The problem seems to be that, now that abortion is readily available at any stage in pregnancy, people seem to be less responsible about birth control. How else does one explain the increasing abortions every year? I would like to see birth control made available for free. But I do agree with you in part; I would rather not support "welfare babies" either.

http://www.lifenews.com/2014/10/03/pr...

I read this story yesterday, and it scared the hell out of me. It's not that abortion advocates don't know that it's a baby. It's that they don't care. Much like Atlas, people would rather ignore reality than accept it. (And yes, I know Rand was pro-abortion)

this is a fallacy. A live baby is worth way more than the sum of a fetus' parts. That's capitalism. If you want to make this about celebrating human life, we can do all we can. But I do not buy that most humans want to end life.

This is where many women are terrified the law is headed - that if they take drugs, drink, etc they'll be prosecuted for harming the fetus. I have, in my reproductive years, been a staunch pro-choice advocate. "Keep your laws off my body" Now that I'm older and technology has improved to be able to sustain increasingly younger fetuses outside the womb, my feelings are shifting. Do I want the govt outlawing what I can do with my own body ? No ! So should that force me to consent to a 'delivery' of a preemie instead of what I feel should remain my choice to terminate a pregnancy ? But do I have a legal obligation to the health of the fetus or am Ina slave to the fetus ? Do men even get a vote since they can't be pregnant ?
I have many more questions than answers.

your analogy fails. I do not have a duty to support anyone. Your car example just is not the same. Each individual has a choice to get in the car with me or not. As long as the fetus cannot survive outside the womb, the fetus' rights do not supersede the females' rights. You and I can counsel women to not choose abortion. But you have no right to compel her to be a slave to your Ethics.

a fetus is dependent on a female host. I am not a slave to anyone. no birth control?! I cannot engage in sex unless I am willing to give birth?! nonsense

Actually, the egg and sperm are "alive" before they even meet.

But they're not intelligent life, nor is an embryo.

The stats you are pointing to as genocide are incorrectly labelled.

Genocide includes an outside force performing the killings against the will of the person. In the case of abortion, since it isn't a procedure forced on someone, Genocide is inapplicable. These women are having this done voluntarily, so Racial Suicide would be a far more accurate label.

The real problem is lack of responsibility from the individuals concerned producing all these unwanted pregnancies.

Many methods of birth control exist, from abstinence to "morning after" drugs. Nor is the most common method (the pill) expensive, under $10 at Walmart.

The inability to exercise personal responsibility to not become pregnant, or impregnate someone else is what needs to be addressed.

Actually, just freeze it to the number of children that you have prior to coming onto assistance. Just tell them that's what you get while you're on it. Any more children won't increase the amount you receive.

I'm very conflicted on this. I'm not pro-abortion at all, and I feel that profiting off of the remains of aborted fetuses is wrong. But worst of it is selecting how to abort the fetus based on what body part is needed. I think that speaks volumes to the depths of depravity that we've sunk to. I mean it's "just a bunch of cells" is the argument that they like to use, as they imply that the entire fetus will be disposed of. What they are saying is, "Let's keep going with late term abortions because it's good business for us." I'm sorry, but personally, we should limit the gestation to no more than 16 weeks unless the life of the mother is in danger.

Just my point of view.

I value human life as well. As a result, your attitude does not value it, but mystifies it. If I cannot sell body parts or tissue then the direct result of your policy is needless death of those who benefit by research. She has a God given duty to carry a fetus to term? that is making her a slave. How is that valuing human life?

This undeserved smear has already been debunked. http://reason.com/blog/2015/07/15/pla...

AR was pro-choice herself, and so am I. At least up to the 13th-15th week, when the cerebrum develops. Once a fetus has enough of a brain to be a moral agent, then I'll consider him/her sovereign.

Nicely said........I think you've gotten to core issue.

I have to ask the same questions. Again this is A=A

"IF" this offends you why would you even remotely think Abortion is right?

Anyone who is "FOR" Abortion and Planned parenthood, should be PROUD of these actions regardless, strictly on the basis of the usage of "worthless" tissue being used to "benefit" women who want to abort, and science who wants to experiment.

If however, these is in anyway offensive to you, then you might need to re-think your view on planned parenthood, and abortion all together.

yes. it is how science progressed.

hey! women here! I am not a slave to cells

Come to think of it, I think Rand got a lot of things wrong because she would not keep up with the science. Branden once said she seemed ignorant of any advance beyond the work of Sir Isaac Newton.

Do you remember the brouhaha when she said, "After all, Nathan, the theory of evolution is only an hypothesis?"

The fact that Planned Parenthood is doing it secretly makes is reminiscent of stealing bodies from graves a couple of hundred years back.