If pro-abortionists want to commit intellectual suicide and deny scientific facts, that's their problem. But there's no reason a civilized society should fund their anti-scientific outlook - or accept its inhumane consequences.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
At the end of the day, if there are truly ethical considerations, those have to override scientific considerations.
If they are opposed to abortion, they should be for preventing unintended pregnancies.
The issue is not abortion. The issue is whether women can make up their own mind instead of some right-wing pastor, some right-wing politician telling them what to do.
Pro-lifers have long been castigated for bringing private values into the public square. But actually it is the pro-abortion position that is based on merely personal views and values.
What we need to do is have empathy and that ultimately, at the end of the day, it's a woman's private choice... I don't support federal funding for abortions, nor do I support late-term abortions.
No one is pro-abortion.
When we choose to have an abortion, we must do so understanding the full ramifications of what we are doing. Anything less feels to me to be hypocritical, a selfish abnegation of reality and responsibility.
What we want is scientists who don't become part of the policy discussion: All they do is produce science. If someone becomes an advocate, then I won't pay as much attention to their science.
In the end, abortion is an issue of fundamental human rights. To force women to undergo pregnancy and childbirth against their will is to deprive them of the right to make basic decisions about their lives and well-being, and to give that power to the state.
We are learning more about the humanity of the unborn child. Science and truth support the prolife movement.