I can't speak for all pro-choice people, but, if there comes a day where artificial uterii are common, I'd probably reassess my position on abortion, and I'd be glad to do so.

Hope there's enough people willing to adopt.

I would still be pro choice. More options for the parents isn't a bad thing though.

I'm all for advancing fertility science. Reproduction as an educated , investigated, and conscious decision- I support.

It's like an outbreak of mass spiritual ego. We all believe this arbritary and unprovable belief in God's intent- fear and shame on you if you don't. When people are claiming to be at spiritual war with you, what do you do?

When the fetus can appear in court suing for life, then I will be for the fetus. Not before.

I hate to sound like a dick, but pro choice is obviously the correct position here, and will be regarded as such in the future. I can appreciate the sensitivity of the issue, given what's at stake, but the fetus will always exist inside a woman's body. Her body = her choice.

ETA: That goes beyond my belief that a woman has the right to make that choice. Trying to take that right away from her does not mean she won't do it, it just means it will be more dangerous. It is not possible to regulate what a person does with their own body, nor should we try.

I mean, all anyone needs to do is ask themselves whether this would be an issue if men could get pregnant. Abortions would come in 101 flavors and I think everyone knows that.

True... I suppose that I should clarify that by saying that I would reassess I didn't necessarily mean that I would 100% no longer be pro choice as much as I meant that if we were living in a world where a pregnant woman could both physically remove a fetus from her body relatively easily without aborting the fetus AND not have to be legally/financially responsible for that child then I would find it harder to support abortion rights in that world than I do in the world that currently exists...

Weird concept of viability but everybody has a line I suppose.

Coulter is far more entertaining than Hannity/Beck. She's a wonderful troll and really gets people riled up. And takes it to the bank. Truly elite level for it, not sure anyone can top her in trolling abilities.

So the woman goes deep into the forest with her 2 year old child and abandons her. Her body her choice.

I am pro choice as we need something to control population and I do believe the low crime rate we have today is because of abortion. The more people, the more stress on resources and wildlife, the more chance of war and genocide. Pro life will ultimately lead to 500 million dead in a war.

steeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelllhousssseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eee

o really?

brave new world was at least 500 years from now IIRC

I'm pretty solidly pro-choice, but I don't think it's an issue where I'm nearly as comfortable saying the other side is wrong. For me it's just about being pragmatic and realistic, but I can't fully push the morality of it aside to the degree that I can just discount people's feelings the way I can with something like gay marriage.

Its not that Republicans are pro-choice. Its that they are blatant misogynists who can't seem to be asked questions about abortion without going on deeply offensive rape tangents.

Again, how would the issue be different if it were men who became pregnant? Do you disagree with my assertion that abortion would 1000% standard?

This definitely sounds like an unbiased opinion not based on stereotypes at all

your assertion is irrelevant to what is wrong/right.

no u

look, opposition to abortion is opposition to the right of a woman to control her own body. it's patently absurd, but people don't see it like that because sexism/misogyny are fundamental parts of American culture. my assertion is important because it illuminates this dissonance. if it were men that became pregnant (all other gender roles remaining the same), there would be no term for 'abortion,' because of how ****ing standard it would be. deep down, everyone knows this.

again, I understand that this is a highly charged issue because we are talking about human life, but there is just no way around the fact that we are also talking about something inside of a person's body.

the position that i'm asserting as morally 'correct' (in the same sense that equal rights under the law is morally 'correct') is that any individual should have autonomy over their body...

Total BS. The courts have been clear on the idea that there are also the rights of the fetus that are considered starting with Roe v. Wade. Subsequent court decisions have clearly established the idea of the fetus having rights.


Yes it does, your dissonance.

HAHA. A really stupid statement

Thankfully the courts have recognized the difference between an 8 month old fetus that is viable out of the womb and a one month old fetus that isn't. I really don't get the folks like you that believe a woman should have right to destroy an 8 month old fetus that is completely viable out of the womb. Not much difference between an 8 month old fetus and a new born in reality.

except one exists inside another person and the other doesn't. cool appeals to authority though

people who are hardcore anti-abortion are misogynists and anti-woman. it's really pretty simple.

I think he's completely right. Look at how much of the anti-abortion rhetoric is rooted in misogynistic slut-shaming.

Let me know when the GOP passes any law that affects men in any negative way when they and their partners want an abortion.

What if a woman agreed to carry another woman's baby and then the pregnant woman decided to have an abortion. Should she be allowed to abort another woman's baby since it is her body? Let's assume she gets paid only when she delivers to term.