Abortion in the US

[killbot1000]

For all the Pro-Choicers out there, I really just don't understand you. The issue isn't that you've had your choice restricted. Even before Abortion and contraceptives were available, you've had choices. The choice was to have sex, or not to have sex. Before Contraceptives or Abortion, you had to live with the choice you made, and the consequences that came along with it.

 

Today, with the science we have, we can stop a fertilized egg from attaching to a uterus wall, and we can stop a fetus from developing. However, all of this science isn't used to increase Choice, it's just used to eliminate the consequences of a bad choice. Sex is a very pleasurable experience, but with every pleasure, consequences are connected. I'm trying not to be cliched, but you can't make your cake and eat it too.

 

Nobody's a pro-choicer, because then they'd be advocating the teaching of the consequences of unsafe sex to people. In my opinion, they're just anti-consequencites (if thats a word), they want to be able to enjoy the pleasures of sex without facing any of the possible reprocussions.

 

And I see nothing wrong with that, if somebody wants to have sex without consequences, I say good for them!, I encourage it.

 

Really, to be honest, its none of your business, or mine, its the people involved, the potential mother and father. Sex is totally fine in my book, its not bad, its nothing to be ashamed of, enjoy it, its the christianity, and Islam, and judaism that have made the act of sex seen as "bad" but its not, and if we can live in an age where we can have the fun without the consequences, I say "THANK GOD! (that doesnt exist)".

 

My analogy of the chicken egg was fine, because the red dot is in a uterus rather than a shell, not really a big difference there, the embryo is a potential offspring, I stress the word, POTENTIAL, and I dont believe its a person when its in the embryo stage, I just dont...and thats me, you have your opinions, I have mine, but thats the point, leave the decision up to the people involved, dont legistlate your morality on other people.

[SenVa]

Wow I guess im the only undecided one... I kinda think every situation is different. If a teen get preganet... that is there fault... they have to live with it, but lets say a person because really sick... and keeping the baby would\could kill them. Then it should be there choice. I know I would keep the baby (but im totally a guy so I doubt I would ever be in that situation.)... but who am I to say they have to risk\lose their life...

[Rhapsody Guru]

Pro-choice :pirate2:

I don´t like to have childrens so abortion is a good thing. At least it´s my girlfriend wich decide such things but I hope if one day she´s pregnant she will abort.

Everybody is free to have babys but childrens should not grow up with parents wich don´t like them. Only people wich really want babys should keep them.

 

By the way... have you forgotten all of those parents who are paying THOUSANDS of DOLLARS to adopt children from Asia? If people would quit being so selfish and put their unwanted child up for adoption, the parents who can't have children (due to medical circumstances or whatever) can raise the children! See? Everyone wins... the parent who didn't want the child in the first place gave the child to a couple who REALLY care. Amazing how it works doesn't it.

 

 

Guru

[Rhapsody Guru]

Oh and, for the record, people who are quote-on-quote "Pro-Choice" are really "PRO-DEATH" since they really don't care about the health of the mother and the child. Women actually experience more pain in an abortion than they would in normal childbirth... PERIOD! And even if it wasn't surgically done... The Pill causes so many heart problems it is not even funny. The only reason these so-called pro-choice activists are so caught up in this agenda is because it's a money making machine! They only care about money. Also, have you ever noticed on abortion patch commercials that they say it can cause cancer and heart palpitations and other dangerous side effects? Hey women out there, if you love yourself so much and don't want to hurt yourself, go bring the child up for adoption! Yeah baby!

 

'Nuff said.

 

 

Guru

[wildcat69410]

And I see nothing wrong with that, if somebody wants to have sex without consequences, I say good for them!, I encourage it.

 

While you're at it, why don't you encourage random race-hate killings, without consequences too! When there are consequences set in place, I think people should have to go through with them. Unless under extreme circumstances like rape and life or death situations. Actions without consequences doesn't just imbalance morals, it imbalances the entire decision making process. It's just stupid to encourage something like that.

 

Really, to be honest, its none of your business, or mine, its the people involved, the potential mother and father. Sex is totally fine in my book, its not bad, its nothing to be ashamed of, enjoy it, its the christianity, and Islam, and judaism that have made the act of sex seen as "bad" but its not, and if we can live in an age where we can have the fun without the consequences, I say "THANK GOD! (that doesnt exist)".

 

I never said sex is bad! Sex was created as a good thing, it isn't to be ashamed of at all, I agree! Christianity hasn't negated sex at all, it's just encouraged it only between Married couples as it was created for. All it's done is made it seem premiscuous sex as bad, which I don't see much of a problem with. Living without consequences, and living in a world that supports avoiding of consequences waters down everything. How can we learn from our mistakes, how can we learn right from wrong if we do not receive any reprocussions for our actions?

 

Do you remember the consequence free 60's and 70's? With the sex revolution, and drugs and everything. Where has that put our society, what has happened to the {censored} that has come out of that. Living in that era, having that era's mindset is stupid and pointless. Looking back at it now, it looks like an immature stupid era. That's the way we're acting now with abortion, we want to live without consequences, so that's what we do. In the end, we just lower the standards for our society as a whole, which is just a dumb thing to do.

 

My analogy of the chicken egg was fine, because the red dot is in a uterus rather than a shell, not really a big difference there, the embryo is a potential offspring, I stress the word, POTENTIAL, and I dont believe its a person when its in the embryo stage, I just dont...and thats me, you have your opinions, I have mine, but thats the point, leave the decision up to the people involved, dont legistlate your morality on other people.

 

I don't have to believe it's a person to believe that people should receive consequences for what they do. Whether you believe its a child or not, or whether it deserves the rights of a human or not, it has no bearing on choice and consequence. In my opinion, they're not aborting the child, they're just aborting the consequences. They've made a mistake, and they don't want to have to go through with it, so they just abort it. When you start eliminating consequences, you start lowering the standards for a society to live by, and then the society starts to slip and fall, and that's a bad thing.

 

I'm not trying to legislate morality here, I'm just trying to keep the age old action and reaction standard in place. If there are natural consequences to an action, then they should be kept, because more often than not, they're there for a reason...

[killbot1000]

While you're at it, why don't you encourage random race-hate killings, without consequences too! When there are consequences set in place, I think people should have to go through with them. Unless under extreme circumstances like rape and life or death situations. Actions without consequences doesn't just imbalance morals, it imbalances the entire decision making process. It's just stupid to encourage something like that.

 

Dont try to compare having sex to hate-killings, its totally not similar at all, and your comparison is totally invalid, it just shows your negative view of sexuality, whether it be conscious or subconscious.

[gwprod12]

Yet again we have people sticking their noses where they dont belong, trying to dictate to everyone else how they should live their life. Abortion is legal. If you dont like it, change your congressman/senator/president.

 

Let's be serious here. The Republican Party dominates all three branches of government in the United States. President Bush is committed to an anti-choice anti-freedom platform. And Abortion is STILL legal.

 

At this point, I'm for Abortion, just to limit the ranks of potential Christian whackos. UGH, where's a Lion when you need something to eat a Christian?!

[SenVa]

Rhapsody Guru um... I'm pretty sure that if people want to adopt and are not unsutible parents they dont need to spend thousands of dollars to do so... if they are paying that much it means that they are not able to safely support kids.

 

Also, When you say a mother feels more pain from abortion I'm guessing you mean emotinol... because it would be a complete lie to say it is more phisical pain, but back to the emotinal pain... it is ultimately the mothers choice... so I don't see how one can argue that.

 

Just for the record I'm undecieded, but I just can believe what Rhapsody Guru said... If I am wrong then I'm sorry, but I just don't think it is true.

 

gwprod12 brought up a good point. The republican party has control over our government and yet abortion is legal. This leads me to believe that the republicans are not really running our nation on their believes but just running it in order to stay in office and get paid...

 

If the pro-lifers want to really take action they should do 2 things

 

1. instead of judging people they should push for the election of people who will make anti abortion laws instead of avoiding the issue to keep as much favor as possible.

 

2. Keep religion / god out of it... Our nation "should" be god/religion independent... atleast according to our consititution. If we push laws because of sins... and god's belief then we break that religion independantness... These laws should be made completely on morels. (This should be the same for every law... and war for that matter.)

[gwprod12]

OR. Again, I say this. You will never convince everyone in this country, not to mention the supreme court and the legislature to ban Abortion. Make an alternative that's reasonable. Some people dont want to have babies, either to keep or to put up for adoption. That's just the way of it. Come up with an alternative that gives people who want to have abortions what they want but isnt morally objectionable to pro-lifers.

 

Compromise.

[Rhapsody Guru]

Even if you are using birth control, you can still get pregnant. The problem is is that abortion is the only surefire method of birth control. The problem is also that that baby could one day find the cure for cancer. When you kill babies, you're harming the world, not just the baby itself. Don't try to use the argument "what if the baby was going to be a serial killer." thats not really the point. the point is that we shouldn't have the power to decide what babies live and what babies die. The baby has every right to live, and to deny him/her that right, is to deny all all humans the right to live.

 

The baby is a human from the time of conception. That is not negotiable.

 

 

Man you are good.

[gwprod12]

Except that it ultimately rings false. If live is universally sacred, then why is there so much killing?

[killbot1000]

Except that it ultimately rings false. If live is universally sacred, then why is there so much killing?

 

Seriously!

[bluedragon1971]

Agreed. (on the babies with parents who want them)

 

Then women considering abortions should do what my birth mother did for me, give the baby up for adoption. I know in my state that all hospitals have a no questions asked policy: if you can't or don't want to keep your baby, you simply leave it at the hospital within (I think) a week of birth. It will be taken care of and put up for adoption.

[killbot1000]

Then women considering abortions should do what my birth mother did for me, give the baby up for adoption. I know in my state that all hospitals have a no questions asked policy: if you can't or don't want to keep your baby, you simply leave it at the hospital within (I think) a week of birth. It will be taken care of and put up for adoption.

 

 

And nobody ever said there was anything wrong with that, any choice is ok, BUT they SHOULD have a choice, abortion should be frowned upon but never banned, I dont like abortion, but I think its a perfectly valid choice for somebody to have.

[wildcat69410]

And nobody ever said there was anything wrong with that, any choice is ok, BUT they SHOULD have a choice, abortion should be frowned upon but never banned, I dont like abortion, but I think its a perfectly valid choice for somebody to have.

 

Although I agree it should be frowned upon, I want to take it a step further. I personally believe that they should not have a choice, unless under the situation of rape or incest. At the very least, they should have closer regulations on Abortions to prevent abuse of this "right". It is virtually coming to the point where parents are aborting their child in the third trimester once they find out the child has a mental defect, such as cerebal palsy.

 

Although I think Abortion should eventually be banned, we're going to have to do it one step at a time, and that first step is much tighter regulations on who can get abortions, and for what reasons. Do women truly have a right to get an abortion simply because their child isn't perfect?

[killbot1000]

Although I agree it should be frowned upon, I want to take it a step further. I personally believe that they should not have a choice, unless under the situation of rape or incest. At the very least, they should have closer regulations on Abortions to prevent abuse of this "right". It is virtually coming to the point where parents are aborting their child in the third trimester once they find out the child has a mental defect, such as cerebal palsy.

 

Although I think Abortion should eventually be banned, we're going to have to do it one step at a time, and that first step is much tighter regulations on who can get abortions, and for what reasons. Do women truly have a right to get an abortion simply because their child isn't perfect?

 

 

I dont mean to be rude, but quite frankly I think youre incorrect, nobody I have known or anybody that Ive heard of is getting abortions in the third trimester, just because I think women should have a choice doesnt mean that I regard life as trivial. You say its coming to a point where parents are aborting their children in the third trimester, but honestly, where is the data to support this, has the number of late term abortions been on a sigificant increase? I dont believe so.

 

Also, what does a man have to say in the matter? I mean, a man can just knock a girl up and run off without any punishment to the man, does the woman have to bear full responsability in this? Also, I assume you are opposed to abortions on moral grounds. You say that a child has a right to life, but you say its ok in rape and incest? Well, to turn your argument inside out, its not the fetus's fault the mother was raped, it has a right to life, the mother can always give it up for adoption....seriously, thats just not an option, and if you are against abortion on moral grounds you have to be against it in cases of rape and incest too, honestly, youre just trading one imperfection for another, am I wrong?

 

Seriously, the way it is now isnt perfect, but almost nothing in life is, but its better than taking away the choice, the women Ive met who have had to deal with this, have never made their decisions lightly, and I challenge you to find a woman who does, if they do, theres something wrong with them, and I would have to speculate that 90% of women who have to make this choice, make it with the weight of the world on their shoulders...honestly...theres two sides to every issue.

[gwprod12]

Amen Killbot.

 

I'd been wondering why Abortion is so bad if it's okay sometimes? It's only okay when the woman wasnt asking for it, right? lol.

 

When Men are universally responsible for the fruit of their loins, then they can choose whether or not to have an abortion.

[killbot1000]

Amen Killbot.

 

I'd been wondering why Abortion is so bad if it's okay sometimes? It's only okay when the woman wasnt asking for it, right? lol.

 

When Men are universally responsible for the fruit of their loins, then they can choose whether or not to have an abortion.

 

Thank you gwprod12, sometimes I feel like im the only one up here heheh.

[wildcat69410]

I dont mean to be rude, but quite frankly I think youre incorrect, nobody I have known or anybody that Ive heard of is getting abortions in the third trimester, just because I think women should have a choice doesnt mean that I regard life as trivial. You say its coming to a point where parents are aborting their children in the third trimester, but honestly, where is the data to support this, has the number of late term abortions been on a sigificant increase? I dont believe so.

 

I have known a woman to get an abortion in the third trimester due to the fact that their child appeared to be mentally retarded due to genetic analysis. Unfortunately, the data supporting this is a little low, due to the fact that most doctors and studies don't keep records of third trimester abortions, but they are estimated to be as many as 18,000 third trimester abortions per year. Yes, that is lower than I originally thought, but there's more.

 

A child can be deemed retarded due to the lack of a specific chromosome very early in the pregnancy. It doesn't have to be third trimester to support my theory. There are many many more abortions performed during the second trimester, any of which could have been performed for any number of reasons. Although again, the studies to not at all record for which reason the abortion was performed, it's not like I'm pulling these stories out of my ass here. Abortion has been abused, severely, by women who don't like the child that's developing in their womb.

 

Also, what does a man have to say in the matter? I mean, a man can just knock a girl up and run off without any punishment to the man, does the woman have to bear full responsability in this? Also, I assume you are opposed to abortions on moral grounds. You say that a child has a right to life, but you say its ok in rape and incest? Well, to turn your argument inside out, its not the fetus's fault the mother was raped, it has a right to life, the mother can always give it up for adoption....seriously, thats just not an option, and if you are against abortion on moral grounds you have to be against it in cases of rape and incest too, honestly, youre just trading one imperfection for another, am I wrong?

 

Wow, you quote my post, but don't read it? Read my third sentence again, and then again in case you missed it. I said that they shouldn't have the choice UNLESS under rape/incest. My point being in the same way that the law treats justifiable homicide, or defensive killings. I am morally against the killing of an innocent individual, however when that individual is attacking me and threatening my life, then I believe I have the right to kill that individual. In the same way, I don't morally believe in Abortions, but when that person is forced to have sex against their will, then it's okay. There are exceptions to the rule, to act as if there weren't is ludicrous. I'm not trading imperfections, I'm being realistic.

 

Seriously, the way it is now isnt perfect, but almost nothing in life is, but its better than taking away the choice, the women Ive met who have had to deal with this, have never made their decisions lightly, and I challenge you to find a woman who does, if they do, theres something wrong with them, and I would have to speculate that 90% of women who have to make this choice, make it with the weight of the world on their shoulders...honestly...theres two sides to every issue.

 

I wonder how many of those women are getting their second abortion? Women who are supposedly making this choice with the weight of the world on their shoulders sure forget that feeling quickly. Many women get more than one abortion, not due to a freak incident, but due to the fact that they consciously decide to have unsafe sex.

 

Plus, your logic is a little off. Just because the decision is thought about well doesn't make it a right decision. My problem isn't necessarily that the decisions aren't thought about enough. Some actually are. It's just that I don't believe they should have that decision. Why, because a large amount of people abuse this "right", and I don't see how they have this "right" at all.

 

Amen Killbot.

 

I'd been wondering why Abortion is so bad if it's okay sometimes? It's only okay when the woman wasnt asking for it, right? lol.

 

When Men are universally responsible for the fruit of their loins, then they can choose whether or not to have an abortion.

 

Uhm, Men generally are universally responsible. It's called child support payments. All the woman has to do is remember a man's name, his appearance, anything about him, and when tracked down he can be forced via the court of law to make such payments. If a woman can't remember a man's name, then that woman's been sleeping around WAY too much. And that's the issue, they're abusing Abortion to be able to go have promiscuous sex with multiple partners every day of the week, without even considering the consequences.

 

Oh, and are women universally responsible for their children? Of course not, that's why you have children left in Hospitals, and Abortions. Because women don't want to be responsible for their children. How about until one of the two parties are universally responsible NOBODY gets to have an abortion.

 

By your logic, that sounds fair.

[kernalzero]

I won't make my opinion known because I work in a profession where my personal ideas and beliefs have no place because I must remain objective and not judge patients (although I'm sure you can figure out where I personally stand). I just thought I would add this information because I think it's fairly relevant to this discussion.

 

Plan B - the morning afterpill

How does it work? It's high dose progestin (in the form of levonorgestrel, just like some birthcontrol pills) that must be given within the first 72hrs following the sexual encounter. It works by blocking ovulation from even occuring. IF ovulation has already occured or even fertilization of the egg by sperm forming the zygote the pill will prevent implantation of the zygote into the uterine wall. I should also add the fact that if you are already pregnant (the the zygote has implanted) it will do no harm to the fetus and will NOT abort the pregnancy!!!!!!!

 

The American college of Obstetricians and Gynecologists considers the start of pregnancy the point in which the fertilized egg actually implants itself into the uterine wall!!!! NOT WHEN THE SPERM FERTILIZES THE EGG!!!!!

 

I just hought I would throw this out there into this conversation because there are many people who consider the plan b pill that recently was approved by the FDA for over the counter sales as a form of abortion. If you consider this abortion then stop jerking off because everytime you rub one out...you potentially kill a baby...

 

One question I I don't want it to hijack this topic but typically (and this is a generalization and is in no way 100% true for any group mentioned below) those opposed to abortion are: very conservative, christian and republican.... the same group that is for the death penality...how can you be against one form of 'murder' but completely for another? this doesn't make sense to me.

[killbot1000]

Widlcat, I did read your post I know that you ALLOW abortion in cases of rape and incest, but I turn your argument inside out when I say "its not the embryo's fault that its mother was raped, why should it have to suffer" I knew exactly what you said, I was just using that point as an argument to show why your point of view is irrational, nothing more.

 

Quite frankly, your view of women is just wrong, 18,000 third trimester abortions? Is that the best you can do? that is small potatoes if you ask me.

Theres no women out there that are just waiting to abort fetuses, its not what women are thinking about when they have sex.

 

Your statement on wondering which women are getting their second abortions is just rumor and conjecture, its just paranoid conservative talk. honestly, abortions dont really happen all that often, atleast in the USA, there are far more important things that we should be worried about, like our soldiers dying in the war, those are real people, theres no question about that, an embryo is arguable as to whether its a person or not.

 

Why are you so against one form of death, and not another, your logic doesnt make any sense, im sorry.

[kernalzero]

Killbot I'm trying to find the data to back this up but in the mean time ... I recall reading somewhere that in some western european countries that have legalized early term abortion the actual rates of abortion are low compared to countries where it's illegal. I'll post the data when/if I find it. make of that what you will.

 

EDIT: http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/civilize.html

 

"In the Netherlands, abortion is freely available on demand. Yet the Netherlands boasts the lowest abortion rate in the world, about 6 abortions per 1000 women per year, and the complication and death rates for abortion are miniscule."

[killbot1000]

Killbot I'm trying to find the data to back this up but in the mean time ... I recall reading somewhere that in some western european countries that have legalized early term abortion the actual rates of abortion are low compared to countries where it's illegal. I'll post the data when/if I find it. make of that what you will.

 

EDIT: http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/civilize.html

 

"In the Netherlands, abortion is freely available on demand. Yet the Netherlands boasts the lowest abortion rate in the world, about 6 abortions per 1000 women per year, and the complication and death rates for abortion are miniscule."

 

I think it probably has something to do with their attitude on sex (better). Its about preventing pregnancy in the first place rather than what to do once you get pregnant (like here).

[kernalzero]

I think it probably has something to do with their attitude on sex (better). Its about preventing pregnancy in the first place rather than what to do once you get pregnant (like here).

 

 

you are correct, it does have to do with prevention...

"How do they do it? First of all, contraception is widely available and free -- it's covered by the national health insurance plan. Holland also carries out extensive public education on contraception, family planning, and sexuality. An ethic of personal responsibility for one's sexual activity is strongly promoted. Of course, some people say that teaching kids about sex and contraception will only encourage them to have lots of sex. But Dutch teenagers tend to have less frequent sex, starting at an older age, than American teenagers, and the Dutch teenage pregnancy rate is 9 times lower than in the U.S.

 

An important message that we can learn from Holland and other European countries is that even the most comprehensive family planning programs and widespread contraceptive use will never completely eliminate the need for abortion. Abortion is a critical backstop to contraception, which is not 100% effective. And people do make mistakes -- they sometimes forget to use their contraception, or they use it wrong. Motherhood should never be a punishment for human error. "

[wildcat69410]

One question I I don't want it to hijack this topic but typically (and this is a generalization and is in no way 100% true for any group mentioned below) those opposed to abortion are: very conservative, christian and republican.... the same group that is for the death penality...how can you be against one form of 'murder' but completely for another? this doesn't make sense to me.

 

So then you admit that Abortion is a form of murder, correct? Avoiding that, the Death Penalty is a punishment for a person who commits a heinous crime. What has the embryo committed? Absolutely nothing. They're two completely different things. What doesn't make sense to me is how you can be against the killing of a brutal murderer, yet for the killing of an innocent unborn child.

 

Quite frankly, your view of women is just wrong, 18,000 third trimester abortions? Is that the best you can do? that is small potatoes if you ask me.

Theres no women out there that are just waiting to abort fetuses, its not what women are thinking about when they have sex.

 

Exactly, they're thinking about the moment. Unfortunately, most women don't have the foresight to understand what the consequences of their actions might have. That's why we have abortions, because women make mistakes and don't judge the possible reprocussions of their actions. When they don't want to face the consequences, they simply avoid them entirely.

 

Your statement on wondering which women are getting their second abortions is just rumor and conjecture, its just paranoid conservative talk. honestly, abortions dont really happen all that often, atleast in the USA, there are far more important things that we should be worried about, like our soldiers dying in the war, those are real people, theres no question about that, an embryo is arguable as to whether its a person or not.

 

Hmm, let us look at some statistics here. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, there were approximately 1.2 million abortions performed in the year 2004. This includes any trimester of pregnancy. Over the entire course of the war, we have lost just over 2500 soldiers. Soldiers who were doing their job and their duty as men and women of the armed forces. Abortions killed 1.2 million potential lives. Yes, I understand that an embryo is arguable, but still 1.2 million is a hell of a lot greater than 2500.

 

There's nothing paranoid about it.

 

Killbot I'm trying to find the data to back this up but in the mean time ... I recall reading somewhere that in some western european countries that have legalized early term abortion the actual rates of abortion are low compared to countries where it's illegal. I'll post the data when/if I find it. make of that what you will.

 

EDIT: http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/civilize.html

 

"In the Netherlands, abortion is freely available on demand. Yet the Netherlands boasts the lowest abortion rate in the world, about 6 abortions per 1000 women per year, and the complication and death rates for abortion are miniscule."

 

Well, thanks for providing objective data from an unbiased source *sarcastic laugh*. The only reason the Nethelands bost the lowest abortion rate isn't because it's legalized there. Do other countries post lower drug rates because it's legalized? Of course not. There are other factors involved in that.

 

you are correct, it does have to do with prevention...

"How do they do it? First of all, contraception is widely available and free -- it's covered by the national health insurance plan. Holland also carries out extensive public education on contraception, family planning, and sexuality. An ethic of personal responsibility for one's sexual activity is strongly promoted. Of course, some people say that teaching kids about sex and contraception will only encourage them to have lots of sex. But Dutch teenagers tend to have less frequent sex, starting at an older age, than American teenagers, and the Dutch teenage pregnancy rate is 9 times lower than in the U.S.

 

What a fantastic idea! Let's provide free condoms to everybody! I guess lower pregnancy rates tend to happen when you stuff a condom in a teenager's hand, and then tell him that if it breaks, he's totally screwed for the next 18 years. I think it's sort of ironic that the people who generally support abortion (secular liberals) are for preaching to children from a young age about condoms and sex and how amazing it is, yet denounce Religion for preaching to young children their beliefs. There really isn't a difference.

 

An important message that we can learn from Holland and other European countries is that even the most comprehensive family planning programs and widespread contraceptive use will never completely eliminate the need for abortion. Abortion is a critical backstop to contraception, which is not 100% effective. And people do make mistakes -- they sometimes forget to use their contraception, or they use it wrong. Motherhood should never be a punishment for human error. "

 

I think the biggest question is not why aren't the programs working, but rather why are teenagers engaging in sexual activity at younger and younger ages. There's never a "need" for abortion. There have always been alternatives to Abortion. What do you think women did before Roe V Wade? It was called adoption, and it worked quite well. My point being is that human error isn't forgetting to use a contraceptive, it was for engaging in sexual contact without considering the consequences. People look at sex as just one big pleasure ride, and yet forget what it does.