My Views on Abortion
Simply put, I am pro-choice . . . with exceptions. I do not feel that I as a male have the right to tell a female that she can't have an abortion electively. Since the baby is still developing in her body, I believe that she should not have to give birth to the baby if she does not want to.
However, I am opposed to Medicaid paying for a woman's abortion. Except in the case of rape, the woman chose to have sex, and she knew there was a possibility that she might become pregnant as a result of intercourse. Therefore, the taxpayers should not have to support her abortion. She should have to financially pay to have the abortion done out of her own pocket. And if the woman is on welfare or can't afford an abortion, then she's just going to have to have the baby. She should have thought of her financial situation before she got pregnant. The only exceptions in which federal tax dollars from Medicaid should support an abortion is if the woman was raped, if the doctor deems there's a strong possibility she could die from the delivery, or if the baby is going to have severe, chronic, or fatal birth defects or be a stillborn. Other than that, I do not support a woman's "right" to use federally-funded tax dollars to pay for her abortion. If a woman is going to have an abortion, she must take responsibility for consentually having sex and getting pregnant by funding the abortion out of her own pocket.
Partial-birth abortion I do not support AT ALL! Sorry, but that's just too late for a woman to say, "Oh, I don't want to go through with the pregnancy," as the baby is emerging from the mother's womb. Even pregnant women cannot be that fickle. I see the act of sucking a baby's brain out into a bloody mass as it emerges from the womb as an utterly vicious and inhumane act committed upon a baby who is just experiencing her/his first breathes of life outside of the womb. You can't just say, "Hi baby! Welcome to the world! Now we're going to kill you!" What next? - - killing babies after they've been fully born simply because the mother doesn't want them? I'm appalled that Bill Clinton would approve something this horrendous and pervertedly sick into the law.
Pro-life proponents make the argument that a woman doesn't have the right to abort her baby because it's a living thing inside of her. Well I say that it's not a living being until it pops out of the womb and experiences its first bodily sensation outside of the mother's womb. Until then, it's just a developing fetus. You can make the argument that an aborted baby could have been a great world leader, a doctor, an inventor, or a scientist who found the cure for AIDS or another disease. True, but you can also make the argument that an aborted baby could have been a vicious dictator, a serial killer, a rapist, or a terrorist. "What-ifs" can work both ways.
So my philosophy is simple. As long as the baby is still fully inside the womb, a woman can choose to abort it. But she must use her own money to pay for her non-essential abortion, not Medicaid from public tax dollars.
I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but that's the way I feel.
My Favorite Links
Dude Power Lexicon
Photo Gallery
My Gallery of Writings
Discussion Board
Take My Polls/Surveys
Sign My Guestbook
View My Guestbook
View My Old Guestbook
Get your own Free Home Page