The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular Liberty.com

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: I feel this way too.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I easily reconcile both positions. (see in situ)

I feel this way too.

I wish women would restrict themselves to only getting abortions in situations where the mother was raped or her life is at risk, but I strongly feel the government should not restrict it. I don't morally agree with abortion outside of those instances myself, though it's not my place to impose my morality on others. There's plenty of rhetoric on when life begins. I don't buy the instantaneous production of a soul at the moment of conception (not even sure if I buy the idea of a soul, but I'm no angstheist, so I'm open to it). Nothing pisses me off more than the parasite argument some people use to justify abortion. That they have to frame it as anything but a human life is the truly troubling thing, and it certainly shouldn't matter to a woman's decision. Just as any one of us should be legally allowed to do whatever we want to our own bodies (with drugs for example), women have the choice to do what they want to their own bodies, even if that includes not putting it through carrying a child for nine months. It is kind of silly we can end a human life's potential but can't destroy a bald eagle's egg. The law is pretty ridiculous some times.

Though Stossel had me giggling a schoolgirl a few weeks ago when he brought to point other choices in life that most pro-choice on abortion folks didn't agree with, like the choice to own a gun. One lady interviewed even said she owned a gun and didn't think we should have such a choice (lol?).