it was amazing what people took; vases, briefcases

I don't care about ending the future of suffering of poor pregnant women? Funny how I just don't vote to have her killing downgraded to a neutral even positive action, seeing as that her death would solve all the pain of her unplanned pregnancy. Plus with a dead pregnant women you get two individuals out of ptsd stricken poverty instead of just one, so, yeah drinks all round, I guess.

So you cant euthanise an adult human already in suffering but you can euthanise a child because of predicted unquantifiable suffering.

And whilst we are here, if its a truth and a moral one at that, that bestowing personhood on a human is a private, personal, circumstantial decision that should not be imposed by the government on anyone, who are you to say to me that pregnant women are people? So what if I think that ZEFs are people but born human individuals are not? What is that to you? As long as we all stick to acting out on just the humans who we think aren't people because of _____ then we will all get along in peace, yes? 

Ok lets take that example, say, a thirteen year old rapes his eleven year old sister, who becomes pregnant. Lets say that this 13 year old was raped himself as a child and is traumatised-most rapists are apart from those with sheer psychopathy or psychosis-and acts out that trauma on his sister-as what often happens with PTSD in child sexual assault. Perhaps, in compassion society gives him a sanitised space which he can therapeutically rape his sister, with a trained clinicians to monitor his health. Perhaps he finds after a few tries that raping his sister with a coat hanger too dangerous and demands that someone else does the raping with a curette and a pair of forceps.

Then lets take the sister, who is now pregnant. Perhaps she chooses to deal with her traumatic rape and subsequent pregnancy, not by ending the pregnancy-she feels it would be too traumatic for her- but by murdering an even younger born relation in turn. Perhaps she picks the way for her brother to die is by pulling off his arms and legs in his sleep and then crushing his skull. Perhaps in compassion to what she has been put through, she should be given government funded sanitised forceps to do the job. See where I'm going with this? Being aggressed against doesn't give you a free pass to choose assault against others to ease symptoms of your own PTSD. You cant assuage rape with raping in turn, or rape with murder, or murder with rape. I expect an option of murder and rape to be off the table to both a traumatised 13 year old and an 8 year old and I have 0 qualms about the government enforcing that. Because of their age I would give them both diminished responsibility and charged with manslaughter. I would investigate their families. I would suggest reform rather than prison. The pregnant girl they be up for parole because it would be unlikely that they would hurt anyone else.

You can still put someone through sexual assault whilst they don't know that its happening or don't realise that its wrong and its still a crime.

You do realise that she hasn't deliberately chosen to abort.

And you do realise that if she hasn't deliberately chosen abortion, then its forced abortion-putting sharp instruments up into your uterus-on top of forced sexual assault. And I highly doubt that anyone under the age of twelve would choose abortion on their own, its mostly adults that have thought up the mental gymnastics that you need in order to kill; the idea that humans can be pregnant with anything other than your own offspring.

Lets also consider that fathers sleeping with their daughters use abortion as a way of covering up their crimes.

hmmm I guess you could call me across the board a left leaning moderate with a libertarian sting in the tail? Someone once said that libertarians are like housecats because in their own head they are aloof and independent but rely on hand outs and the system, which I find hysterical because its true XD. I think that libertarianism thinks too highly of peoples motives and behaviour and doesn't actually work in real life, so I think its a moral duty for the government to back up limiting choice, but I would prefer a welfare state. I've grown up with it and think its completely normal for tax to be taken from my income so that someone's grandad can walk in and get his medication. I just cannot perceive anything else and its totally bizarre to me to see a state functioning morally without it. I am anti-abortion and the death penalty. I am for gun control. I am against euthanasia but "for" elective suicide. I am for gay marriage and I think prostitution, marijuana and class A drugs be be put in the hands of doctors, though I find the concept in of themselves distasteful. Some of those issues I feel more strongly about than others and I'm not a single issue voter. Every election I have to know that my vote can never change anything that I want to get changed, or I have to resort to tactical voting and/or vote whilst holding my nose, which is disheartening.