Abortion questions...?

If you support free speech does that make you pro-flagburning?The questions surrounding the availability of abortion are quite different from the questions as to whether someone should get an abortion.

Which is why I consider myself pro-choice and not pro-abortion. I think women should have the right to an abortion, but I do wish that no abortions took place. The same for free speech and flag burning. If I am for legalization then I am pro-legalization. That is what the "pro-" portion means, it means "for". We support the legal aspect, not the medical aspect. Pro-abortion literally means "for abortions". No one here is for abortions. We are for legalization.

Anti-choice would be the position where someone is against the idea that a woman and a doctor should make the choice of whether to abort a pregnancy or not. Pro-choice is the position where someone believes that such a choice should be made by a woman and her doctor.

It is an important nuance nonetheless, just as the nuance between the pro-freespeech and pro-flagburning positions, or between anti-temperance and pro-alcoholism.

Nope. Same definition. You even stated that we are for legalization, so why not call us pro-legalization? You have to break your own rules to call it pro-abortion.

Pro-abortion is not specific to what is being aborted. Pro-abortion could mean that we are for the abortion of countdowns prior to a space shuttle launch. Pro-abortion could mean we are for the stopping of everything. How far do you want to carry these silly semantics?I suppose we could also ignore the nuances of other labels. I would assume that you are for the freedom of religion, so that would make you pro-muslim I would assume. You might be pro-gun, so you might be pro-killing. Need I go on?

That is the very definition of a semantic argument where you ignore the implied meaning by referring to the literal meaning. We say we are pro-choice. You say we are wrong, we are really pro-abortion because of semantics.If you were not playing semantic games then you would call us by the the phrase that we use to describe ourselves which is pro-choice.

Implied meaning is not relative. Implied meaning is the meaning that the speaker is meaning to say. If you mistranslate it it is YOUR fault. As we have shown you multiple times, no one is pro-abortion. The pro-choice movement is not about encouraging women to have abortions. This is why your label is incorrect, and I can't understand why you don't see this difference.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

You are the one redefining our position. Quite often you have implied that supporting legalization is the same as supporting the abortion itself.

I agree. However, the reality is that women do seek out abortions and will continue to do so even if it is made illegal. When abortions were illegal there was a serious class issue that arose where poor women were not allowed access or only had access to very dangerous alternatives. At the same time, rich women (read "white") had access to doctors that would perform hush-hush abortions in safe and clean environments using modern medical procedures.While it saddens my heart that any woman would choose to abort their pregnancy it saddens me more to see women dying from medial malpractice as a result of poverty. In the end, it isn't my decision to make.

Obviously, we aren't there yet. In our modern society, young and single mothers are villified by the very people who would like to stop them from getting an abortion. We live in a political environment where the party demonizing welfare recipients who receive money for children they did not abort is the same party claiming that abortion is wrong. Until women are not demonized for giving birth and face decades of economic disadvantages you will continue to see women seeking abortions.

IMHO, this is the wrong debate to have. The real discussion should focus on why women seek abortions to begin with. There are many stories of women prior to Roe v. Wade purposefully injuring themselves in falls in order to induce a miscarriage.And what if a fetus does have a soul that goes on to the afterlife? Given that half of pregnancies naturally abort in the first month without the mother really noticing I can only assume that the vast majority of people in heaven will be fetuses that never made it past the 4 week stage.

When is the best time to teach kids about gun safety? Before or after they have been hunting every weekend with their friends? Or do we tell them that the best way to hunt safely is not to hunt at all?

It's not a hypothetical situation. It was the reality prior to Roe v. Wade. Even in ancient Rome there were apothecaries that sold potions that were supposed to cause miscarriages. I believe there was even mention of such potions in the Bible, but I could be wrong about that.And it goes beyond the ability to feed a child. Young single mothers are at a serious disadvantage compared to their childless peers. On top of that, they are ostracized and socially stigmatized, especially by the conservative portion of the population that is also stridently pro-life. Do you really think that the only reason women seek abortions is that they are a little low on cash?

When you think they are ready and when they start firing weapons may not be the same. That's the point.