|
|
 Originally Posted by BananaStand
I guess so. though I think you're actually referring to a very tiny slice of the population though.
It's my belief that even people who claim to be pro-life, are only referring to the choice they would make themselves. I think if you took a poll that asked "Should the government make laws forcing people to choose life", I think you'd find that some 90%-95% of people are actually prochoice
Which is why I always roll my eyes when some liberal is ranting about how Republicans want to overturn roe v wade. That's never gonna happen, and almost no one wants it to.
Right, except for the fact that Roe V Wade is being overturned right now. It's just not going through the procedural path you have your eyes set on. If abortion is technically legal, but rendered inaccessible, what good is the fact that Roe V Wade remains on the books? Further, this is being done with great cost to healthcare since one of the principle ways it is being done is by defunding Planned Parenthood. This scores massive political points with the evangelical base, but in reality abortion is only a fraction of what Planned Parenthood does. It is a healthcare provider predominantly for women, but also for men as well for testing and treatment of STDs for example.
Interestingly this really ties into our conversation about how a supported (however tacitly) minority can cause great harm and ultimately the majority should be held to account for what they've enabled (intentionally or not.)
Btw, you idea about people actually expressing their personal preference should they be in that situation as opposed to a desire to ban abortion had never occurred to me. It does make a lot of sense if true though-- the emotional weight of considering being in the situation can be so heavy that you fail to answer the question at hand and instead answer the related one regarding your personal preference.
|
Reply With Quote