Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestions2yrs ago

How do you think access to different reproductive options shapes our society?

+
Expand
+ Settings

Informed Voters

These active users have achieved an understanding of common concepts and the history regarding the topic of

@omg123
#1 Informed Voter
@9ZDKTZY
#2 Informed Voter
@9X3VD63
#3 Informed Voter
@9G6K9CF
#4 Informed Voter
@9YM7896
#5 Informed Voter

Engaged Voters

These active users have achieved a basic understanding of terms and definitions related to the topic of

@B2TDFYS
#1 Engaged Voter
@🌊BlueWaveCrew
#2 Engaged Voter
@B5TTBDH
#3 Engaged Voter
@B9BHCJC
#4 Engaged Voter
@B7C5GL2
#5 Engaged Voter
Test Your Knowledge

4 Replies

 @9J36S7C from Illinois  answered…2yrs2Y

Reproductive options are important for our entire society to consider. Empathy is important, and also facts. Pro-choice should be implemented everywhere for the the Mother/ body whom carries the child/ owner of embryo through surrogacy, regardless of opinion. Mothers whom are in a contract pregnancy should also have rights until the baby is born, they should be able to ensure ( with an official opinon as well such as a moral or govermental agency) that the baby will be in a safe home.

 @9J3CTK2 from Illinois  agreed…2yrs2Y

A person should be able to choose if they are able to give the embryo in their stomach a good life instead of a miserable one if they were to abort.

 @9J35SHV from Illinois  answered…2yrs2Y

I think different reproductive options are definitely convenient but also expensive at the same time, society developing signs. But wommen should not be pushed to resort to other reproductive options if their main choice is abortion

 @9J35QQT from South Carolina  answered…2yrs2Y

I think it makes our country more sexually active which can be degrading to the way they perceive other people.

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies