You do not that all of the religious zealots are going to be all "hang the bitches"...right?

>So all you pro- lifers out there, what are your opinions? Should illegal abortions be treated as a murder (should the women having the abortion face murder charges)?

If they had gotten married, or just masturbated it wouldn't be an issue. No unwanted pregnancy. You forgetting that there is another solution at least in the US. Anyone can drop off a baby at a police station or fire station with NO QUESTIONS ASKED. With options like that available, then yes it should be murder to carry out an illegal abortion.

If you were horny and decided to have sex even though you don't want kids, you shouldn't have the right to murder your own selfish mistake.

"Instead your insisting on the GOVERNMENTS right to kill a human being?"

where am i doing that?

It is true that aborting a fetus prevents an organism that will likely grow in to a human being from ever doing so. But who cares, because it is too costly to society to completely ban abortion (assuming there are some limitations). To those who might argue I am opening a can of worms, I want to reply that abortion is one cost cutting method that has emerged as a popular and institutionalize practice over the years. Other cost-cutting methods would not be well received, and considering tact and what's socially acceptable is important for public policy. Because abortion is an established institution that cuts costs, there's really just no reason to ban it beyond moral beliefs. And I honestly just don't find moral arguments compelling. Likewise, I don't believe women have a right to choose either, because such a claim is not empirically testable. I also don't have patience for hypothesis that aren't empirically testable either.

But, this survey is very important because it brings up an important regularity in how people consider the severity of terminating a human in cell like stages. It just doesn't trigger our empathy and therefore outrage when one is killed like it does when a baby, toddler, youth, teenager, or adult etc is.

>But who cares, because it is too costly to society to completely ban abortion (assuming there are some limitations). To those who might argue I am opening a can of worms, I want to reply that abortion is one cost cutting method that has emerged as a popular and institutionalize practice over the years.

We could save so much money in the US on reduced welfare if we just killed off all the liberals. That'd be an effective way to save money with murder.

Isn't equating money savings and abortion the same as putting a price tag on a human life?

> We could save so much money in the US on reduced welfare if we just killed off all the liberals. That'd be an effective way to save money with murder.

That would be stupid. Instead, you would need to create a work-for-life program. Don't work? Don't worry -- your dead. pew pew.

> Isn't equating money savings and abortion the same as putting a price tag on a human life?

Yes.

> In other words, we can get away with abortion but we can't with many others. If we can get away with something, then why not?

So you believe that hunting animals for sport and killing them should be illegal too?

"But yes, killing all people on welfare or senior citizens on social security would also cut costs. However, those methods would not be well received like abortion."

while you can argue that senior citizens on social security and people on welfare drain society, there is nothing that indicates that a fetus that would normally be aborted would be a drain on society if not aborted.

babies consumes less resources if raised by people who can barely support a baby or by an orphanage, actually increasing the chances that the person the baby becomes is not a drain on society.

>Yeah but you are not considering that orphanages cost money and women generate less $

If babies were a drain on society, then maintaining human existence would be impossible. The average human has to positively contribute or resources would run out and society would fundamentally fail in all possible configurations. While orphanages are expensive, each child is an investment. The average child that comes out of there will contribute enough through taxes or other means to make society self sufficient.

A10/Avo

> A10 wrote:

> >Yeah but you are not considering that orphanages cost money and women generate less $

If babies were a drain on society, then maintaining human existence would be impossible. The average human has to positively contribute or resources would run out and society would fundamentally fail in all possible configurations. While orphanages are expensive, each child is an investment. The average child that comes out of there will contribute enough through taxes or other means to make society self sufficient.>

I know that. Even impoverished people tend to generate more $ than they cost. But I'm talking about opportunity cost. This means that of the opportunity to save a life, less revenue will be generated than if a woman is allowed to invest in a higher paying career and post-pone reproduction.

> Avo wrote:

so you're basically saying that 1 person's decrease in producation wont be made up by someone else's entire production on average??>

On a micro level, when exchanging a lawyer for an assembly line worker, the lawyer can easily be replaced. But if you have 32 million more people living in poverty rather than the middle class, then a lot of revenue and business is compromised.