Abortion

From SaveTheWorld
Jump to: navigation, search

Will someone help start a great article about abortion? Below are just some suggestions about structure.

The Forum | Offer to Politicos | Local Partners | Rules | Talk Tips | SaveTheWorld:FAQ | Getting Started

Democrat Website[edit]

The separate article Democrat Platform on Abortion shows what the Democrat national platform (positions on issues) says about Abortion. Below are the parts of it that tell how Democrats want Abortion law changed, and that tell what facts Democrats believe about Abortion which justify their positions. Your help is welcome to update this section as the platform is updated; and/or to add information from other Democrat sources.

Democrat goals[edit]

Protecting A Woman's Right to Choose. The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way. We also recognize that health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions. We strongly and unequivocally support a woman's decision to have a child by providing affordable health care and ensuring the availability of and access to programs that help women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, including caring adoption programs.

...President Obama and the Democratic Party are committed to supporting family planning around the globe to help women care for their families, support their communities, and lead their countries to be healthier and more productive. That's why, in his first month in office, President Obama overturned the "global gag rule," a ban on federal funds to foreign family planning organizations that provided information about, counseling on, or offered abortions. And that is why the administration has supported lifesaving family planning health information and services.


(Goal One)[edit]

(Goal Two)[edit]

(Goal Three)[edit]

Democrat beliefs[edit]

(Belief One)[edit]

(Belief Two)[edit]

(Belief Three)[edit]

Republican Website[edit]

The separate article Republican Platform on Abortion shows what the Republican national platform (positions on issues) says about Abortion. Below are the parts of it that tell how Democrats want Abortion law changed, and that tell what facts Republicans believe about Abortion which justify their positions. Your help is welcome to update this section as the platform is updated; and/or to add information from other Democrat sources.

Republican goals[edit]

(Goal One)[edit]

(Goal Two)[edit]

(Goal Three)[edit]

Republican beliefs[edit]

(Belief One)[edit]

(Belief Two)[edit]

(Belief Three)[edit]

Comparison[edit]

This section is for comparing the legislative goals and beliefs of the political parties on this issue. We will list them side by side without challenging them, yet, so we an isolate where the differences lie, and which facts we need to research. Here we may also make observations about goals stated so generally that we have questions what they would look like, and observations about what facts were not addressed which perhaps should have been. Your contribution is welcome. Sign your contribution with 4 tildes (~~~~). The simplest way to contribute is on the "Discussion" page, which is like a place to leave comments. Or you can clarify something on this page, from fixing typos to adding a paragraph, or a section, or a whole new article. For suggestions how, please see The Forum#Ways you can contribute. For sample verbiage and codes to help you do this, that you can copy, paste, and adapt, see Template.


Comparison of the Specific Goals[edit]

Neither the official national Republican or Democrat websites include "abortion" or "life" in their list of issues. However, clicking on "Family Values" in the Republican list brings you to two sub-issues, one of which links to this statement:

Pro Life - The Republican Party is proud to stand up for the rights of the unborn and believe all Americans have an unalienable right to life as stated in The Declaration of Independence; Republican leadership has led the effort to prohibit partial-birth abortion and permitted States to extend healthcare coverage to children before birth. Republicans have also passed laws for informed consent, mandatory-waiting periods prior to an abortion, and health-protective clinic regulation. Thanks to Republican legislative initiatives, there has been a tremendous increase in adoptions.

(Goal One)[edit]

(Goal Two)[edit]

(Goal Three)[edit]

Comparison of the Specific Beliefs[edit]

(Belief One)[edit]

(Belief Two)[edit]

(Belief Three)[edit]

Sorting out the Facts[edit]

Here is where we will begin examining the evidence for the various alleged facts, and how the outcome of this examination clarifies which legislative goals are most consistent with reality. Your contribution is welcome. Sign your contribution with 4 tildes (~~~~). The simplest way to contribute is on the "Discussion" page, which is like a place to leave comments. Or you can clarify something on this page, from fixing typos to adding a paragraph, or a section, or a whole new article. For suggestions how, please see The Forum#Ways you can contribute. For sample verbiage and codes to help you do this, that you can copy, paste, and adapt, see Template.

Does Life "begin at conception"? Does it matter?[edit]

Neither the Republican nor Democrat party platforms opine "when life begins". The Democrat platform does not deny that unborn babies are fully human beings with eternal souls granted full "rights to life" by both God and by the 14th Amendment; but neither does the Republican platform affirm that they are. Does it no longer matter?

It mattered in the beginning. In fact, from the very beginning of the abortion issue, January 22, 1973, it mattered to the eight justices of the U.S. Supreme Court who signed on to Roe v. Wade. They said when it is "established" that life begins at conception, or at least earlier than an abortion can be done, then abortion can no longer be legal, much less protected by the Constitution. (The following quote is about when "personhood" is "established"; elsewhere Roe equates "personhood" with "when life begins"):

“If this suggestion of personhood [of preborn babies] is established, the...case [for legalizing abortion], of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.” Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113, 156

Here is where Roe v. Wade equates "when life begins", "when a 'person' came into being", and "recognizably human":

...of when life begins. These disciplines variously approached the question in terms of the point at which the embryo or fetus became “formed” or recognizably human, or in terms of when a ‘person’ came into being, that is, infused with a ‘soul’... Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113, 133 (1973)

Notice that these are not presented as distinct standards. Had they been, we would be at a loss to imagine how they are different. Rather, they are presented as different "terms" describing the same "question".

Here is a quote from a 2004 federal law that legally recognizes the unborn as human, to "establish" what Roe said must be "established" for abortion to become illegal again:

18 USC§1841(d) ...the term “preborn child” means a child in utero, and the term “child in utero” or “child, who is in utero” means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.

Has any court case since then said it no longer matters

Interaction/Argument[edit]

Here we begin interacting with each other, responding to the reasoning and evidence of those who disagree, and acknowledging any agreement. Here is where we practice focusing our scrutiny on the issue, not on each other. Here is where our character is tested, along with our commitment to seek the truth and to acknowledge it when evidence warrants.

In the preceding sections there shouldn’t have been much controversy, but only a hopefully objective comparison of positions. So we could edit each other’s work and our amendments should be seen as friendly, But from here on, we need to be very careful about editing the arguments of others. We can freely add our own arguments, but before we remove others’ contributions we need to be careful not to weaken their argument; the only legitimate reason to edit another’s argument would be to correct spellings, fix grammar, tighten the flow of thought, or remove redundancy (unnecessary words).

Your contribution is welcome. Sign your contribution with 4 tildes (~~~~). The simplest way to contribute is on the "Discussion" page, which is like a place to leave comments. Or you can clarify something on this page, from fixing typos to adding a paragraph, or a section, or a whole new article. For suggestions how, please see The Forum#Ways you can contribute. For sample verbiage and codes to help you do this, that you can copy, paste, and adapt, see Template.

Argument One: XXX[edit]

Argument Two: XXX[edit]

Argument Three: XXX[edit]

===Argument Four: XXX===