Science and technology can solve the problem of abortions. In fact, they practically already have. We just need to educate and equip teenagers and young adults.

Perhaps I am too cynical but sometimes I wonder if pro-lifers are more concerned with using abortion as a club to keep teenagers from having sex than they are with preventing abortions. I'm sure there are many exceptions (which is evidenced in this thread) but it seems that pro-lifers are the first ones to holler when liberals want to teach sex education and make condoms available to teenagers.

I'm not suggesting that teenagers should have sex. I'm just asking how serious are we about preventing abortions? Precautions at night and a pill in the morning is all it takes.

Perhaps birth control technology is not yet perfected, but even now, I bet 99% of unwanted pregnancies could be prevented. Why aren't we preventing them?

i agree, there's alot of social issues in the world that are ignored because they don't carry the political influence. using a condom and popping a pill is less work than the actual act of sex...

life is what you make it

The morning-after pill is a form of abortion to me and many others who are pro-life...

He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God.
-Micah 6:8 NIV

i would consider myself pro life but i also agree with the morning after pill. however, once a baby is known to be conceived and well into it's a developed fetus (which i believe is a non debatable time and unspokenly agreed upon) no abortions should be acted upon. as doug said, preventable methods should be used.

life is what you make it

Prevention. That's all you need.

Men: Use a condom. Make sure it has spermicide.
Women: Use birth control.

Problem solved! Yay!

The morning-after pill wouldn't work for you anyway.

But seriously, there are many forms of birth control. I just threw the morning-after pill out as an example.

I think they get a choice of either be a human or a animal, but no one knows do they unless they get real proof.

Hot potato.

There is nothing special about all and ONLY "human life". Speaking about how much we value human life (above and BEYOND all other life) is strange at best as it is if we are claiming the humanity aspect of said life is what makes us care for it and not want to cut it short. It is not. The classfication of homo-sapien incites NO more imperitives whatsoever.

We care about humans because they are sentient, which means they are concious and have interests such as avoidence of pain and in continued existence. Perhaps we should start stating what we really mean, and rightly so, which is that we value SENTIENT life.

We should apply said criteria to every stage of fetal development for considering our obligations to it. I do not see sentience (due to the absense of key neural components) in an early-term fetus, so they cannot have interests, (which means they cannot have rights) and I therefore conclude that we have no obligations to it so the decision should be left up to the mother.

if it's left up to the mother, then she should pay for it all...

why should the man pay for the abortion if he doesn't want it aborted?

that's idiotic sexism

life is what you make it

So your saying that your ok with killing babies?