yes and of course abortion is about the poor 16 year old who was raped and had to carry the unwanted child. How dishonest the baby killers and supporters have always been. Why would their rotten corrupt nature change now? May God have mercy because they show none to the most innocent.

Dear Stephan,

Apparently you think you have the right to impose your views on a pregnant woman and force her to continue a pregnancy that she doesn’t want to continue. Women in the past have been treated like mere baby-making machines who have no say in the matter. Just impregnate them and let nature take its course.

Male humans are usually stronger than females and can force them to do their will. Wowsers like you have all sorts of specious reasons to keep things that way.

The law of the jungle is you claiming the right of the dominant male to tell a woman that she must go through with a pregnancy that she doesn’t want. You talk of the rights of the fetus as though a part of a woman’s body (which is what a fetus is.) has equal rights with the woman whose body the fetus is inside.

Women have been second class citizens. They have been denied the right to vote, to hold property, to decide who they would marry, to get equal pay for equal work, etc.

Some men have supported them in their drive for those rights. Others like you have found various reasons to deny them those rights. That primitive book of male dominance, the Bible, has supported denial of woman’s rights:

1 Timothy 2

11: Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. 12: I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent. 13: For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14: and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15: Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.

A woman wants to be more than a baby-making machine. Can’t have that.

Care for the fetus? Nonsense. You are an incarnation of those men who would keep women from holding property, getting equal pay, deciding who she would marry and whether she would vote.

Your denial of woman’s rights does not reflect well on you.

David F, you are so right in your summation of views like Stephan's and Runners.

I have asked numerous times on this forum over the years, for pro-lifers (mainly middle to old age religious men) to please tell me how they would police a nil-abortion-for-any-reason policy?

None have ever given me an answer... because there is no way they could ever do that than by severely curtailing even the most basic human rights of the pregnant women.
In most cases it would have to involve virtually jailing the offending pregnant women, tying them to beds, force-feeding them etc, to really make SURE they couldn't abort their babies by any number of methods.

Once labour begins, I can't imagine how this would be dealt with in non-compliant women...

There were very good reasons why abortion was legalized in most modern westernized societies, and these will never change, no matter how many men are unhappy with losing 'control' over what 'their' women do.
Like back in the 'good ol' days', when God-fearing men were in control, and women did what they were told.

If some men (and women) aren't happy with the current abortion laws, then encourage men to correctly wear condoms during sex where they don't want children as a result.
That would result in far less unwanted pregnancies if it was done properly, surely?

'Like back in the 'good ol' days', when God-fearing men were in control, and women did what they were told.'

Yea Susie and we see how the Emily's listers who are suppose to be civilised control along with emasculated males. Congratulations on your concern for the unborn.

"I don't believe this, I think your making things up. Please provide peer reviewed data to support this."

Stephan, so do I take your response as a "No"?

Dear runner,

I have more concern for the rights of the born than the rights of the unborn. A woman who is old enough to have a baby should have the right in most cases to decide whether she wants to have that baby. In your worldview a man who accepts that a woman would have rights over her own body is emasculated. Your masculinity shows itself in your right to tell a woman what she should do. There are other ways of being masculine. We men are physically stronger than women. We can also be gentle and caring. We can love our wives, daughters, mothers and girlfriends. We can want them to be all they are capable of being. We can want them to be happy, independent human beings. Your rights of the unborn is phony. Your rights of the unborn is really the right of the born male to tell the born female how she should live and what she should do. I wish you had a concern for the rights of the born even if the born is female. "Shut up and have babies" is your implicit motto for women. If a man doesn't go along with that he is, in your words, emasculated. That's what it comes down with all your sanctimoniousness.

A pregnant woman who wants an abortion has her reasons. Yet those people who harass women at abortion clinics implicitly assume that a woman needs to be controlled. They act as though she hasn't thought it out. I hope none of my female descendents ever has to have an abortion. I hope they are able to avoid getting pregnant if they don't want to be. However, a situation can change for a pregnant woman. If it does and she feels she needs an abortion she should be able to get one in a professional procedure without being harassed.