The following is a 3 message exchange between 3 users
@9F4RHRPRepublican 6mos6MO
From my perspective, the core argument is about the inherent value of life. Pro-choice often focuses on a woman's autonomy, but excludes the unborn child's right to life. This child, though not yet fully developed, has the potential to become a fully functioning human being. It's not about current capabilities, but potential ones. Shouldn't we, as a society, prioritize preserving the potential for life over personal convenience or circumstance? It's a delicate balance, but for me, upholding the sanctity of life is paramount.
@9H57ZGBRepublican5mos5MO
To say 'potential for life' is to deny this child's already months-old life. We do not (or should not) as a country hold that some lives are more important than others-- especially if we espouse any form of egalitarianism. All life in all stages ought to be protected. A pro-life sentiment does not go far enough to say the unborn need protection -- we must do more to assist the struggling single mother and to address the conditions that lead to cycles of poverty and despair in our country.
@Patriot-#1776Constitution5mos5MO
The way to address these conditions is to get the government to leave people the heck alone.
