Me too! I actually Do support some restrictions, but most people would count My restrictions as less than none. (Negative restrictions?)

Hey! I resemble that remark! Thanks for the funny!

__________________
Today's forecast: Government corruption.

Tomorrow's forecast: 100% chance of more 'politics as usual'

Maybe it's finally time to vote Libertarian

Negative restrictions? Now I'm curious.

__________________
To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society. -Theodore Roosevelt

My restriction would pretty much be late term abortions (unless the life of the mother was at risk). Didn't really add much to the discussion, so I didn't think it was terribly important to post it at first.

__________________
"Anyone that needs what they want, and doesn’t want what they need
I want nothing to do with
And to do what I want
And to do what I please
Is first on my to-do list"
-Gnarls Barkley, "Going On" lyrics

That's where I am. I don't care much for restrictions of abortion, but I don't think a fetus/baby that could survive out of the womb ought to be 'aborted'.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Agreed. I'm not too eager to place restrictions on abortion, either. The reason being, the whole idea of being pro-choice is because I believe it's really none of my business and a woman ought to be able to do what they want to do. So, to suddenly turn around and say "But, we should have this one restriction" kind of runs counter to being pro-choice in the first place.

I do think it's a reasonable enough restriction, though.

__________________
"Anyone that needs what they want, and doesn’t want what they need
I want nothing to do with
And to do what I want
And to do what I please
Is first on my to-do list"
-Gnarls Barkley, "Going On" lyrics

Since I've asked everyone else to explain their vote, I should probably explain my own: I think I could support legalized abortion, subject to some notable restrictions.

The foremost restriction, for me, would certainly be related to prenatal development. I don't have a solid position as of yet on what stage of development should represent the cut-off point, though I'd be inclined to err on the side of earlier rather than later.

Regardless, I definitely feel that THAT should be the crux of the debate. A restrictionless system, in which the rights of "personhood" are somehow based entirely on one's physical location (in a womb or out of a womb) strikes me as absurd; the difference between a medical procedure and pre-meditated infanticide should hinge on something other the movement of the subject's/victim's head down the final few inches of the birth canal.
Almost any major stage of prenatal development (heartbeat, level of mental activity...etc) would make more sense to me than that.

To that restriction, I'd add exceptions in case the mother's life was in jeopardy, with a similar exception for her health, could it be reliably enforced.

EDIT:
I should add that I'm inclined to look to some stage of pre-natal development as the cut-off rather than "viability" b/c I see viability as a slippery term. If a baby needs an incubator to survive for the first few weeks, is he/she "viable"? What if more equipment is also required? "Viability" is based as much on our level of technology (and what technology is at hand) as on anything else. If we ever achieve the ability to completely grow humans in test-tubes, all stages of prenatal development will be "viable" outside the womb.

__________________
To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society. -Theodore Roosevelt

I also concur with this and voted accordingly.

I oppose abortion except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

__________________
Serious Quotes:


Funny But True Quotes
Those who argue for complete secularism are funny. They see what government does and then argue that we don't need it to start with prayer.

What, exactly, qualifies as "saving the life of the mother?"

I think that this is a convenient buzz phrase, but I'm not sure that people really give thought to what it means.


Not picking on you in particular, Eagle88.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

Don't worry, I don't feel like you are. To me (others may have different interpretations) "saving the life of the mother" is when competent medical personnel determine that the mother will not survive the pregnancy. I support allowing abortion in such a case.

__________________
Serious Quotes:


Funny But True Quotes
Those who argue for complete secularism are funny. They see what government does and then argue that we don't need it to start with prayer.

I suspect it generally means that it generally means that if continuing the pregnancy would present a serious risk to the mother's life, it should be terminated.

__________________
To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society. -Theodore Roosevelt

Good. I don't want to pick at you; this can be a touchy subject at best.


See, that's where I think it starts to get fuzzy. I suspect (granted, my medical experience is limited to pre-hospital practice) that most situations/medical conditions aren't as clear cut as that. Doctors don't like to say "won't," but like to pull statistics and give ranges. Like a friend of mine who had a tubal after her first child was born very preemie (and she was quite ill herself). The doctors would only say that pregnancy would be dangerous, but wouldn't/couldn't give absolutes.

So, then the question is, at what point of risk of death/incapacitation of the mother do we allow abortion? 50/50? Greater? Lesser?


I think that it's crucial that if we're going to make these kinds of limitations, we need to understand the ramifications thereof and consider how something like that can be legislated.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

Without reading through thread to get an idea I would have to agree with your post. Practically speaking every issue has some sort of area where some guidelines must be instituted. Some form of medical restrictions but I'm too ignorant of the medical field on abortions to know what kind of restrictions must exist.

On to the OP. I would support a woman's right to get an abortion with as few restrictions as possible. To highlight certain restrictions I oppose are those of requiring a minor to hold parental consent to get an abortion. I'm not too sure about late term abortions. I tend towards granting women full decisive capacity in that area as well. I know the slippery slop argument is a poor one but this is one issue where I see legislation negatively effecting a necessary procedure. Or better yet...a situation creating unintended consequences.

The biggest problem I have with legislation intended to restrict abortions is where does culpability lie and how to determine intent. Banning all late term abortions would definitely lead to the aforementioned problem of unintended consequences denying an abortion to those women who would require one for the sake of their life. Allowing for an exception would possibly lead to the problem of determining liability. Is the culpable party the doctor, the mother or both. Most of my reservations come from observing enforcement of drug laws and the horrendous nature in which they are applied. Criminalizing certain abortions would be even more difficult and we also have to determine what could be gained. I think a relatively small percentage of people like to equate late term with murder but the intent is remarkably different. In such situations I prefer to go on the side of no legislation.

I also believe that this is an issue that, as a male, I can never truly understand as well as a woman. Now that argument is not good enough to state that my opinion does not count but I must recognize that there is some limitation in my ability to fully comprehend all the factors.

Maybe I'm taking the safe way out as well.

__________________
ugh

I totally understand what you mean here. It's a tough paradox: you want to have an opinion and to be an involved partner. Yet it's clear that as a man you can't really understand what a woman goes through.

How to be an active participant, yet not a controlling bastard, yet not punking out and washing your hands of the situation?

I wonder if the women involved understand how much men can agonize about this.

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

I can understand this...lots of brothers. Personally, I welcome men's comments on the issue. It would be sexist on my part to declare they have no right to civilly express a view.

__________________
I am an American. That's the way most of us put it, just matter of factly. They are plain words, thos