Welcome to Gaia! ::

There isn't a limit to how many abortions one can get, but the fact that it costs her $500 every single time she wants on would hopefully put such a person off unsafe sex.

And well, if not, then that's why Social Services are around. :3

Legally, I don't think so, but if you're asking *should* there be a limit, it depends on whether you think just one is bad or okay.

No woman with access to contraception would rather just have one abortion after another. They're not fun, they apparently still hurt even if you take RU-486, and even sitting in a waiting room is more tedious than taking a pill every morning or using a condom.

If I didn't have access to contraception, I would figure I'd better avoid vaginal sex altogether or at least become very familiar with my cycle--much better than having several abortions, no matter what your moral take on the procedure is.

If a woman neglects to use contraception, and ends up having 5 abortions and comes in wanting a sixth, it doesn't make sense to tell her no, have the damn kid and maybe you'll learn some responsibility. That would be using pregnancy as a punishment. But the pro-life argument for stopping her is not "learn some responsibility" but rather "stop taking innocent lives!"

Anyone would agree that if a woman ends up having multiple abortions, something's wrong. Either she needs better contraception, (or she needs to start using it) or she needs to learn to say no to unsafe sex, or something. If you're pro-choice, it's because you see abortion as a necessary fail-safe, not as super happy fun times. Maybe you don't see anything morally wrong with having ten abortions, but you have to agree there's a better alternative that should be implemented.

I would like to say that there are a very few people who call themselves "Pro-Life" and do seem to believe (or sometimes outright say) that pregnancy should be used as a punishment. I don't think I've ever run across one that was a member of the PLG, but I have seen one or two in the Debate, and a few on other internet sites.

*Psst!*

We know. Now go tell the Pro-Choice Guild! gonk

It's a really hard issue to decide on.

And believe it or not, I won't try to sway you either way xd

Ultimately, it's up to each person, and I can't tell you what you think is right. It took me awhile to be firm in my stance, but I got there.

I definitely understand seeing abortion as the lesser of two evils, but I don't agree with it, because to me, a fetus has the same value as a born person, and I wouldn't kill a born child to take that child out of an abusive home without putting that child in the adoption system. If I wouldn't do that to a born child and I value a born child the same as a fetus, I can't reconcile abortion being the lesser of two evils. If I didn't value the two lives equally, I definitely could.

Doesn't really have to do with the debate though, because it's an emotional appeal. It's like saying, "Oh but that baby could have been so happy!" It doesn't really matter. The thing that matters is, does pregnancy compromise a woman's bodily integrity, and if so, does that violation warrant killing the human invading her body given the circumstances that surround pregnancy. If you are pro-life, you believe that no, it isn't the human's fault it's in a woman's womb and shouldn't die for it. If you are pro-choice, you believe it is a woman's right to remove the invading human.

if she chooses is implied in "right"- no right is forced on anyone, that would be backwards. no choicer (excluding some truly sick, deluded individuals) would want abortion as the only option. though it does seem that some, especiall those who make money off it, push harder for abortion than bringing the child into the world.