The Freedom of Choice Act, which I hear has been signed off by Obama (but that doesn't matter) is a Federal mandate (ie, will override states' rights) that will overturn some many state regulations and place a new code for the practice of abortion. Here are just the things that it will terminate:

 

 

 

- State abortion reporting requirements in all 50 states

 

- Forty-four states laws concerning parental involvement

 

- Forty states laws on restricting later-term abortions

 

- Forty-six states conscience protection laws for individual health care providers

 

- Twenty-seven states conscience protection laws for institutions

 

- Thirty-eight states bans on partial-birth abortions

 

- Thirty-three states laws on requiring counseling before an abortion

 

- Sixteen states laws concerning ultrasounds before an abortion

 

 

 

This is...Wow. :shock:

 

 

 

So girls at any age who are irresponsible enough to get pregnant can now go and get abortions, with no repercussion, and, furthermore, without even altering their parents?

 

 

 

Remember when you were a small child, and you'd do something stupid and irresponsible? Your parents would learn about it from one medium and then punish you by putting you in time out. Do you know why they did this? Because they wanted to teach you a lesson! They wanted to teach you, 'What you did was wrong, and you will be punished so you won't do it again!'

 

 

 

Sex may or may not be bad, but getting pregnant when you're underage is, yeah, bad.

 

 

 

Let's say you're a father / mother, I mean, wouldn't you at least want to hear if your daughter was irresponsible enough to go off and have sex with some dude you didn't know about or even hear about?

 

 

 

How is this supporting 'planned parenting' if it's encouraging reckless underage endangerment?

 

 

 

And it even overturns the right of the doctors to refuse to do abortions, which means that many privately founded and funded hospitals, such as Catholic and Jewish foundations, will either be given the option to have to give abortions or close down. My own diocese has made it clear that if this act is passed, it will close it's hospital down to preserve it's ideals on abortion.

 

 

 

Furthermore, the FOCA would make it legal to do partial birth abortions and late-term abortions. Even pro-choicers have to concede that killing a baby who is quite obviously a human being at this point with the only difference being that it still has it's umbilical cord, must be unethical.

 

 

 

For conservatives, this is a huge step in the way of a completely government controlled society that can change at the whims of the Senate, and for liberals, this is a huge breach on the sanctity of the rights of the family to know what's going on with such sensitive subjects like sex.

 

 

 

I don't know. If this gets passed, I'm packing up and going to Russia, where there is at least some sanity.

 

 

 

...and because they're goin' back to communism WHOO!

 

 

 

EDIT: I got the statistics from: http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/issues/ ... e-act.html though I did some more digging to find the number of states that it violated and mixed around with the wording a bit. (The way I made it sound at first was unintelligent and unclear.)

Obama isn't off to a very good start, the Catholic Church has announced they will shut down every single Catholic hospital if this Act is passed, 30% of the United State's hospitals are Catholic owned/run, it'd be a huge blow to all employees and also to the community as a whole. It definitely needs to be revised.

So girls at any age who are irresponsible enough to get pregnant can now go and get abortions, with no repercussion, and, furthermore, without even altering their parents?

 

 

 

What is the reason for parental consent regarding abortion? It's nothing but a guise so that parents can make their children have the child if the parents don't agree with abortion.

 

 

 

I 100% support the Freedom of Choice Act, and if it's ever passed, it will be signed by its Sponsor, Barack Obama :)

Obama isn't off to a very good start, the Catholic Church has announced they will shut down every single Catholic hospital if this Act is passed, 30% of the United State's hospitals are Catholic owned/run, it'd be a huge blow to all employees and also to the community as a whole. It definitely needs to be revised.

 

 

 

Catholic hospitals will not be forced to perform abortions, this is a Religious Right talking point that doesn't hold water with the facts.

For conservatives, this is a huge step in the way of a completely government controlled society that can change at the whims of the Senate, and for liberals, this is a huge breach on the sanctity of the rights of the family to know what's going on with such sensitive subjects like sex.

 

 

 

What?

 

 

 

I've never understood why conservatives and liberals are classified they way they are in regards to abortion. All morality aside for a moment, it is way more liberal to expect government to involve itself in the personal decisions of mothers.

Aw. Your Luke Skywalker sig is gone.

 

 

 

I don't know, I felt sketchy about writing that part. My point in writing it, though I represented it poorly, was that the FOCA is really a breach in one way or the other about party morals.

 

 

 

And no, they will be 'forced' to perform abortions. While nobody is going to do it gunpoint, it'll be considered malpractice to deny them 'treatment' on grounds any less than insurance. Like, if you go to a normal doctors agency and ask for a flu shot, if they deny it because they don't feel flu shots are ethical, you can sue.

 

 

 

And the reason for parental consent in abortion is simply because the daughter has made a mistake; a teenager who has messed up that bad before they're even out of the house needs to be rectified. Or at least, that's the general view that society has.

 

 

 

I ask again: if your daughter was pregnant, would you want to know it? It instills a sense of security.

If the teenager knows you're going to support their decision, they have no reason to hide this from you. If they know you're against abortion, and would more than likely make you keep it, they're not going to want to tell you for fear that you will make their choice for them.

 

 

 

If they are forced to tell you afterwards, meh, w/e. I don't think they should ever have to tell you, but I wouldn't be that opposed to telling after the procedure is finished.

 

 

 

Of course I'd LIKE to know, but it's her choice if she wants to tell me or not; she should not be forced to tell if she doesn't feel comfortable. I would always let her make the decision after she told me anyway.

 

 

 

I ask again: if your daughter was pregnant, would you want to know it? It instills a sense of security.

 

 

 

If I had a daughter: 1) I'd hope that I had done a good enough job as a parent to ensure that if she was having underage sex that she would take precautions to avoid becoming pregnant in the first place. 2) If she did fall pregnant I would hope that she would feel comfortable coming to tell me she was pregnant, in the knowledge that I wouldn't force my beliefs on abortion onto her. Unfortunately, many parents do force their children to do what the parent wants in these situations

In my opinion, this is the right thing to do. If something happens, and an underage woman does become pregnant, it is her right to decide if she wants to go through with the pregnancy. It is a life changing event that will affect how she lives the rest of her life. Just because she has done something that is morally wrong for her age does not mean should she be punished for the rest of her life.

 

 

 

Plus, I don't believe this is a push to a government controlled society. This is a push to ensure the rights of every individual in this country, and the freedom to chose an abortion is one that needs to be garunteed to all who wish it.

1st off can we get a link to the wording of the act preferably in the first post? it would help a lot.

 

 

 

If this act is as unrestrictive as it initially sounds, its going overboard of overboard. I try to retain some sense of moderation in abortion debates, I fully acknowledge being pro life but I dont like flame wars. Also, before adressing anything else, since the church hospital thing is still up for debate I wont comment on it until we have clear facts.

 

 

 

Now then, even if you are pro choice I think you will agree with me when I say there should be some automatic restrictions on abortion. Such as a ban on late term abortions when the mother's life isnt at risk, and some way of preventing someone having an abortion too quickly. So someone cant just walk into the doctor and have procedure done instantly(at least make them think about it overnight to try and reduce occurences of severe regret).

 

 

 

The physical limit on abortions should be set at a date based off of logical reasoning. Personally I think it should be 2-3 weeks before the development of the nervous systems, though I wish it were earlier. The 2-3 weeks is just a buffer, neural development being the most scientific limit(I mean if not allowing harm to a human isnt a good barrier what is?).

 

 

 

Maybe someday we will stop needing abortion clinics and people will actually learn to control themselves, if only that wasnt a joke to believe.

There is a reason why there are councilors and leaders and sages in the way; you don't know what decisions to make all the time. I don't think anybody would disagree me when I say that the decision to do an abortion is life-altering at a minimum, and that any pregnant 15 year old girl who doesn't even have the proper decision making skills NOT to have school actually has the clarity to decide what to do with the baby.

 

 

 

Abortion may very well be the only viable solution for her, but to tackle it alone is the stupidest thing I ever heard of. You would need counsel - I mean, there are other things that you can do. But I guarantee that getting rid of the punishment for having underage and irresponsible sex is not the right thing to do.

 

 

 

I mean, if we got rid of the penalty for committing a murder (20+ years) do you honestly think that the murder rate would go DOWN? It's the same concept here. All this does is advocate underage sex and encourages the idea that nouveau-dans la mondeteenagers know better than time-tested adults.

In my opinion, this is the right thing to do. If something happens, and an underage woman does become pregnant, it is her right to decide if she wants to go through with the pregnancy. It is a life changing event that will affect how she lives the rest of her life. Just because she has done something that is morally wrong for her age does not mean should she be punished for the rest of her life.

 

 

 

 

I must also point out that I am a healthy proponent of adoption. I think it's silly for somebody to keep the baby for 18 years if they economically or emotionally cannot, but abortion is a terrible alternative that should never be used unless the baby is threatening the life of the mother and cannot be saved itself.

Obama isn't off to a very good start, the Catholic Church has announced they will shut down every single Catholic hospital if this Act is passed, 30% of the United State's hospitals are Catholic owned/run, it'd be a huge blow to all employees and also to the community as a whole. It definitely needs to be revised.

 

I don't see them doing this. Letting millions die and without care for a few thousand abortions? No, besides how are they going to make a living? If a hospital owner is catholic and shuts his hospital down, how is he going to get payed? The old men in the churches are making threats since they got nothing to loose.

 

 

 

If this passes, it'll be one hell of a great law. One more step into a factual future.

 

 

 

Anything else that needs to be said has been said by Magekillr. If Obama signs this, my support to him will rise 500%. =D>

 

I mean, if we got rid of the penalty for committing a murder (20+ years) do you honestly think that the murder rate would go DOWN? It's the same concept here. All this does is advocate underage sex and encourages the idea that nouveau-dans la mondeteenagers know better than time-tested adults.

 

There is still STDs and sexual insecurity. Also, actual sex education (not the "don't have sex" education) could truly be beneficial.

What is the reason for parental consent regarding abortion? It's nothing but a guise so that parents can make their children have the child if the parents don't agree with abortion.

 

Well, since the parents of the mother/father are likely taking care of the kid, I reckon they have the right. It doesn't seem fair, but I don't see a child being born to a fourteen-year-old as fair, either.

 

 

 

I don't agree whatsoever with terminating late-term abortion laws. After seven months, it's a baby in a woman's stomach. That is without a doubt taking a life.

 

 

 

The Catholic Church has every right to shut down their hospitals. It isn't smart, and in general isn't helpful for us, but it is their choice. Even birth control is seen as murder by the Church. And considering this does have to do with life, it isn't just some "silly" belief that someone can pass off. It's a child, and Catholics take pregnancy and birth incredibly seriously.

 

 

 

But, as far as I see it, seven months or later is pure murder (infantcide, I don't know). Earlier, I still would prefer not to have an abortion, but at least if the government manages it it will be much safer for the mothers. And I reckon it is their choice in the end...

 

 

 

There is still STDs and sexual insecurity. Also, actual sex education (not the "don't have sex" education) could truly be beneficial.

 

There isn't much that would help, apart from scaring kids away from unprotected sex. That's the most important thing. Teach them to use condoms. Give out condoms for free, hell, I don't know.

Well I just skimmed over the bill, going to reread in a minute here

 

 

 

heres a link to the actual bill, id ask the thread author to put it on first post for everyones access.

 

 

 

link to bill

I mean, if we got rid of the penalty for committing a murder (20+ years) do you honestly think that the murder rate would go DOWN? It's the same concept here. All this does is advocate underage sex and encourages the idea that nouveau-dans la mondeteenagers know better than time-tested adults.

 

 

 

The reason for removing restrictions on abortion is to allow a safe procedure for the woman. Abortions happen despite laws against it, and prior to Roe vs. Wade, there were something like 5000 deaths a year due to poor hygiene and procedures. Added, there were still 1.2 million abortions a year prior to Roe vs. Wade, while there were about 850,000 in 2003. [1][2]

 

 

 

The only thing that's going to seriously reduce abortion rates is good sex education. I'd much rather an "all of the above" solution than the insane approach of "abstinence-only" sex ed. You need to teach kids to use contraception regularly and effectively if you have any chance of reducing abortion rates. Kids have sex whether you teach them to or not; it's really just a natural human urge.

 

 

 

I don't see how these abortion laws advocate underage sex at all, only bad parenting and a lack of proper sex education would do that. Added, according to the actual bill (source [1]), late term abortions (after about 24 weeks) will still be restricted to situations where the life or health of the woman is in danger.

If a teenager was irresponsible enough to have unprotected sex and fall pregnant because of it, would you allow them the chance to bring a child into the world?

 

 

 

I don't believe that anyone has the right to force a child to be born into and raised in an environment which isn't conducive to their physical and psychological well-being. Teen mothers and families who cannot support these children should not be forced to bear them, nor should social services be overburdened by masses of newborns being put up for adoption.

 

 

 

At any rate, the issue of teen pregnancy could be avoided altogether if America dropped that silly abstinence credo and taught children what practically every civilised nation in the world does.

Yeah, that's what I think. But I also think it's bad not to give them the chance of life ...

 

 

 

Oh, I also despise partial-birth abortions even more than late-term. Doctors' lives can be ruined for dropping a baby after birth, now they can be payed to kill them during labor? I do not think that's, well, good.

 

 

 

I'm kind of mixed in my opinion. Glad I'm not a woman. Then my opinion would actually matter here, and I'd be far more befuddled.

One question I have about the pregnate women/girls about abortion is this:

 

 

 

Would you kill something that hasn't even proved itself in the real world? All I'm going to say.

does anyone know where the theory this will force doctors to perform abortions come from? Im thinking from the line to paraphrase "that no government will restrict the right to full reporductive services"

 

 

 

a. Noone should be required to perform abortions if they find it morally wrong

 

 

 

b. the line in the bill "87 percent of counties in the US dont have clincis that provide abortions" made me laugh a little, its like they are saying its impossible to cross a county line when pregnant.

I mean, if we got rid of the penalty for committing a murder (20+ years) do you honestly think that the murder rate would go DOWN? It's the same concept here. All this does is advocate underage sex and encourages the idea that nouveau-dans la mondeteenagers know better than time-tested adults.

 

 

 

The reason for removing restrictions on abortion is to allow a safe procedure for the woman. Abortions happen despite laws against it, and prior to Roe vs. Wade, there were something like 5000 deaths a year due to poor hygiene and procedures. Added, there were still 1.2 million abortions a year prior to Roe vs. Wade, while there were about 850,000 in 2003. [1][2]

 

 

 

The only thing that's going to seriously reduce abortion rates is good sex education. I'd much rather an "all of the above" solution than the insane approach of "abstinence-only" sex ed. You need to teach kids to use contraception regularly and effectively if you have any chance of reducing abortion rates. Kids have sex whether you teach them to or not; it's really just a natural human urge.

 

 

 

I don't see how these abortion laws advocate underage sex at all, only bad parenting and a lack of proper sex education would do that. Added, according to the actual bill (source [1]), late term abortions (after about 24 weeks) will still be restricted to situations where the life or health of the woman is in danger.

 

 

 

I agree, 100%

 

Also, do we really have to talk about abortions? All these new topics are pretty depressing :(

This is great news. I'm glad Obama is changing this country for the better. My Mother was forced by her Catholic parents to have an unplanned child when she was 16, they made her put it up for adoption and now the person wants NOTHING to do with her. That alone is reason enough to let a person choose whether or not they want to have a child.

 

 

 

This is a great step in the right direction.

 

Would you kill something that hasn't even proved itself in the real world? All I'm going to say.

 

Absolutely. After all, its just a thing and it doesn't have life.

 

Would you kill something that hasn't even proved itself in the real world? All I'm going to say.

 

Absolutely. After all, its just a thing and it doesn't have life.

 

 

 

But is it the right thing to do?