[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Azure

Lets take vaccinations as an example.

Right now it is a personal choice whether parents vaccinate their children, but there is a VERY good chance that we move to a point where you will required to be vaccinated in order to attend public events, school, hospitals, airports, etc.

I support that. I think if we don't do that it will become a bigger issue each year.

As for 'all' government regulation, it depends what you mean. Do I support a law requiring you to wear seatbelts? Yes, even though it only affects the safety of your OWN life, without any detriment to anyone else.

Do I support government regulation requiring you to not eat junk food? No, but I would support a sugar tax combined with a tax rebate on all healthy food items.

However, those things do not compare with a purposeful act like abortion, i.e. you do not purposefully try to get diabetes or a massive coronary.

I just think that a part of the pro-choice side, including some in this very thread have created a pedestal where they have gotten onto and deny, deny, deny, deny any kind of argument from the pro-life side because they have deemed ALL pro-life arguments to be ONLY about controlling the woman's body, thereby intentionally and purposefully ignoring the ENTIRE part about is it a human life, and if so, is a human life more important than your personal freedom, and is it not important to protect human life & as an extension, humanity above all else?

Thanks for answering my question. Interesting answer. I think your views are a lot more nuanced than "staunch libertarian". But I take your point: Some "pro-choice" (when are we going to abandon these dated, misleading pro-choice/pro-life labels?) rhetoric is overly dismissive of "pro-life" concerns.