A Woman's Right to Choose...

which life is worth saving and which gender is worth sacrificing. I watched this video last night and just wondered how many pro-choice people are ok with choosing abortion based on the gender they prefer. Suppposedly, gender discrimination in abortion clinics is only illegal in 4 states. That means that in 46 states, you can keep aborting until you get what you want.

I found it repulsive to hear the woman at planned parenthood say "I hope you get your boy!" as she left the room. Maybe it's just me.[youtube:xobok0a9][/youtube:xobok0a9]

Repugnant to use abortion as a sex selection process. Will they go into wombs and cut out the female fraternal twin eventually? Feminists should be in the forefront of adding anti-sex selection abortion laws to the other states or make it a federal law.

Women have the right to choose, and none of us is in a position to judge their motives. Make it illegal to say "I want an abortion because it's a girl" and they'll say "I want an abortion becuase I don't want to be fat for my trip to Cabo".

That's the problem with rights - it eliminates your ability to judge those that exercise them. Along with a right to do something comes the responsibilty to know when NOT to do it. That responsibility seems to be completely lacking in some people.

If they are "rights", then they should NOT be put to a "popular vote."

Same goes for right-to-choose; marriage equality; slavery; interracial marriage; equal-protection-under-the-law; warrantless spying by our own government; and starting unnecessary wars.

Rights are rights. Some folks are stupid and abuse rights. That doesn't mean that all should be stripped of their rights because of a few morons.

Nobody that matters wrote: Women have the right to choose, and none of us is in a position to judge their motives. Make it illegal to say "I want an abortion because it's a girl" and they'll say "I want an abortion becuase I don't want to be fat for my trip to Cabo".

That's the problem with rights - it eliminates your ability to judge those that exercise them. Along with a right to do something comes the responsibilty to know when NOT to do it. That responsibility seems to be completely lacking in some people.

Interesting point. Would be hard to prove that the mother aborted because of the sex of the child, or was forced to abort by the father because of the sex of the fetus.

Don't create laws that can't be enforced?

You won't find a woman walking into a clinic and saying I want an abortion if this fetus is going to be a girl any more than you will find a guy walking into a gun shop asking to buy a gun so he can kill his neighbor. Rights are just that...the right to do something without explanation as to personal motive. Will those rights be abused by some people? Of course. But you don't want the right to arm yourself taken away because some have bought guns and killed people do you? I agree with fred...a law wont change anything. It's illegal to commit murder, but people still buy guns with that intent.

Yep, if we don't get to choose your motives for buying a gun, then you don't get to choose the motives for terminating a pregnancy.

I'm pro-life, but anti-meddle.

Women have the right to choose - both Democrat and republican appointees have made that clear.

At the same time, the courts have been tolerant of states that opt to inform women of the issues
embroiled in their choice - which I'd imagine would include ethics (or lack thereof) of misogyny.

I find efforts to legislate morality tiring, inefficient, and ineffective. The state is a lousy vehicle for morality. All it can bring us is a bunch of noise. State-imposed morality does not save lives. Operation Rescue has saved more lives than any personhood amendment . Your local crisis pregnancy center has likely saved more lives than Operation Rescue. How do they do it? Simple - they have a conversation.

Is a simple conversation and a prayer really that scary?

bailey bud wrote: I'm pro-life, but anti-meddle.

Women have the right to choose - both Democrat and republican appointees have made that clear.

At the same time, the courts have been tolerant of states that opt to inform women of the issues
embroiled in their choice - which I'd imagine would include ethics (or lack thereof) of misogyny.

I find efforts to legislate morality tiring, inefficient, and ineffective. The state is a lousy vehicle for morality. All it can bring us is a bunch of noise. State-imposed morality does not save lives. Operation Rescue has saved more lives than any personhood amendment . Your local crisis pregnancy center has likely saved more lives than Operation Rescue. How do they do it? Simple - they have a conversation.

Is a simple conversation and a prayer really that scary?

I am Pro-Life but Pro-Choice supportive.

But I would like to ask the Pro-Choice woman on 285 Bound a simple question. I am totally comfortable with and supportive of your legal and personal right to an abortion and I have no compunction to ever try to change the law. But why do I always get the feeling that my support is not enough and I have to ideologically be on the same page with your reason(s) for your decision(s)?

What gives?