::begin quote::
We get that Huckabee is against abortion and everything, but you’d think Democrats and Republicans could unilaterially agree that having a baby at 16 is never a good decision.
::end quote::

I think it's important to note that Mike Huckabee never said she had to keep the baby, only that he was glad she was not having an abortion. Putting the child up for Adoption is always a viable option, and that IS what Republican and Democrats can equally agree on.

Is a life of guilt after an abortion really worth it.There are so many couples out there who can't have children who would love to have the opportunity to adopt.

Typical left wing response! The good decision would have been not tho have unprotected sex and any sex for that matter at 16.

Why is he throwing his two cents in on this "issue" ? it's none of his business what she does… it's between her and whatever she believes in. He should stick to trying to ruin the world. Maybe if Sex Ed in this country wasn't such a farce this whole teenage mother business wouldn't be as big an "issue". I'd put money on Spears jr. being the product of an abstinance only Sex Ed.

Candidate Huckabee spoke as most thoughtful people think and why all the political rhetoric about a normal comment which suddenly has become some silly issue from others who seem not to be in the same situation.
Have a little common sense.
Everyone is so quick to admonish….
Get a life!
By the way I'm an independent so no need to comment about politics regarding my thoughts.

This is a typical left wing hysteria induced article trying to stimulate the fact that most Republicans, pro-life or pro-choice, really are about taking responsibility for your actions. But, true to form, liberals are more interested in the "mind" and body of the Spears "family". Rasheed….he probably offered his "two cents" on the issue because he was asked. Dope!! In the meantime, if he does stick to "ruling the world", maybe he'll make abortion for idiots illegal.

Hucabee is scary.

A girl named Bambi writing about the insufferable life of guilt a woman would naturally feel after an abortion; that, instead, woman should use their bodies as vessels to provide children for others should they not want the child themselves? How ironically moronic.

Republicans, Right wingers, Conservatives - whatever safe word we've given to those who promote the limitations of freedoms for anyone who doesn't think like them - have made it clear they’re the last word on morality. But some food for thought. How moral is it to brutally assault others with beliefs that are your own and not theirs? I suppose it takes a fair amount of intelligence to be able to recognize that no matter how strongly we believe something, it is what we personally believe - the smartest men know that they can be wrong. And for all those Bible-Thumpers who enjoy compelling women who have had abortions to feel like murderers? Please consider for a moment the flip side - women who have children when they are not ready or women who have children in a questionable environment or even, women, who have children and give them up to other people? I never knew children had become so expendable. I’m pretty damn sure that if I ever think to introduce a child into this world, it will only be when that child is 100% wanted and ready to be taken care of. It’s a fucking life, for Christ sake. Isn’t that what you claim is so important? The life?

The hypocrisy is simply overwhelming. “As long as the child is born!” is really all that matters to you?

1.) Why is he "throwing his two cents in"? Clearly it was a question the media asked and wanted a response. Had he declined to respond, you would have accused him of cowardness, avoiding the issue or whatever.
2.) Abstinance does not cause conception. Modesty in dress and self-respect is taught with the abstinance programs. Certainly not reflected in Jamie's life
3.) Jamie had quite a role model in her scantily dressed, morally bankrupted sister. Alot of competition there with a sis thats loss of virginity was nationally announced. Brits' unclothed public displays, etc. If I were a betting person, I would highly suspect Jamie was a victim of a comprehensive Sed Ed program. One that encourages sex acts of 16 year olds and younger. Attempt reading the book endorsed by Planned Parenthood with graphic cartoon sex acts for "10 year olds up". A book entitled, "Its perfectly normal".

Hey "Damsel in Digress"….I am considered "pro-life" and I have NO religious agenda. What do you say to that? And talking about hypocrisy, don't pro-choice people try and force their opinions on others too in a very violent and foreceful way (my unreligious opinion)? By claiming only one side is forcing their agenda on people shows your own blindness.

In truthfulness, there are many of us who believe that abortion is wrong that should have coined the phrase "pro-choice". In our world it would be called "clear choice" and would mean; if you make a decision to have unprotected sex, where a substantial probability says you may get pregnant, LIVE WITH YOUR CHOICE somehow. That is why we advocate adoption. Once the choice is made, can't we find a place for the innocent child in our world? Does anyone dispute that a human fetus develops into an actual human?

Common sense, compassion, living decently, making a decision to not let yourself succumb to the pressures of those who want to degrade you, strentgh in family, good parenting - these are the things that go hand in hand with our "clear choice" stance! Isn't abortion as a means of birth control the clearest example of making children "expendable" as you say. Your ranting troubles me more than most posts here because you are obviously educated, but so blind.

I fear for the way this world is turning with the type of "freedom" you espouse. Taking responsibility for something is not only our freedom, but our responsibility. While JL Spears, and her whole family seem devoid of any decency, making her situation seem glamorous in any way seems so ridiculous to me. I am so disgusted that this country holds any celebrity up as any kind of role model. Regardless, have a safe new year.

I just want to say that Damsel In Digress made a really well thought out logical argument. Well said!

And Chris, the issue here is about abortion, and it is only the republicans that are attempting to FORCE people to NOT have them. Liberals/Democrats/Left Wing are saying leave the option up to the individual…they are not forcing you to have abortions, although in your particular case, I think it may be a wise move.

Ultimately, the question is who the hell are you to make that decision for someone else, you self righteous arrogant, prick.

I have the most trouble with how this country handles these types of issues. First, Chris you are right about how disgusting it is to hold any celebrity or celeb athlete up as a role model. But then, there are media articles used to incite people into more and more hateful opinions and name calling - like you I Anti-Heart Huckabee. I never read one sentence in Chris's post where he said pro-choice people are "forcing" people to have abortions, just being forceful with their own opinions. Then you told Chris the issue is about abortion. There I completely disagree with you, it is a whole bigger and inter-related issue. Both his and Damsels opinions were well thought out, you are simply falling into the trap that most uneducated and small minded people do when viewing these articles and posts. And then you say something about in his case abortion may be a wise move…what is that? Why so much hate?

On another note Anti-Heart - why do liberals like yourself hate people that disagree with you so much. I am beginning to see democrats, who are supposed to be the party of the people, more for what they really are…..bratty, big mouthed name callers who can't stand another opinion…talk about self-righteous. Anti-Heart make your own point, quit the name calling.

We get that Huckabee is against abortion and everything, but you’d think Democrats and Republicans could unilaterially agree that having a baby at 16 is never a good decision.

Do you propose that abortion would be a better decision?

I have heard many arguments put forward by ProLife demonstrators, especially by the ProLife Alliance in the UK.

Damsel In Digress said something above that really struck a cord in me. Basically, no matter what the circumstances of conception, no matter the emotional/mental state of the mother, no matter what the beliefs of the immediate family, if you’re ProLife the only thing that matters is that the child is born.

Adoption is the only solution that matters.

Interesting. Maybe they’re right? But is it really as clear-cut as that? Is the answer ever that simple?

Have a child, put it up for adoption. End of story.

Something about that argument leaves me a little uncomfortable.

I think its up jamie if she want to have a baby its not good to have one at 16 but its not are life its her life so,let do what she wants to ur not her mom or dad and i think she should keep the baby not gave it up she had it and her boyfriend should help with the baby by thang for the baby she is still cool so,stop hateing her i mean it please.

What is the big deal, he gets asked all sorts of questions, just like other candidates, and he is EXPECTED to answer them!
As for Damsel in Digress, you seem to contradict yourself. You slam conservatives for their beliefs being "forced" on people. Isn't that what you do every day? And you say, "it's a f… life" but yet you are so quick to say it is a personal desision to abort if it is not a 100% wanted. Maybe everyone should think of that BEFORE carelessly having unprotected sex, especially if you don't want a child, at 16 or any age! If you have sex, you should be prepared to take responsibility for the LIFE you create, not just casually disregard it and not give the LIFE a chance to actually LIVE!
Bible thumper or not, the decision to save a life is always a good one, even if it hasn't been born yet.

I think a fundmental element that is too easily forgetten is every person's entitlement to their own beliefs. At the root of disagreements, our only hope can be that while we may not always agree, we remain informed and respectful.

Unfortunately, when it comes to hot topics such as abortion, I suppose things are bound to get too ugly too quickly.

Chris - Thank you for the food for thought your comments have provided. You mentioned that my blind ranting troubled you. Since a moral life (something you seem to be an expert on?) is one that I assume includes fairness, I will tell you what troubles me: That one person - one person among millions - can state that anything is a "clear choice" simply because it's their choice. Before you get too worked up, let me attempt to predict your responses. Maybe: "Well then what, Damsel, is there no clear choice/right answer for anything? What about murder in general? Religion says murder is wrong. So should we leave that up to a pro-choice decision too?" Or perhaps even: "But it's not just ONE person that believes this. Many do, and that proves how right it is!"

While you may not be Pro-Life due to religious inclinations, I do stand by the belief that most people who are Pro-Life are because of their personal religiously institutional beliefs. That is to mean, that their church or their god says it is wrong. I must say I found your line "I have NO religious agenda. What do you say to that?" quite amusing. You are trying very hard to begin something, yes? But since you asked, here's what I have to say to that: While your reasons may not be religious, you are still deciding "What is moral" to a question that clearly has no right answer. If there was one, I would hope it would not remain an issue that continues to see sides so evenly divided. The fact that there is such a split - I think - shows that the "right answer" is ambiguous. Pro-Choice is simply attempting to allow everyone's idea of the right answer. Hence, why I choose to support it.

Here's some food for thought for you: I grew up in a small, religious town and firmly supported the Pro-Life agenda until I was 18 years old. However, like you, it wasn't due to religious reasons. I felt it unjust. Unfair to the fetus. A careless answer to unprotected sex. All the reasons you stated. I also firmly wanted to remain a virgin until marriage. It again had nothing to do with religion in itself. Morally, idealistically, responsibly, perhaps even romantically, it made sense. So while I may not be the same person I was at 18, let's attempt to not side "Pro-Life" with clear moralism and "Pro-Choice" with radical hedonism? At 18, I went away to a liberal university (let's try not to shiver too much in disgust at this, yes?) - a very good one in fact - where I was fortunate enough to meet people of all different walks of life, different beliefs, different upbringings. I am a very passionate, opinionated person. Yet the greatest lesson I think I learned is that no matter how much I believe something, I am no one to force that upon anyone. Especially when that belief CAN be centered on a religious agenda. Even if there are people like Current You and 18 Year Old Me that believed it for reasons other than religious.

So, hence, Pro-Choice. Which should never be confused with Pro-Abortion. Simply the allowance for everyone to make the personal choice for themselves. Considering the state that our world is in, I hope we can all agree that sometimes, even in the arena of politics where everything - even whether Hillary prefers diamonds or pearls - can become an issue to cloud our minds from things more urgent, there are greater problems for "Pro-Lifers" to direct their focus than Jane Doe's slutty, liberal uterus.

I think it's too easy to paint the issue black and white. I simply wanted to expose some gray. Hence, the my opinion that to blanket every unwanted child with "Well, Put it up for abortion!" could be evaluated as disturbing in some sense.

I'm sorry that you see my expression of opinion as a blind rant. I suppose a part of me felt a angry sadness at the idea that of all the issues concerning our world, this is one that continues to garner so much attention. Especially since pro-choice embodies the essence of the democratic spirit. I guess you simply proved my point however - that people who are pro-life tend to think they know all and everyone else deserves a shake of a head, a frown, and being told their opinions are troubling. Chris, I will always be the first person to call myself out. There are many things I don't know - I'm only a 24 year old girl who has already learned that the only thing she knows about life is that every situation is individual. So am I blind? I am naive. I am idealistic. But even at the young age of 24, I have seen a lot of life. The conclusion I've been fortunate enough to make is to always keep an open mind. I hope you consider doing the same.

And now? I will stop treating the Jossip comment boards like a High School Civics Class 500-word Essay Assignment.

Damsel - I have to first say that there appears to be more than 1 Chris posting here. I only came back here days later 12/31 to see what had happened. I was the Chris that posted first and kind of called you out. As you - I tried to write what I felt and tried to not sound like I was arguing with you. While I don't think I did such a good job there, I also think it's been exasperated by some of the usual suspects who turn these things up. By the way - I am not "worked up" in the least.

With that said, I hope you return and read this as well. I find your writing and opinion well thought out and like I said, coming from someone with much intelligence and life experience. Thank you for the debate!

My "clear choice" idea is not just about me. I, like those that adopted "pro-choice" was just looking for a catch phrase that sums up my opinions. I always thought whatever group first chose "pro-choice" for their movement were genius. The same way that whoever put the word "racial" in front of the word "profiling", which is a legitamate and necessary means to today's law enforcement issues. But I'll save that for the 500 word essay contest……. But "clear choice" in this sense does span many of my opinions on the political issues that face us.

My calling you out (What do you think of that?) is based in my original problem that anyone who goes against "pro-choice" is seen as some facist bible thumping right wing dictator suppressing freedom & the very right of someone to their own thoughts. I really do think there is hypocrisy there. Both sides have their opinion, but "pro-lifers" are always mentioned in the same breath as religion.

My opinion on abortion, to me, is related to science, reasonable expectation, and my sense of compassion. Not in religion or denying anyone's freedoms. I asked if anyone really disputes that a human embryo develops into a human child. To me that is a more important factor than all the rest. Damsel - and anyone else reading this - I am simply stating my opinion, standing on no higher moral ground than you. Pro-choice proponents have their own moral ground too, and it's rooted in the same foundation as everyone else's. Do you in fact, or anyone else disptue what a human embryo will eventually become?

And as far as pushing morality - don't both sides do that? For as many right wing bible thumpers, aren't there as many pro-choice advocate throwing morality around? You are so correct when you say that this issue is not going away. Don't you claim your own moral high ground when you claim your belief that pro-choice embodies democracy? I don't come by my opinions lightly. I am not a headline reader. This is just another polarizing issue with no "right" answerand I never said there was one. The laws go as the prevailing political winds do. Someday, they may change.

I imagine it might shock you to know that I do believe abortion is called for in cases of rape and incest, any crime in fact. To me, a reulting pregnancy is not part of their choice - they were victims and don't need to be subjected to that. Abortion as means of birth control, as a means of correcting the error of unprotected sex ("ooops…I forgot the condom, my bad"), as a means of convenience to a lifestyle, is nothing more than cruelty. There are options other than unprotected sex, there are many means of contraception, there are solutions other than abortion.

I'll end this as I started - sorry for all the other "Chris's" that wrote here - thank you for the debate - it's been refreshing. I wish I had more than a couple minutes. Happy New Year.

Whoever is without sin, let him throw the first stone.

Alright… the person who says what business is it of his… by context, id say he was ASKED A QUESTION. Normally when you asked a question, its a wuss of a response to say it's none of his business. Anyways, there ARE two sides to the abortion issue, and thats what this was, a discussion about abortion. And hes glad she's "having" the child, as in not aborting it. Don't make this overly complex.