outside all abortion clinics where pro-lifers rally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyUFzNVolG8&t=62sAbortion is totally fine with me, this could have been your kid.
Cash me ousside howbowdah girl... she's not a case for abortion, she's a case for an extinction level event. Idiocracy brought to life.
I don't believe in abortion is because majority of the time why women have abortion is because they don't want the child, whether that's because they're not ready for it, too young, not financially stable, or just had a one night stand. Because the mother.. who clearly laid down and DECIDED to have sex was being not cautious, the child then should be killed? no. You decide to lay down and have sex, you then step up and parent a child. How is it fair to that child to be terminated when they don't even get a say?
Also, I'm against it because there are sooooo many women out in the world who physically can not have a child, or lost the child due to miscarriage, SIDS or other issues. My aunt and uncle had a child, lost her when she was 1 month old due to SIDS, they only had their child for 1 month...1 month because she left too soon. And now people are just terminating pregnancies because they "don't want" the baby.. yet families are loosing children that they clearly want. It's a sad. sad thing.
***this excludes rape cases. *****
Good take.
I'm with you. Government has no bearing on what a woman does with her body. Religious right douchebags are the only people that have a problem with it.
I'm religious and I'm pro choice. It's fucking common sense...
@helloitsmethere no it isn't. Religion has no place in government. SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE read the Constituion high school student
I think I misunderstood your comment about common sense. Unfortunately The religiious right assholes (Republicans all of them) are STILL trying to ban abortions one small step at a time.
No. I think you need to reread what I just said... The whole pro choice vs. pro life thing is based on common sense. That's what I meant. Pro-choice means that it is the parents' rights to choose if a woman wants an abortion or not. Taking that right away will lead to issues. It is VERY much needed. My religion DID NOT influence my stance on this. That's what I was trying to say...
Tbh, a lot of Southern Christians take it to a next level (not all of them, but a lot of them)... that's why I don't trust a lot of them.
Your user name says everything dispite your opinion.
Its from a song dumbass
I know what it's from stupid...
tl;dr for my tastes lol I'm sorry but since u invited me I felt compelled to reply:
If Trump or the Republican mass in Congress somehow managed to make abortion illegal, many globally would go bat shit. I would go bat shit because although it doesn't exactly directly affect me, that would be a sign that America had lost its way and I would feel Trump completely failed his job as a president if he let this happen.
I'm so done with pro lifers and I srsly hope they don't come rambling on my opinion cuz I'm not in the mood for an argument today
My sister just said this a second ago: I miss Bush. If people are starting to miss Bush then you KNOW it's bad...
@helloitsmethere So pumped for the next 4 years lmao
Oh lawd save us...
@helloitsmethere I'm sure u've seen the Spicer thing
No, whats that?
@helloitsmethere U know the dude who lied about the Trump crowd being the biggest ever and trying to disprove any facts about it being relatively small? The Trump administration is proving to lie
Oh yeah, that idiot. I heard about him. He is annoying af...
@helloitsmethere Yeah but that's not what's important lol the important part is that Trump's administration is lying and continuing to lie about this. This brings up worries about the future
I'm worried too... And here comes Kellyanne Alternative Fucking Facts Conway... smh
@helloitsmethere LMAO and the reporter laughed his ass off afterwards xD
The reporter is a savage for dealing with her bullshit in the first place lmao
@helloitsmethere I don't remember what channel it was for but I'm proud xD
It was CNN Lmao same
@helloitsmethere I could imagine the roast fest getting amazing lul
@helloitsmethere and @maxemeister trump has banned CNN from reporting on him and along with another organization from giving updates on what's going on
Wait are you serious? Holy shit enter Stalin
Yes I am, they're not allowed to report on his actions connected to their organization now.
Do they have the power to do that?
I'm assuming since he is president he does have the power to do that.
No he singlehandedly definitely would not have the power to do that. With the Supreme Court, Congress to block him, and the constitution with freedom of the press, a mere president cannot just declare no more freedom of the press. Or maybe he can. Did he just refuse to let them into press conferences?
I can't remember exactly, i saw it on many articles and people were mad or found it funny. Just Google it.
Alright I sure will, thanks
@SweetHomicidalQueen seriously? That's just fucked up...
@helloitsmethere U know what's even more fucked up? He's goin after Muslims and now he's actually allocating funds for the wall. An economic nightmare
I just saw the wall being built on TV... I just can't... omg
@helloitsmethere Now this won't hurt many people but it'll hurt our economy and our wildlife
I know... and I feel sad :(
@helloitsmethere This is one instance where I can really say most if not all Trump supporters really were stupid in this
They really were... and thanks to them this country is FUCKED. I moved at the fucking wrong time... smh
@helloitsmethere He can't effect too much since he indeed is JUST president
Then again... that's true, plus he can't deport me either.
Just 4 years. We've got this... Right?
@LadyTerror I hope so...
@LadyTerror I always wanted to conquer a country. Rally the lady folk cuz I'm leading a conquest, boyos!
In cases of health concern to the mother and cases of rape it should be allowed, other than that i believe it shouldn't be allowed
Very good mytake, bravo :)
You are right about this I completely agree you explained it really well
well its a good thing it would be unsafe. abortion should be illegal. murder is a legal and people still do that, doesn't mean it shouldn't be illegal.
Abortion isn't murder though, so your argument is moot.
Well said. Pro choice
"I will force you to have children, but I am unwilling to pay an extra 6 dollars of taxes to increase the chances of those children having decent education, food and healthcare"
exactly lol
FYI @Hidden_P I DON'T HAVE TO LOOK UP THE BASTARD TO KNOW WHAT THE MEANING MEANS AND FOR YOU TO CALL LITTLE BABIES BASTARDS ISN'T CALLED FOR
You keep switching from using the words fetus to baby. Which is it? And maybe women should learn to keep their legs closed if they don't want a baby, or just use protection.
So will the boyfriends and husbands stop expecting sex then? I'm sure a lot of relationships will crumble because men are whiny babies when they can't have sex.
Fetus is for the first trimester, when it can be aborted. Baby is for the second and third trimester when they decide to keep it or if they HAVE to get rid of it to keep the mother alive.
Well on judgment day all pro choicers and abortionists will go to hell. The government might allow ou to get away with killing babies, but God will hold you accountable.
Yeah, cause guys are sooooo willing to wear condoms. You practically have to pull teeth. Oh? Religion? Lovely. We all see how well Christianity is doing. Can't even say Merry Christmas in the workplace without backlash most of the time. Also, threats of hell don't bother the non-religious. It's like telling them the tooth fairy will smite them down. Also, why can't women refuse to have sex? It's totally valid given men are trying to mandate what is done with their uterus. If men don't want children aborted then the only surefire way to not have a baby is to abstain from sex even in marriage until you want to have a child. No birth control is 100% effective. Sex only for procreation makes the most sense in your argument. Men can't have it both ways. Recreational sex? Leave abortion alone. It's that simple.
@Genocide Women decide what men get to sleep with them so they can easily insist that the man wears a condom. Women just don't want to take responsibility. And abortionists will go to hell whether they believe in hell or not.
Ever heard of rape?
@Genocide Yes, but as you already know, the majority of women who have sex consent to it. They should insist that the man wears protection. But instead they would rather kill a unborn baby. Evil parasites.
I don't know a single woman who had had an abortion. The ones using protection still had their babies. I would still have my child if my birth control measures fail... but if I were raped or the baby would have low quality of life (bed ridden, sickly) I would abort. I however won't tell another woman what is right or why she should abort. Abortion shouldn't be the first choice, of course contraception should come first, but it needs to be offered to those who cannot drive who are not as privileged. They won't stop having sex and they can't afford to feed the children they have. I am lucky enough to have family that cares enough to take me to get the free protection, despite how out of the way it is, but not everyone has that. In rural areas drug stores really abuse condom prices. My entire town had ZERO places to buy condoms. I've checked in desperate times.
@Genocide The problem is that society doesn't encourage women to take responsibility. Women are treated like spoiled children who have to be pandered to. There are far too many women who have unprotected sex and just have an abortion if they get pregnant. Women should take more responsibility. But of course telling women to take responsibility would be sexist.
Taking responsibility and being told to take responsibility is not sexist. I believe women should take responsibility when it is their fault. If you can afford condoms and don't buy them? That's asking for pregnancy. If you can get an IUD, implant, or shot... and don't!!! That's being irresponsible. Men are just as responsible though. They should always use a condom and I think they need to push the male birth control that they keep delaying. It needs to be a team effort. Sex is after all. I just think that a woman who had made a mistake shouldn't be judged for one abortion. Nor should a woman be judged for mercy killing. I wouldn't want to bring a child into this world that can't walk, can't be a kid. I would have an autistic child, but I would certainly abort my child if they couldn't run and jump and enjoy being a kid. Every woman deserves a choice. Not all of us are stupid or crazy. Some of us just don't like being optionless when we have tried our best to avoid pregnancy.
@Genocide Women should be more responsible for the simple fact that it's their body and they are the ones who have ovaries and can get pregnant, so if they don't want to get pregnant they should insist that the man wear a condom instead of just having an abortion as a mean of contraception.
That's where I disagree. It should be equal. The men want to have sex usually more than the woman does. If she's going to be on birth control pills, IUD's or implants that have horrible side effects such as weight gain, mood alterations, increase of ovarian cysts, and lots more... guys can bring condoms and nag the medical industry to make the male birth control pills faster and wear the condoms without being haggled and nagged. Having to nag a man is such a turn off. Men are the loaded guns. If you unload the gun then there is no danger in the first place.
@Genocide So much bullshit. Women are the ones who run the risk of getting pregnant, so if they are too dumb or careless to not insist that the man wears a condom then they should have no right to an abortion. Women hold the power when it comes to sex and if the woman said to the man "It's either a condom or no sex" the majority of men would still have sex. So no, women are mostly responsible.
Sorry forgot men are incapable of being responsible in the world of Love_Is_Eternal. Done arguing with your ignorance. I'd have better luck teaching a fish to play piano. There is no intellectual conversation with sexist pricks who can't accept equal responsibility for dipping his stick. If men can't be responsible they shouldn't have sex at all. All adults are meant to be responsible. Glad not all men are as mentally handicap as you are. My boyfriend thankfully understands he is equally responsible if we have a child because it takes two to have consentual sex. 50-50... A man plays an equal role. Can't get pregnant without them you know. Goodbye, tired of getting nowhere with you. Apparently whoever taught you sex Education also got you to drink the koolaid. You're so brainwashed by sexism it's scary.
@Genocide Typical reply from a stupid female. I never said men are not responsible, I said that women are MORE responsible for the simple fact that they are the ones who get pregnant. They should insist that the man wears protection instead of using abortion as a means of contraception. It's a shame you're too stupid to understand this.
The fact that some women may have unsafe abortions is a weak argument. Arguing we shouldn't pass a law because people will harm themselves in the process of breaking the law isn't rational. I have an idea: don't break the law. If society passes a law, then people harm themselves while breaking the, there is only one person at fault. If we legalized cocaine, people wouldn't die in back alley drug deals either. Does that mean we should legalize cocaine, to save some lives?
Yes. en.wikipedia.org/.../Drug_policy_of_Portugal
It's not at all a weak argument considering that most people against abortions are also pro-life. How can you claim to be pro-life if you don't care that more women will die from having unsafe abortions?
@lumos Because it will save more lives than kills. Yes, maybe 100 women a year will die due to botched back alley abortions, but 1 million lives will be saved. It's totally rational.
Maybe 100 women a year? Are you kidding me? If women had to resort to unclean and unsafe abortions, you bet your ass that the chances of them dying would skyrocket. Try thousands, or hundreds of thousands of deaths. If you truly were pro-life you wouldn't want a single death. Utilitarianism isn't a philosophy that goes well hand in hand with pro-life. When it comes to pro-life, it should be all or nothing. If you're ok with women dying due to getting unsafe abortions, you're not pro-life. A true pro-lifer would mourn those deaths. And who exactly do you think would take care of these 1 million unwanted children? As far as I'm concerned the adoption and foster systems are already overcrowded with kids in desperate need of homes. What exactly are you going to do to help those kids personally? Are you doing anything at all to uphold your "pro-life" status? Or do you say you're pro-life simply for the "moral" badge and not for the consequences?
@lumos Regardless of how many women die from having illegal abortions, it would be fewer than the number of abortions performed. It would save lives. My original point still stands: That we shouldn't pass a law because people will harm themselves while breaking the law is a dumb argument. Don't break the law.
"Utilitarianism isn't a philosophy that goes well hand in hand with pro-life. When it comes to pro-life, it should be all or nothing. If you're ok with women dying due to getting unsafe abortions, you're not pro-life"
@lumos I don't think you fully understand the anti-abortion perspective. From their perspective, if 1,000 women die from having illegal, unsafe abortion, it's better than 100,00 fetuses being aborted. It's fine if you disagree with that perspective. Just be sure to understand it before you critique it.
@OhMyMan not talking about the anti-abortion perspective. I'm talking about the "pro-life" perspective, in which every life is valuable and every life lost is worth mourning. Which is why a philosophy such as utilitarianism really doesn't mix well with a perspective such as pro-life, because "a few people dying for the greater good" simply cannot be a positive thing when it comes to PRO-LIFE. It would be an oxymoron.
@lumos That makes as much sense of pro-choice people shouldn't call themselves pro-choice because they won't let me choose what kind of gun to have or how much I can pay your workers. You are kind of right, but they are just names and labels. Even if we agree that pro-life people shouldn't call themselves pro-life, that has nothing to do with the abortion act.
@OhMyMan except that guns have nothing to do with bodily autonomy? I don't believe someone has the right to call themselves pro-life if they're ok with people dying when it could be prevented. It's as simple as that. Their use of that label is hypocritical and they're taking a "moral standpoint" that they can't even uphold. They're cherrypicking what lives to prioritize, which goes against the core idea of being pro-life. It has everything to do with abortions.
@lumos But pro choice people don't call themsleves "pro choice in regards to women's anatomy." They just call themselves pro-choice. I think they should call themselves "pro-choice in regards to women's anatomy." Calling themselves pro-choice is hypocritical because they cherry pick which issues they are pro choice about.
@OhMyMan are you kidding me lol? Pro-choice is a term that's pretty much solely used when it comes to discussing abortions, and quite frankly I've never seen it used elsewhere. If you wish to have a debate then please don't create straw men. But if we're going to use you're petty straw man fallacy as an example, I have a counter argument for that: there are MANY choices that you can be for or against. I would even go as far as to claim that there's an infinite amount of choices that you can support. Or not support. It's an ambiguous term if you take it out of context (abortion), like you did. However, being PRO-LIFE is pretty much a self-explanatory definition with very little room to misinterpret or take out of context. Pro-life = being on life's side, mourning death, wanting to prevent death when you can. Pro-choice can mean whatever you want it to mean if you take it out of its original context, which is STILL abortion and only abortion. Stop wasting my time on nonsensical arguments