Comment: Life

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: While I admire some of Sen. (see in situ)


As a non-religous person (agnostic) I don't share the same passion against abortion as some of our religious friends here. However, as a classical liberal I do believe that one of the very few roles of the government is protection of life. So the govt has the responsibility to protect life - the question is now what life is, and from that standpoint I do think that there ought to be something that defines when the life starts. Also, while I do agree with abortions when the mother's life could be endangered, etc, I despise the idea of people just thinking to themselves "Oh, let's have unprotected sex and if we get pregnant we'll just abort the fetus". That betrays a wanton disrespect towards life and disrespect of nature and living things in general.

That said, conservatives need to get off of their high-horse and stop thinking that you can ban abortions while ignoring to talk to kids about sex, and unprotected sex in particular. You can't have it both ways - premarital sex will happen, whether you like it or not, and if you don't educate these kids about protection, pregnancies will happen. And abortions resulting from those pregnancies will also happen, whether in a doctor's office, or with a coat-hanger or drano-margarita cocktails.

Finally, there has to be an easier and less costly access to adoptions. There are many couples out there wanting children but not able to have them, and there is probably an equal number of parents who don't want their children. This seems to me like a win-win solution, but for some reason we still go to abortion as a first choice.