Pro-life, but allow in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother or child

Abortion should be treated the same as any other medical procedure. you wouldn't criticize somebody for getting their appendix removed, because it doesn't concern you. why are people pro-life when many mothers' lives are endangered by a birth or pregnancy? In my opinion, it's an excuse to control and criticize women.

pro choice is not just about physical safety when it come to the health of the mother. caring for a child takes alot of finacial stability, positvie mental health, access to child care services, a good living enviorment, among other things. so even if the mother and the baby would be perfectly healthy that does not mean that it is the best to have that baby.

I think we forget mental health in this situation because even if something terrible hasn't led to the reason someone is pregnant there are people suffering with mental health issues that if they are forced to have a child they don't want will compromise the quality of care they give to that child.

It’s still not the pro lifers body: there are financial, personal, and familial reasons that someone may choose an abortion.

Pro-life is a biggoted blanket statement and suffocating generalized viewpoint, as it removes the individual and vulnerable experience of each person who may become, or has become pregnant. It should not be a regulated topic. It is a health and wellness issue that should be entrusted by each person in the patients chair.

Under this exception, one dismisses the multitude of unwanted teen pregnancies. Before age 25, although a mother may feel ready, or fit for birth, a number of mental problems threaten the pregnant developing mind, and the fetus. The stress of growing up too fast can lead to anxiety, depression, which could be inherited.

If you allow it for all of these why not allow it for anyone who chooses, why would you want to force someone to have a baby they aren’t ready for or don’t want

You are willing to possibly kill a woman or child to save the live of a baby that does not yet exist.

If you would allow a child to be aborted in these cases, why does the mothers wishes and desires become anything less than the reasons provided? Even if she is in a happy situation and doesn't want a child she should be allowed to do what she wants with her body as long as she isn't harming anyone.

It is not a woman's burden to support another person, with the risk of great bodily harm to herself, without her consent. Ever. She is free to withdraw that consent at any time.
This position recognizes at least in theory that a woman should have to consent to being pregnant, but it implies that just because a woman becomes pregnant that is somehow "consent."
No! People can have sex just for enjoyment, we live in a free society. The insinuation that having sex automatically means you want to get pregnant is sexist and rooted in a backwards ideology that women only exist to bear children. Women should have total control over their bodies.

I think that no matter how it happens, it should always be the womans choice. Its her body and other people shouldnt decide what to do with it.

You should agree with Pro-life because in a lot of cases besides any of the ones listed above when a woman has unprotected intercourse, they know that there is a possibility of them getting pregnant. And if the woman takes that chance, it is them agreeing that if they get a baby, they get a baby. So in that sense, if a woman gets pregnant and wants to abort that baby, they shouldn't be able to since they already had a consensus that they may become pregnant and has decided to take on that responsibility.

"Danger to mother or child" is too hard to define. It should be the woman's choice what happens to her body.

Impossible to regulate, and I am in favour of putting the rapist to death I just don’t believe that the innocent child should die. The only consistent line of life is conception as all the other lines use dehumanization to justify killing.