Abortion views: Pro-choice or Pro-life? - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Provision of the two UN HDI indicators other than GNP.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14732964
I object to the term "pro-life". I have rarely met anyone who is really pro-abortion. I have met plenty who are OK with abortion but as an affirmative choice, practically no one is.

That said. The decision is one which I must leave to the mother. Men have an absolute point at which they can prevent an unwanted pregnancy. It is called a "zipper". If they leave their "zipper" up they will never face the decision to abort their child. Women have the same choice most of the time. That said, once they are pregnant only they should make the decision.

Of course the diversions of rape and the health of the mother are exactly that. Diversions. These circumstances are so rare as to barely warrant mentioning. The real question is whether abortion should be used for simple birth control. I think it should be avoided at great cost. So what are the costs that we should undertake to prevent abortion?

We should provide kind and supportive adoption services at government expense. Every church should prioritize their funds to offer mothers every opportunity to carry their children to term and then support it into adulthood. The minimum wage should be raised to a living wage. Day care and health care for children should be universal and at government expense. Fathers should be compelled to pay child support or face jail time. If they have no job they should be set to sweeping the streets and paid a living wage for doing it.

The key problem with abortion is that it is all to often an economic decision. We have the republican party in the US (for example) clamoring for cuts to welfare and social programs which help women keep and raise children, all the while whining about poor women who abort their child mostly because they haven't the means to raise it.

People don't have abortions because they are naughty. They have them after a great deal of soul-searching because they feel trapped and out of options. The set of social programs they have to turn to in the US and presumably other countries as well, are pathetic. That is the root of the problem.
#14732983
Abortion diminishes the chances of pregnancy later in life.

Anyway, abortion has become a pet cause for the religious right and their ultra-rich minders in light of the shortage of cheap, disposable workers it creates. Ban abortion, let birthrates soar and watch the 'immigration is good for us!' movement evaporate like mist.
#14733069
You mean like the royal family and bankers and landlords and capitalists and such? They will be made to work. In camps in Siberia if necessary.
#14733078
Me too. Landlords are not part of the work force. They take money from people who work even though they do nothing themselves.

If you are talking about workers compelled to stand idle as the capitalists won't allow them to work in their factories then that is easy to solve. Take the factories from the capitalists and give them to the workers. You then have no unemployment as everyone can work. Private ownership of the means of production causes unemployment.
#14733084
@Decky

Landlords are not part of the work force. They take money from people who work even though they do nothing themselves.

If you are seperating the terms landlords from land owners, then sure.
But if you're talking about general land owners, then no, you're wrong.
The majority of landowners are also workers and part of the workforce. And infact in many if not most places around the world, those landowners are also the ones working these lands and responsible for the larger share of production in many countries, including countries i know very well, Iran and Lebanon, and Belarus which 'll be a national in within the next few months.

And with this generalization, you also sweap off 10s and 100s of thousands of people mainly from central Asia who live in a tribal communities, own and work their lands since centuries, and a good portion of those managed to accumulate a considerable wealth and move up the financial ranks while still working their lands and producing.
And that includes me and my clan, in which we own our lands and work in them and we managed to move up the social ranks by simply selling what we produce directly, and without even hiring others to work our lands for us. And me owning my own bussiness yet the only one working in it and manually producing and selling directly.

If you are talking about workers compelled to stand idle as the capitalists won't allow them to work in their factories then that is easy to solve. Take the factories from the capitalists and give them to the workers. You then have no unemployment as everyone can work. Private ownership of the means of production causes unemployment.

No, 'm talking about atleast 1 third of population which consists of elderly, sick people, unable to work, non working mothers, teenagers who still too young to work, kids, etc.
Those also deserve the exact same rights as everyone else and also the same priviliages given to any other member of society regardless of where he or she stands or does. And that includes everything from health care to education to security and etc.


EDIT:
Note; those landlords who own vast patches of land and suck people dry with them, don't exist everywhere as in many areas of the world, those are history now.
#14733105
No, 'm talking about atleast 1 third of population which consists of elderly, sick people, unable to work, non working mothers, teenagers who still too young to work, kids, etc.
Those also deserve the exact same rights as everyone else and also the same priviliages given to any other member of society regardless of where he or she stands or does. And that includes everything from health care to education to security and etc.


The elderly are workers. What do you think they did before they were old? :?:

Sick people are workers, if I get the flu and have a couple of days of work do I magically cease to be a builder? :?:

I am not sure what you mean by unable to work, do you mean soft rich people who have never tried it before, because a few years in the gulag cures a lot of things.

Non working mothers? What an odd idea. Is bringing a child up not work? :?: They are workers. If a childminder is a worker and teacher is a worker why would a parent not be a worker?

Children and teenagers are workers in training (well apart from rich ones who are blood sucking parasites in training). When I was being taught how to set up a plumb profile on the side of some brickwork for the first time I was not actually producing anything but I was still working. Training is part of working.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Accusations of antisemitism have been weaponized. […]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Is the solution to support more Oct 7ths? If your[…]

Watch what happens if you fly into Singapore with […]

Chimps are about six times stronger than the aver[…]