Your position on abortion

[Nym90]

Moderately pro-choice. I feel that abortion is usually morally wrong, but that throwing people in jail is not the answer. That only makes matters worse. I do not feel that the state should interfere in the decision; it should be up to the woman, her doctor, and her Creator.

Eliminating poverty would eliminate the vast majority of abortions at the same time. That's the only way to truly stop abortion.

[Nym90]

Moderately pro-life (at least that's how I see it...)

Basically, abortions after 18 weeks should be illegal (or at least discouraged) except for medical reasons... but at the same time efforts need to be taken to reduce the causes of abortions (anti poverty measures, better sex education, contraceptives made easily available etc)

I agree with your position almost 100% (I think I'd make it 20 weeks instead of 18, but that's starting to split hairs). However, I consider myself moderately pro-choice.

I still haven't seen anyone come up with a good rationale for why throwing people in jail would help matters; would that really be a more effective way to stop abortion than anti poverty measures, better sex education, and contraceptives made more easily available?

We have to get away from demonization of the other side on the abortion issue. The real question that divides pro-lifers and pro-choicers is the one I just stated, I think. We both want to make abortion happen less often, but pro-lifers prefer the direct approach of throwing people in prison, whereas pro-choicers prefer instead to make abortion less necessary.

[Nym90]

Moderately pro-life (at least that's how I see it...)

Basically, abortions after 18 weeks should be illegal (or at least discouraged) except for medical reasons... but at the same time efforts need to be taken to reduce the causes of abortions (anti poverty measures, better sex education, contraceptives made easily available etc)

I agree with your position almost 100% (I think I'd make it 20 weeks instead of 18, but that's starting to split hairs). However, I consider myself moderately pro-choice.

I still haven't seen anyone come up with a good rationale for why throwing people in jail would help matters; would that really be a more effective way to stop abortion than anti poverty measures, better sex education, and contraceptives made more easily available?

We have to get away from demonization of the other side on the abortion issue. The real question that divides pro-lifers and pro-choicers is the one I just stated, I think. We both want to make abortion happen less often, but pro-lifers prefer the direct approach of throwing people in prison, whereas pro-choicers prefer instead to make abortion less necessary.

We don't want to decrease abortion, we want to make it nonexistant! The same reason why we imprison people for murder, we imprison them for abortion.

Well, making it nonexistent is still decreasing it. That was my point.

And throwing people in prison won't make it nonexistent. Throwing people in prison for muder doesn't make it nonexistent either.

A more effective way of reducing murder (as well as abortion) is to make it less necessary also by reducing poverty. There is a very strong correlation within states and nations across the world between poverty and murder and other crime rates.

Of course, I have a different position on murder than I do on abortion (I'll explain why in the next paragraph), but as far as actually reducing or eliminating the incidence of either, the solutions that will most effectively solve them have more to do with eliminating the problem at its source rather than trying to solve it after the fact. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

I do not believe that a person's life "begins" at conception, I personally define it as beginning gradually over the course of the pregnancy rather than at one single moment. Since the law has to pick one single moment, however, I would choose the earliest possible time at which a fetus has ever survived on its own outside the womb (20 weeks). That's a critical cutoff in my opinion because the fetus now has the ability live entirely independently, rather than being 100% dependent on the mother for all critical life functions.

[Nym90]

I am pro life.  I believe a woman has the right to chose, but she needs to do it before she has sex.  If she doesn't want to be pregnant, it is easily avoided.  Next the argument usually goes to raape victims, and this is certainly beyond the woman's control.  However, two wrongs do not make a right. 

I do not accept that the elimination of poverty will eliminate abortion.  Maby righ women and young girls have abortions.  I feel the same about education.  Sexually active people know where babies come from.  If you're referring to education for those contemplating abortion being educated about how disgusting abortion is, that has deferred many women.  The sight of an aborted fetus is gruesome, but has made some women think twice.

The vast majority of abortions are done because the woman can't afford to keep the baby, not because she doesn't care about it. The great majority of women want to have the child, but do not want it to have to go without; they feel it is more cruel to make a child live in abject poverty, with the increased risks to society that may result from the child growing up poorly (increased risk of the child becoming a criminal or at the very least a drag on society overall more than an asset).

You can argue against that logic if you wish, but it's simply wrong for people to say that women are being selfish and only care about themselves. Having an abortion is a difficult choice and women do consider all of the factors involved both pro and con in the vast majority of cases.

Now, the counter argument here would be that the child should be given up for adoption instead, and I would agree that this should be promoted. There should be financial rewards of some sort (tax incentives and the like, though for many poor women, tax incentives won't work; some other incentive should be used instead.)

And yes, education includes not just improving the quality of education in public schools, thus giving women the financial capability to provide for their children and thus not have to abort them, but would also include greater education about abortion itself; what it entails, and what the future consequences are to both the mother and the baby.

As I said, incentives work better than punishments, if the goal is to reduce the number of abortions performed. I never said they would eliminate abortions; but the reality of the situation is that punishments simply won't work as well as giving incentives for good behavior.

[Nym90]

The vast majority of abortions are done because the woman can't afford to keep the baby, not because she doesn't care about it. The great majority of women want to have the child, but do not want it to have to go without; they feel it is more cruel to make a child live in abject poverty, with the increased risks to society that may result from the child growing up poorly (increased risk of the child becoming a criminal or at the very least a drag on society overall more than an asset).

That's actually incorrect. There are a large amount of abortions that are done in cases where the couple can't afford children (21%), but about 70% of the cases are done in cases where the woman is young, doesn't want a child, is forced to have an abortion, etc.

What is the source of this data, and is there a link?

In any event, the 3 cases that you listed are highly linked to lack of an ability to afford to have the baby. It may be only an indirect cause rather than a direct cause, but it still has as much influence.

Since the woman is young, she is less likely to be able to afford it.

The main reason women don't want the children is because they can't afford it.

No one can be "forced" to have an abortion, though I assume this means situations where the parents or father have attempted to put pressure on the woman to have one. ("Have an abortion or else we're throwing you out of the house" or some such). The main reasons for that are a lack of an ability to pay, or an unwillingness to pay on their part which then causes the woman not to have the ability to provide for the baby on her own.