South Dakota bans most abortions

I'll concede the whole freedom fighters vs. terrorists analogy as it's quite true. That is a fine example of people standing up for what they believe, and an example of people standing up for what they believe in a situation where they believe themselves to be personally affected.

However, you can stand up for what you believe, and shout it from the belltower without passing laws which back up your side of the argument. No one is suggesting pro-lifers be silenced as has been inferred. What people have objected to in this thread are the tactics of using one's beliefs to pass blanket laws on others. Because you believe something means that everyone else *must* live by that belief, whether or not they share those views? Doesn't make much sense to me. Only way such a thing can possibly be justified is if it were something that affects you personally. This is not an issue that personally affects those passing the laws, so they could quite easily return to promoting their views instead of trying to get their views made into law.

Blindly acting to any extreme on a view is *not* something to be admired. There are times and causes that warrant stronger actions then others, but that doesn't mean that strong measures should be taken in every situation. If I decide that there should be not television broadcasts on Sundays, does it make sense to try to get a law passed on that? Of course not, it's my opinion, and one that is no more, or less valueable as that of someone who wants TV on Sunday. I can choose not to watch TV. Pro lifers can choose not to have an abortion.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm all for having conviction on matters that you take personally. But I am most certainly against the ever so popular 'by any means necessary' aproach that people are willing to on nigh any issue. There is a lack of perspective, and that's something that irks me.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Minion

Well, on the basis of legality, it should be whatever the hell the majority thinks. Why is this so hard to swallow?

This doesn't make sense for issues which the majority doesn't fully understand.

If you ask the majority at what stage after conception is too late to get an abortion, you'll get all manner of answers. If you ask the same question to medical experts, you'll get a much smaller variance in answers. It makes sense to me that on medical issues doctors might know better than farmers.

Another example, if you ask the majority if their taxes should be halved, or eliminated you are guaranteed to have them say yes more often than not. Does that mean it's wise? Of course not, it's because they are misinformed or ignorant of the issue.

Same goes for the abortion issue. A lot of people have opinions. These are founded on any number of things, influenced by people who misinform them (itentionally or not), or pull their opinion out of their ass and base it one nothing at all. This is true for all sides of the issue. So, does the majority picking a side mean that is what they really believe, considering how few likely understand the facets of the argument?

Double Post:

Originally Posted by Zio

Pug, if you don't like a law that was passed then you know what you can do to stop it or even reverse the law.

You can lobby or reverse any law you wish to... Atleast try to.

If I really wanted to, I could rally and reverse the decision about segregated schools.

They acted on thier beliefs, were organized, and started the ball on possibly banning it. Now that takes some guts to stand up(despite proscution and etc other things that will come.) and do something about a law that they don't think is right.

Pro-lifers think that allowing abortation is forcing wrong beliefs on everyone.

Pro-choice thinks that not allowing is.

Either way you slice it, someone's toes are going to get stepped on.

What horseshit. Being persecuted for being pro life? This isn't standing up against 'the man' or anything close to it. It's the relatively safe stance to take, you aren't going to be called a killer for it as opposed to being pro choice.

Also, despite every imaginable attempt to portray themselves as victims, pro lifers are not the ones potentially being put upon here. If 'allowing abortion was forcing beliefs on everyone' was really the case, those who didn't believe in having abortions would be forced to have one. See how retarded that argument is? No one is forcing the pro lifers to do anything they don't want to do, or trying to limit what they may do, or what they may say.

And another thing, your stance on passing laws is quite unique. Of course one can lobby for any law they wish, and that law may or may not be passed. But praising the passing of laws just for the hell of it seems odd. If you don't support it, then you shouldn't be too happy that it happens. And just waiting for it to get democricized out after a while is a pretty lame way to solve the issue. Maybe heading off things before they get passed would be more efficient, and cheaper than sitting back and applauding any and all changes made?

There's nowhere I can't reach.