I believe that a healthy woman should not ideally have an abortion or take a casual view towards the practice. Adoption is preferred for those with good genetics.
Marginal populations that are a drag on society should be encouraged to have abortions. It's still taking life, but, let's just call it "collateral damage" in a covert race war that our overlords mandate. It "improves American life" as Jonathan Gruber would say.
CamelCaseRob - 8 years ago
These options leave much to be desired. I think most people (as do I) have a problem with later abortions. If I were drafting abortion law, I would allow an abortion for any reason for one month after the woman became aware she was pregnant OR if the woman was a dependent minor, in which case she would have one month after her parents became aware of it. This would be for any reason. After that month, I would allow abortions only if 1) the woman's life became endangered, 2) it became obvious that the baby was going to be retarded or physically deformed.
Truth - 8 years ago
None of the above - the voters in each state should decide the issue there.
William Clinton - 8 years ago
I find abortion personally repugnant, and would never allow it from a woman in my family. However, most abortions are for mothers who are poor and stupid, and whose children would grow up to be burdens on society, so I am in favor of maintaining the status quo where they voluntarily take those babies out of the gene pool, out of prison, and off the welfare rolls.
In order to achieve the same social benefit without murdering babies, I would prefer to give poor, stupid women free long-term contraceptives, which would prevent unintended pregnancies in the first place.
I believe that a healthy woman should not ideally have an abortion or take a casual view towards the practice. Adoption is preferred for those with good genetics.
Marginal populations that are a drag on society should be encouraged to have abortions. It's still taking life, but, let's just call it "collateral damage" in a covert race war that our overlords mandate. It "improves American life" as Jonathan Gruber would say.
These options leave much to be desired. I think most people (as do I) have a problem with later abortions. If I were drafting abortion law, I would allow an abortion for any reason for one month after the woman became aware she was pregnant OR if the woman was a dependent minor, in which case she would have one month after her parents became aware of it. This would be for any reason. After that month, I would allow abortions only if 1) the woman's life became endangered, 2) it became obvious that the baby was going to be retarded or physically deformed.
None of the above - the voters in each state should decide the issue there.
I find abortion personally repugnant, and would never allow it from a woman in my family. However, most abortions are for mothers who are poor and stupid, and whose children would grow up to be burdens on society, so I am in favor of maintaining the status quo where they voluntarily take those babies out of the gene pool, out of prison, and off the welfare rolls.
In order to achieve the same social benefit without murdering babies, I would prefer to give poor, stupid women free long-term contraceptives, which would prevent unintended pregnancies in the first place.