Collegiate Times

wow. a giant heap of garbage. it would have bee nice if you had included some sources for your "facts" and "statistics" instead of ignorantly talking about something of which you obviously know nothing about.

Link for this please. Planned Parenthood helps you ease the stressfulness of being pregnant at a young age. How dare you make so many assumptions. You have no clear arguments....this is just horrible written and I'm ashamed that the CT allowed someone to write an article to terribly misleading...

Oh Author, I love you too. Please consider, if we ever met in person I'd make the choice to chop your balls off and thank the good lord your ability to reproduce would be nil.

I hardly can call this monstrosity of an article an "argument" against abortion, but will for the moment. Can we say circular logic? Society traps women by taking away their rights by giving them a choice that may trap them? I can't even dissect this argument well enough to discuss it. LISTEN, your feeble attempt to push an anti-freedom agenda has failed.. now stop encouraging government to invade on people's privacy and get back to studying. Oh, and for the record, I thought this was written by a woman until I saw your name.

Planned Parenthood also provides valuable services at affordable prices. They provide discounted birth control (to help prevent unwanted pregnancies), they counsel about using birth control in the first place (if you happen to need Plan B), and you can get gynecological services (like STD testing) that you may not want your parents/insurance to find out about. Planned Parenthood isn't an abortion factory like some would lead the public to believe. Those "obscene" profits they make are used to provide services and counseling to women of all ages.

Guidance? Do you call this guidance? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJt3OVIdhUk Hiding a crime, not articulating the full realm of options available to the patient, and showing a girl how to circumvent the law. Planned Parenthood, leader of morality.

Can I see some sources for ANY of the claims in this thing?

Which means it lacks a single credible source. Pro-Choice means that a woman can have an abortion for her emotional or physical health--rape, high risk pregnancies, a fetus that isn't viable--and no one can deny it from her. Pro-Choice means that a woman can have an abortion rather than end up losing her job and be put on the street, baby in tow. Pro-Choice means that a woman can choose to keep her baby. Pro-Choice means that a woman can choose to give her baby up for adoption. Pro-Choice means that someone else's bible isn't in charge of my uterus. Pro-Choice isn't Pro-Abortion! If you want to reduce the number of abortions, then help reverse abstinence-only education (which actually raises the rates of STDs and reduces the use of contraception--Google it!), raise money for shelters and medical studies, help make contraception available to all women, and report Planned Parenthoods that shame the rest of their organization! Don't simply complain about it. Educate yourself. Read both sides of the issue. Until you understand it from a woman's point of view, you cannot effectively argue for or against abortion. Then maybe you can write a column that cites some credible sources.

Gee, I wonder if this guy has an agenda. We women are too stoopid to figure out big choices. He should stick with his religious arguments since his intellectual (har-har) ones come out as gibberish. No he's never been inside a Planned Parenthood clinic (just screaming outside) which provide the valuable services mentioned below.

This is the most hilarious thing I've read all day. Man I hate idiots.

Abortion is wrong (source: LOGIC magazine). Pro-Choice is a stupid all-encompassing word (source: The National Association of Stupid Words). If a woman has a baby and loses her job, a life lesson is learned - shouldn't have had a baby (source: the DUH Society). Rape is a different, and horrible, situation. But while the woman may not be able to love a child of rape, perhaps she could put it up for adoption so that some other family could. And Planned Parenthood offers discount birth control? I heard Wal-mart has a 100% discount on a big fat dose of Abstinence. If you don't want to have kids and can't afford birth control (they sell condoms at the Dollar Tree by the way, and pregnancy tests) then sex isn't for you.

I felt like I was reading something from a middle schooler (with age appropriate logic). Yes, taking away womens ability to choose whether or not they can or can't abort is actually GIVING them rights (/end sarcasm). Idiot. Please stop writing.

Oh Adam, that was such a compelling argument! I'm giving up sex right now, and where do you live? I want to know which way to look when I pray... thanks!

Tip: If you want to make the claim that 'women are the real victims of their own abortion rights' then you might not want to give away the fact that you think abortion is murder because it makes your argument seem biased. For example, if I wanted to argue that hunting gives people cancer, I shouldn't say "by the way, hunting is also the moral equivalent of murder" because then no one would care about my argument to support my claim, because they would think that I'm just making up whatever I want to get people to stop hunting.

I agree this article makes no valid or interesting points on abortion. One of the main problems with abortion in my eyes is that it is "a woman's right to choose." Shouldn't abortion (at least - no matter what you believe about abortion itself) be a couple's right to choose... they both made the baby, they should both be able to make this life changing decision.

Look at the guy's facebook page. That say's it all.

After reading the article, then looking at the title again, all I could think was: "War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength."

While the article may be misguided, there is a point to take away from it. Regardless of your take on abortion, the fact is that unwanted pregnancies occur. Some are carried through to term, and others are aborted. Both of these situations carry their own consequences, which will vary from woman to woman, based on personal philosophies, morals, etc. The noblest of goals is to strive toward eliminating unwanted pregnancies themselves, yet we are unfortunately still at a point where we must focus on how to deal with them after they have happened. Why does this happen in an age of extremely effective and highly available contraception? I doubt it's a lack of education; I think it's more likely a lack of personal responsibility. But what do we do about this? It doesn't seem feasible to poll pregnant women, then fine any who say their pregnancy is unwanted. Taxpayers, under our current system, will end up paying for not only abortions, but also pregnancies resulting in children that are not supportable by destitute parents. What a conundrum, from a social standpoint, before even arguing morality. By the way, the term "pro-life" is just as loaded with connotation as "pro-choice."

This is fascinating, truly fascinating. Look a few posts down at anonymous who posted at 11:03am. This is pure gold. He or she says, "Shouldn't abortion...be a couple's right to choose... they both made the baby, they should both be able to make this life changing decision." Ok, open your ears everyone. So this writer is honest enough to say that the child in the womb is a LIFE. A LIFE. A LIFE. In fact, it is a HUMAN LIFE. Call it fetus or whatever you want (of course fetus comes from latin and means 'young one' or 'little one' so I don't think that term accomplishes the de-humanization many intend. So now that we've established that it is a separate human life, and it is scientifically, 46 of its own chromozones, a heartbeat, brain waves, thumb-sucking, etc...now the author of the previous post thinks it should be up to both man and woman to decide whether or not it lives, or gets sucked up by a vacuum pump. This is unbelievably illogical, much more than this article that we're all posting on. If it is a human life, we cannot kill it! That is no one's right! It is no one's choice! Wake up!

continued from below...Just because parents created a child through sex doesn't mean they have ultimate rights to that child's life. Of course parents get the say in how their children live for the most part, but parents do no have unrestricted rights. A parent cannot abuse or kill their own child once it is outside of the womb. So why do we allow it inside the womb? It makes no sense. Babies are being discriminated against based on whether they are in or out of the womb. We have fetology (the science and study of the fetus) now, we can see the fetus inside the womb. It is moving, thumb-sucking, responding to light and sound, growing rapidly, yet we still ignore this and say it is ok to kill. Logic has died in this debate, and it is terrifying for future possibilities, because if we are so willing to kill humans in one form, no one knows what human form we'll willing kill next...the elderly? jews again? who knows. we don't acknowledge science in this debate, and it is absurd.

The author is both ignorant and an a55, and the fact that I read the first three sentences means that I spent a good five seconds longer on this article than I should have.

Yea, good post anonymous! You read only the first three and call him ignorant and an a55. Oh wait, no, I think that means you're the ignorant one, for not even reading it before judging and condemning.

It sounds like the same insensitive pricks who turned a private decision by Terry Schiavo's family into a media three ring circus. Yeah, I want THEIR church to butt into my familys' private health decisions...

Reading through the comments, there are a lot of people who label the author as a "religious fanatic". I'm pretty sure that religion wasn't even touched on in the editorial...biased reviews? Some other people were wondering where the sources are to back up his arguments. There are some shocking statistics that he refers to, such as the number of abortions per year in this country. I think everybody, no matter what their opinion is, should look that up after hearing about it since it is such a shocking number. Abortion may be on the decline, but the numbers are still horendous: 820,151 abortions in 2005 (over 2,000 a day), according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/index.htm). Think about it.

World Population Clock: http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html

The writer completely misses the point by using an absolutely asinine argument. Regardless of how you feel on the topic as that is not my problem, the article is an unorganized, illogical rant that obviously has more to do with Planned Parenthood than abortion. The point to the right of choice is not women's equality. We tell women, "Sure, you can be equal, but you might require an invasive surgery that will have physical and emotional consequences to do so." Who!?!?! Who could rationally make that statement. It is completely rediculous. The writer argues that abortion rights turn women into second-class citizens. How does that even relate? This is an attempt to use hot-button phrasing to misrepresent an argument. In another portion, the writer states that the right to an abortion is making women choose between a career and motherhood. Once again, there's no substance to that argument. It's just ranting jibberish. I am not arguing for either side, as I believe you don't have force your beliefs on others like some do. I never have a problem with people disagreeing with my beliefs but have a hard time tolerating irrational, asinine arguments.

it could be said that republicans care about the baby for the 9 months its in the womb and then when it's out, they lose all interest

Hey "Khadafi", are you in on the right-wing bashing too? It breaks your heart when you learn things that show you the right is right, doesn't it? Grow up and stop the slander.

Clearly you don't know what it is like to be a girl. Abortion is a fairly painless procedure and living a fulfilling life is a good thing. A child born to a college student with no money wouldn't be taken well care and given the best life it could. And women can be raped or have birth control fail and they should be able to choose. Why are you so considered about the money? If I choose to give my money to a doctor that's my choice. He/she is doing a service and should be paid. An abortion is like $300 it's not like they are ripping people off. I don't regret having an abortion, but I do get angry when people like you get a whole column. Honestly CT I could write a better account of a women's view on the matter.

Wow. This guy is special. I hope he gets his wife pregnant and she has an abortion. His heart will break and his logic will too.

Scientific facts versus emotional ranting; unanswered logical arguments versus knee-jerk responses; ethical consistency on the value of all human life at all stages versus hypocritical "living a fulfilling life is a good thing" (for everyone except the baby killed); true concern and love for others in all stages of need versus "me-first" narcissism...How many adoption centers do pro-abortion groups fund? Why is it that Planned Parenthood never counsels any course other than death? The greatest genocide in history - over 45 million people in the last 30 years- is not a tragedy about which one is morally free to decide to "follow their own beliefs" and ignore.

to the first woman. please understand. 1) it's not just that you are paying an abortionist, it is that our government, through different programs, requires everyone to pay for abortions through taxation. 2) Because a child will not be born into plenty of money is NOT JUSTIFICATION for killing it, this is the whole point of adoption! 3) Liberals always act as if science is so important...so WHY DO THEY NOT ACKNOWLEDGE SCIENCE in this situation. with the scientific facts, there is no standing argument for the pro-choice movement. Chris is right, the pro-choice movement is not logical. If a baby one month out of the womb exists in total poverty, we would never say it is ok to kill him or her, so HOW can we say that 2 months earlier, while in the womb it is ok to kill? It is not logical, it is not scientifically sound. Why don't people respond to Chris Mooney's post, or Pike's, or this one? Because you cannot, because selfish arguments cannot stand up to scientific truth.

Khadafi - everyone is calling for 'proof' of all the claims in this article. How about you provide a shred of fact for your statement about pro-life people not caring about people once their out of the womb. it's a false stereotype that you can spout all you want, it doesn't make it true.

Is this a joke? Because it sure reads like one. His 'proof' is the teachings of the catholic church and a myriad of anti choice website that spout blatant lies about the abortion procedure. Not that he would know what its like to have an abortion- since he has a penis.

Oh, good response anonymous, why don't you address the science of the issue? Or maybe get a logical argument? And yea, you're right...men can't have an opinion on this. That's crazy to think that everyone to have input. Oh wait, then we should probably revoke roe v. wade, since it was decided by 9 men.

Or do you just think men can have an opinion when they're pro-choice? that's sure what it sounds like

There is only one absolute truth to abortion - the procedure destroys the life of a developing human being. Plain and simple. Period.

the bible say life begins at the first breath. it's a good book read it sometime.

We have to allow abortion because it is much safer in a regulated, licensed facility than a shady, back-alley doctor office, or worse, at home. If a woman is dead-set on an abortion, then we have to consider her safety and right to life over the rights of the potential person inside of her (after all, she could still miscarry or the child could die during birth). That is why we allow abortion and provide resources for it as a society. Now, as for the conduct of Planned Parenthood, I don't know anything about the organization or its practices, but I wouldn't condone the "selling" of abortions to teens, or anyone for that matter. However, when you live in a capitalist society, don't be surprised when businesses act in their own self-interest. They pay taxes too.

Perry, its interesting how you mention "right to life" in regards to the mother.

@doesnt -- so using the Bible in a literal sense would suggest that fish aren't alive? Does the Bible also say that the first breath has to be 20% oxygen/80% nitrogen? The Bible is a great book, and I suggest that next time you are reading, you actually try to understand what is written.

Psalm 51:5 "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." an inherent sinfulness in any human life

your argument is completely absurd. you admit there is a person inside the mother, then say, yes, let's provide a safe atmosphere for the mother while we kill the child. good perry, good.

Every generation has a struggle over whether to consider a certain group of people fully human or not. previously, it has been about race, religion, etc. Slavery, holocaust, civil rights movement. This is our great struggle. The pre-born child in the womb is scientifically human...we cannot continue the slaughter. YES WE CAN accomplish human rights for BOTH the child and the mother! This is our struggle for human rights. All who think it ok to kill a preborn child will be recorded as being on the wrong side of history, just as the nazis, just as the slaveholders, just as the racist southerners. It is our generation's struggle. Though pro-choice seems to be progressive, it is not.

A woman can CHOOSE to take a fertility drug and have 8 kids or a woman can CHOOSE to take a "day after" pill. Both miracles of science not God.

A tumor is scientifically human, too, with human blood, tissue, and DNA. I'm not saying that a tumor and an embryo are the same thing, I'm only pointing out that just because a cluster of growing, changing cells are "human" doesn't make them able to live independent of the host on their own. A first or second trimester embryo/fetus/"pre-born"/etc. will not survive on its own, once separated from its host/mother.

The interesting thing that impedes a solution is the fact that we are trying to use human-developed classifications to determine the meaning of life and to distinguish an embryo from a baby. To "Sigh": how often have you seen a baby that can survive without external support?

To sigh - an embryo has 46 chromosomes. take a damn biology class. a piece of human heart is not a person. a tumor does not have a gender. at the moment of conception, gender is decided, there exist 46 unique chomosomes. please stop speaking ignorantly. use common sense and scientific knowledge

Of course a baby can't survive without food, shelter, etc, but in my opinion if a fetus can't survive without being physically attached to/inside the mother, then (again, IMHO) it's part of the mother's body. It's true that it COULD develop into a person who can breathe on its own and eat through its mouth, but while it's a first or second trimester thing, it's part of the woman's body and therefore the decision lies with the potential mother. But I agree that she should discuss the decision with the potential father before deciding the fate of the potential baby. That is, if the potential father is around and wasn't a rapist or something.

The course of logic taken by the author in this argument is somewhat ridiculous. This is one of the worst pro-life articles I've read in that it borderline makes no sense. It is implied that because abortion exists, women are somehow forced or required to have it. It is simply an option, nothing more, nothing less. There is no organization forcing women to get abortions behind the scenes. Also, this is NOT our "great struggle" as a generation, but a pointless offshoot from the World's real problems. Just a useless article standard of the CT.

Oh wise one M.E., what are the world's real problems? Poverty, wars, hate? I would agree if we believed in right and wrong and had a value associated with human life. But since people like you are inconsistent on the value of human life, who is to define the world's real problems? If human life has no inherent value, nothing we do matters, we're just random creatures with no purpose...who cares is the world is crumbling around us?

If you are anti-abortion, why not volunteer to help with sex-ed, birth-control distribution, and to help young mothers? If a young pregnant woman knew she'd have a group that was there to help her with whatever she needed, maybe she'd be less likely to consider abortion.

I'm not pro-choice, I'm just anti-baby. How I hate babies.

Good thing these women/girls aren't trying to pay to kill animals they would be in jail with Vick!

My hope lies within the goodness of individuals who object to abortion; regardless of their platform. Please, use your goodness and concern for that unborn child with action, not mere chatter. I strongly urge each of you to visit these women facing this crisis, and offer to adopt their child. This way you can raise them, care for them, put them through college, and not have to worry about their life. Please, adopt these children if you so strongly object to abortion. Adopt them all. Protect them and prevent the woman from hardship.