主播大秀

I really with these anti-choice extremists would back off. If you think abortion is wrong, that's fine - I understand that view. So don't have one if you are morally opposed to it. It's really that simple. Stop trying to legislate your often twisted "morality" and stop acting like the American Taliban. Your religious views should NOT be the law of the US.

I find it fascinating that this is still such a conflict today. As a moderate Republican from middle America, I don't even consider this an issue. On a list of all the things that I feel are important for the federal government or even a state government to be spending time, money and hot air on; abortion does not even make #100 on the list. I know that I am not alone when I say that to many voters this is also a NON-ISSUE. The law of the land has been determined by the Supreme Court. I have no problem with abiding by the law. If at some point they change it for whatever reason, I'll abide by the change. I am so weary of the moralizing crusaders who spent their entire lives trying to govern other people's behavior by endeavoring to legislate their particular beliefs. Please spend the same amount of time, money and effort raising the children that are already here and fall through the web of society by the thousands every day.

Their goal is not the suppression of medical rights for the gain of ethical or moral ground, the goal is the legalization of rape based reproduction, a common theme in macho/sociopathic mentality. This is easily exposed when reading right wing hategroup sites, just take a look.

I'll second Shawn and add: On the day men are able to bear children they have a voice in this debate concerning a woman's choice about her own body. Until that day, they should stick to abstinence or vasectomy if they want to decrease abortions.

All this money and resources spent on trying to ensure more children are born, when so many children today are neglected, live in proverty, starving and killed every day.

The anti abortion people have no issues with children living miserble lives and then dying.. as long as they can ensure that every child is born..

Once that is achieved, most of them will return to their nice homes and wallow in their victory whilst more children are killed by the hands of their family, or neglected etc.

If they care so much about children, why are they not in Africa helping the starving and dying children to survive?

@Shawn
But every nation must legislate morality to an extent. Yes, that often leads the twisted morals, but every society has to draw a line somewhere--for example, we wouldn't allow the right to murder or rape. To those who believe a fetus is a life, abortion quite simply is murder. I support abortion rights myself, but I don't think I'm going to win over much of the religious right by asking them to look the other way while others are free to commit what they believe is murder.

I'm from South Dakota, so I've been dealing with this issue first hand. This law is EXTREMELY restrictive. It prohibits abortion even if a woman's health is threatened. It has no clause for women that are victims of rape and incest and it may also restrict contraception use. It's just ignorance. South Dakotans do not see extreme poverty everyday, so they are not aware that single women with children are the poorest in our country! I hope everyone in South dakota votes no to this ridiculous law.

Hey Shawn: An athiest here... how is trying to get people to stop killing their kids (or as you would rather refer to them, as fetuses, to make yourself feel less bad) "twisted morality"? Seems to me killing your own offspring is the twisted morality.

So women get to have 100% of the say of whether there's an abortion or not, which also 100% determines whether the guy has to pay child support. Trying to have your cake and eat it too? And also, given that YOU are the one that gets pregnant, it should be YOU that takes the ultimate in responsibility, by refusing to have sex with someone who doesn't want to use a condom. Quit being a victim, and be PROACTIVE, but you women love being victims.

As an eighteen-year old girl who attends an all-girls catholic highschool, I believe that the pro-life/pro-choice issue is important in this election if politicians are aiming to ban abortion. I agree with everyone who understands how horrific it is to bring an unloved/unwanted child into this world. The world is a tough enough even with loving parents. I believe that pro-lifers fail to understand what actually happens to this child. Our foster-care system is bull, and there are already too many in the system. I believe that we should take care of the lives that our society is already technically responsible for. As for Steve, I am truly appalled by your comment. Although the woman may be the one who gets pregnant, guess who 99% of the time pressures her to have sex? And who wants to be a victim? Stop trying to blame the problem entirely on the one who holds the baby because in fact it takes a man and a woman to create life, check your biology book if you don't believe me. Seeing as it takes the man and the woman to create the baby, I see no reason why both parties shouldn't have equal responsibility.

Shawn (#1), by your reasoning, if I consider any action wrong, all I have to do is refrain from committing it, and I've done my moral duty. I don't have any responsibility to protect others from being victims of those actions or prosecute those who commit such actions. Clearly, if we followed these principles, our entire society would fall apart. I don't know why proponents of abortion can't admit that it's a form of killing, like capital punishment, and then create arguments to justify the killing in certain circumstances. Let's call it what it is.

THE PRO LIFE FOLKS ARE TOO INFECTED WITH EMOTIONAL HUBRIS TO THINK CLEARLY ON THIS ISSUE.

BEING A MAN, AND UNABLE TO GET PREGNANT, I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT ABORTION IS A SUBJECT THAT I SHOULD AVOID. MY INSTINCTS TELL ME THAT WOMEN KNOW BEST ON THIS ISSUE.

NONETHELESS... I SHALL DARE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTARY. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT A WOMAN WHO IS IMPREGNATED AGAINST HER WILL FROM RAPE... AND YOUNG GIRLS WHO BECOME PREGNANT FROM INCEST, RAPE OR NAIVETE SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO SAFE AND LEGAL ABORTION.

COMMON SENSE RULES THE DAY HERE! THINK ABOUT IT. DO EWE FOLKS THINK THAT A WOMAN FORCED TO GIVE BIRTH FROM A RAPE CRIME WILL SEE THAT OFFSPRING WITHOUT SOME MEASURE OF COMTEMPT? DO EWE FOLKS REALLY THINK THAT A YOUNG 12 YEAR OLD GIRL WHO GETS PREGNANT FROM RAPE OR INCEST IS READY TO BE A MOTHER? AND WHAT IF THE PREGNANCY IS ENDANGERING A PREGNANT WOMAN'S LIFE? ARE EWE SERIOUSLY THINKING THAT NO EFFORT TO SAVE HER SHOULD BE INTRODUCED?

THE SO CALLED PRO-LIFE FOLKS ARE EITHER VERY FOOLISH OR EXTREMELY MEAN-ESPIRITED. IT DOESN'T TAKE GENIUS TO SEE IT.

"Although the woman may be the one who gets pregnant, guess who 99% of the time pressures her to have sex?"

Julie, We are each responsible for our own actions. Learn that now, and you will certainly have a better life. Blaming a guy because you let him pressure you into sex is not taking responsibility.

You either agree to sex, or it is rape. There is no inbetween. There is no 'he pressured me'.

Just like there is no 2 parties when it comes to contraception. Each are their own entity.

The woman is 100% responsible for ensuring that contraception is used if she does not want to get pregnant.

Just like the man is 100% responsible for contraception if he does not want his partner to get pregnant.

I get so tired of hearing people blame others for actions they could have prevented by taking responsibility.

Susan said: 鈥渞efrain from committing it, and I've done my moral duty. I don't have any responsibility to protect others from being victims of those actions or prosecute those who commit such actions鈥�

That鈥檚 right. Until the day you are officially declared God, you do not have that responsibility.

What Europeans need to understand is that pro-life folks believe abortion is a matter of life and death. The "choice" you make means the death of a child. I am not a right wing evangelical, but after I saw my son's sonogram for the first time (at 2 months) that changed my way of thinking. Call it a fetus, call it a bunch of cells, but at the end of the day what you are doing is killing an innocent life.

You may be killing an innocent life in abortion; however, the fact that the woman wants an abortion probably means that your bringing an unloved child into this world. As terrible as it is to take away life, don't you think that it is just as terrible to bring a child into this world who will most likely be neglected, and maybe abused. Abortion is such a tricky issue because ultimately it boils down to the a matter of quality of life.

Derek, I see your point, I may have sent the wrong message by blaming men for the pressure, if we all took responsibility for our actions then perhaps we wouldn't even have to discuss this issue.

Frank A,

You're right, much better to have a lot of children that no-one wants and have to deal with that issue, wait... but none of the pro-lifers want to talk about THAT issue, all they care about is that the child is born, after that they really don't give a damn.

FOr those people who are fond of using the phrase '100%' please remember that NO form of contraception is 100% reliable.
Also remember that if women who really do want an abortion can't get one near their home, they will simply have to travel further to find somewhere where they can get one. Abortion has been a part of every society since the beginning of time (even if noone likes to admit it) and always will be. There are always ways of inducing miscarrige if you can't get an abortion anyway...

Martha, I said 100% responsible.. I was not referring to the reliability of contraception but to the level of a person responsibility.

Julie, you are so right.. :)

Now, imagine the baby that the poor woman wants to abort is you!...doesnt that give you a chill down your spine? A simple rule in life: if you cant keep a baby, dont make one!(if you make one, keep it)

Considering that most abortions are not the result of rape, endangerment of a mother's life or incest, it seems odd that people consistantly focus on these anomalies. The issue is really about responsibility. Abortion costs someone else their life (the DNA of the foetus is that of another person) more often than not for the mistakes of the mother and father.
And many children of parents who did not want/expect children are given up for adoption and are put in families where they are loved. Given the choice, I'd rather have that chance, than be killed with no consultation.

The issue here is the same as it was under Roe: whether an unborn fetus is a human being and thus has the right to life under the 14th Amendment. Both sides have played the emotional card. Pro-lifers using pictures of abortions and aborted babies, pro-choicers (wrongly) asserting there is no provision for the safety of the mother or no provision for instances of rape or incest. The South Dakota legislature and government turned to science, the god of our times, to determine the status of the fetus and the veridct was the fetus is a human being, a person having a right to life under the constitutions of both South Dakota and the United States of America. If only the courts and legislatures turned to scientific evidence more often we would have not only fewer abortions but a more sustainable environment to support the children of the future...

I lived in South Dakota for more years than I care to remember. Luckily I now live in the UK where abortion is legal and is provided free of charge by the NHS. It is my belief if the ballot initiative successful other states will help woman from South Dakota obtain safe abortions and keep them secret so that the women will not be prosecuted under South Dakota's ban. The one thing South Dakotans have yet to learn is that you cannot legistate morality or interfere with personal choices.

One the day that all the Right to Life folks agreed to adopt EVERY UNWANTED child and compensate fairly each mother who carried a child to term against her will, then - MAYBE -I would say we have a better option. Until then, those opposing abortion should SHUT THEIR MOUTHS.

Martha: Not so good of an arguement. Slavery has been around for for most of society as well. Was abolishing that pointless?

Sigh. The pro-abortion arguments presented here have all been well refuted:

To those arguing "quality before quantity", consider:
The answers to poverty and neglect are charity, decent paid work and good upbringing - NOT killing human beings.

To those arguing it is purely the mothers' decision, consider:
Those aborted (the true victims) are both female and male.

To Martha, who wrote that abortion has always been "a part of every society":
Largely correct - but it has always been regarded as the most heinous of crimes; like a murder in which the victim is always absolutely helpless and absolutely innocent. Our generation was the first to...
a) remove the penalties for the crime in certain circumstances and thence...
b) come to declare abortion to be some kind of "human right" (If that's not sick, what is?)

Consider that every doctor who performs an abortion breaks the oath of Hippocrates (460 to 370 BC).

Steve's comment is atrociously sexist, as is the notion that any ONE party is responsible for contraception and reproduction. Men AND women are responsible TOGETHER. It is a woman's responsibility to have safe sex, it is a man's responsibility to have safe sex. That's all it comes down to.

I believe that by making abortion illegal it takes away something which goes beyond a basic human right. It seems like 'rights' need to be defined by law, but there is a deeper law where one's own person is concerned. It cannot be defined by any language or determined by any person over another. We ALL know this deeper law. To have someone else tell us what we can and cannot do with our own bodies is an offense so vile that EVERY human on this planet can understand. If a couple has an unwanted pregnancy and is forced to continue it, both the man AND the woman AND the fetus have had their humanity stripped from them. They all just become objects, things to be defined and written.

There is something DIFFERENT about a pregnancy. I have heard the argument numerous times that a fetus is an individual person, and has rights as an individual person. But, this person cannot participate in society, they cannot make choices, so we must make choices for them. We CANNOT know the secrets of life/non-life. Just because a thing has a heartbeat doesn't mean that it's pondering Plato or making a birthday list. EVERYONE can agree that there is a difference between a twenty year old person and a twenty day old fetus. It's tricky.

That is why I am Pro-Choice. Who am I to tell someone what to do with their body? Who am I to tell someone the answer to that difficult question: to keep or not to keep? I am not going to determine the personhood or non-personhood of a fetus for anyone but myself. I support those who would choose not to have an abortion and those who would choose to have one.

So if you oppose abortion, educate yourself about your body and your partner's body so that you have the best chance of not creating a tough situation for yourself, and if you are OK with abortion do the same. It is a choice that the individual must make for oneself, and respect the choices of others.

So many on the pro-death side (Lets call it what it is.) think that the pro-lifers just want the baby born and have no concern for the mothers and babies afterward. Obviously, they have never been involved with a crisis pregnancy center. When mothers come there in need, they are helped - with medical expenses, housing, and often job training, and parenting classes. The help extends beyond the birth of the child. Yes, we do care what happens after the birth of the child.

On the subject of rape, women who give birth to babies conceived through rape recover better than those who abort their babies. Abortion doesn't cover up the trama of rape, it just compounds it.

As for unwanted children, just ask all the women flocking to infertility clinics how many of those children would remain unwanted if placed for adoption! (And yes, I would take any baby that was in danger of abortion - a question often asked of pro-lifers.)

Vivian, I believe you're incorrect when you say "abortion has always been regarded as the most heinous of crimes." In the Eighteenth Century, both in England and in America, abortion was not considered a crime. Indeed, the common law in England allowed abortion before the fetus "quickened," in about the fourth month of pregnancy. Laws criminalizing abortion were not introduced in America until the Nineteenth Century.

The Greek Aristotle (384-322 BC) believed that the soul began as vegetable and evolved during pregancy, so abortion was not a problem in early pregnancy. It's interesting that he and Hippocrates, who lived just a little earlier, seem to have disagreed.

Saint Augustine (354-430 AD) also believed that a soul could not live in an unformed body, and Saint Jerome believed that abortion did not count as killing if it were early enough, as did St. Thomas Aquinus in the Thirteenth Century.

Pope Pius issued a bull in the late Sixteenth Century that criminalized all abortions at all times, but it was quickly revoked by the next pope, who lifted the ban until after quickening at about 16 weeks.

Most abortions are now performed in the first trimester, a little earlier than the limit these gentlemen imposed.

Ok, so the way I see it there are going to be abortions no matter what the law says. If a woman truly does not want to have a baby, she will find a way to abort it. It's a sad, sad truth. If the government bans abortion then women will have to resort to crude and cruel methods to eliminate the baby. Is that what we want as a society? And even if she does not abort the baby, who actually wants an unwilling mother? On another note, although I am pro-choice, I have a problem with individuals who value life so little that abortion is no big deal. The girls who don't use protection or birth control and carelessly have sex and demand an abortion each time they get pregnant disgust me. However, for those individuals with morals who weigh the decision very heavily and decide that it must be done, then for those it is imperative that the government allow a safe procedure.

To Steve:

Women do not LOVE being victims! What a ridiculous thing to even suggest! We struggle our whole lives to be taken seriously, to be seen as equals, but society continues to feed men this idea that we are weak and to be taken advantage of at any moment. It is so easy for a many to abscound when the woman gets pregnant - every year every state releases reports on dead-beat fathers - the list would make your head spin! The issue at hand is this: if women are put in a powerless situation, i.e. rape, incest, absconding men, we as a society need to allow them to empower themselves. And if she has a one night stand, and your morality condemns that and says she should live with the consequences of that choice? Well, I won't buy that until every dead-beat father in this country is hauled in, bank account rung dry, and thrown behind bars. It seems men are more likely to want women to bake the cake, so the men can have it AND eat it.

Men and women are both responsible for their own sexual behaviour and that includes all aspects.

initiation, contraception, conception and whether the foetus is born. I would hate to have the responsibility of a child being dictated to me by people who believe in stories as credible as a fairytale. (All major religions.

With mutual consent I want to decide all of these decisions and the "no" gets the decision if there is a disagreement. No to sex, no to the consequences of sex. The only exception being if the mother wants to keep the child. If a disagreement occurs here then the man should be absolved of the financial responsibility to have a child.

Religion based laws such as this propsed abortion bill are really from the dark ages.

Forcing women to give birth is ruining one life just for the sake of bringing another into the world. An abortion can mean a second chance for many young women who have made mistakes, whilst not having one can often mean their whole future is one of poverty and misery because they are forced onto welfare to provide for a child who will in turn be deprived of opportunities in the future.

Like so many of the people writing sensible and productive comments here, I would like to say that contraception, looking after your own body and own interests, is the way forward on this issue - not some terrible law imposing children upon people. We need education and more people carefully planning their families.

As for PRO-LIFE and this whole thing with not letting rape and incest victims abort - that is just sick religious fanaticism. It's silliness.

Cyndi Babecka - how can you properly provide for the thousands of babies that are aborted? How can you possibly give them everything they deserve and need? And if you say that all they need is love, that is sadly incorrect because they also need food, shelter, education, and healthcare to grow into mature, responsible, and loving adults.