Quote:
Originally Posted by REDVAN
Pro-life is wrong as a blanket policy.
Pro-choice is wrong as a method of birth control.
Pro-life should be valid after a certain scientific cut-off where it has been legally decided that the fetus is a living person with a mature enough mind that it will evolve into a normal human being.
Pro-choice should be valid in all cases prior to this cut-off fetus age, particularly for rape victims, etc. Pro-choice should also be valid until the fetus gains legal status because that is the law. Until it becomes a person, it is the property of the mother and part of her body and she can do whatever she sees fit.
If a couple is considering abortion, there needs to be a reason for it other than "oops", but I think it should be a legal and morally accepted option.
I also consider this to be a relatively moderate point of view, which is what most people actually believe.
Edit: I realize I mixed up pro-life with "allow all fetuses to live no matter what" and pro-choice with "kill all babies!!" but that's tough. I'm just trying to say that the moderate view is preferred.
|
In a perfect world you may be the most correct. Who makes the choice in the bolded section? Certianly the religious right dont buy into the scientific notion of when life begins. So who?