ANSWERS: 22
  • I don't suppose it is just you, but I would have thought that in a country where you have to be able to afford medical treatment everybody would insist on wearing four point seatbelts whenever they got into a car.
  • Feel free to petition your state government to change the seat belt laws...
  • You also have a choice as to whether or not to wear a seatbelt. No one gets in your car and forces you to buckle up.
  • It's just you. I support keeping people safe AND a woman's rights over her own body.
  • maybe because, it's not a accident that a person is getting a abortion, it's a persons choice.
  • I think it is just you.
  • You're right. It's not about personal choice over one's body, it's about abortion. If it was choice over one's own body, wearing a seat belt would also be a choice because it's that person's life, not the government or anyone else's.
  • It is a point of view. To those who support abortion, an early foetus is not a human being, it is growth within a woman's body which would become a human being if left to grow, whereas the wearer of a seatbelt is always a human being. The question is not whether killing humans is legal or not - it is always illegal. It is at what point a sperm-and-egg becomes a human. To me, the essence of humanity is the ability to think: a foetus with no brain and a person whose brain is so damaged it will never work again are equally not within the category of humans whose life must be respected.
  • 1) The law about seat belts is not stupid: "mandatory usage not only reduces injuries and deaths, but also reduces the economic cost to society. A University of Wisconsin study demonstrated that car accident victims who had not worn seatbelts, cost the hospital (and the state, in the case of the uninsured) on average 25% more." Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_legislation 2) The law about abortion is not stupid either: "In deciding Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that a Texas statute forbidding abortion except when necessary to save the life of the woman was unconstitutional. The Court arrived at its decision by concluding that the issue of abortion and abortion rights falls under the right to privacy. In its opinion it listed several landmark cases where the court had previously found that right implied by the Constitution. The court held that a first-trimester embryo or fetus was not a person under the Constitution, and that a right to privacy existed and included the right to have an abortion. The court further ruled that the state could intervene to restrict abortion in the second trimester of development and could outlaw it altogether in the third trimester" Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States 3) This would explain the reason why you have the "choice" in one case and not in the other.
  • It is inconsistent and shows that the government is OK with choice for abortion but is anti-choice when it disagrees with other choices you want to make with your body.
  • I'm sorry, but why the hell would anybody not wear a seat belt? Why? I've never understood. If you don't want to die, you wear your bloody seatbelt. It's like walking into a main road with your eyes shut, you don't do it. As for your question, the two laws can't be compared. And I don't want to argue. The seat belt thing just got to me.
  • Feel free to get banned from AB also.
  • Government allows: Smoking drinking speed boating Sky diving Bunji jumping Extreme Sking Caving Extreme skate boarding, Horse back riding by anyone(no licence) marriage all high risk activities with a mind for tax !!!
  • nothing wrong at all with being made to wear a seat belt ( should have been made law 30 years ago)... same as nothing wrong with abortion... you have a choice to do either just one you get a fine for and one you don't ...but its still a choice
  • In a sick way of thinking, one could argue that one abortion is but one life whereas not having a seat belt, or even lots of people not wearing them, could cost numerous lives, especially in massive car pileups and such.
  • It's just you. It costs me nothing if you have an abortion. If you get in an auto accident w/o your seat belt, all those medical costs will eventually trickle down to the rest of us in the form of higher premiums.
  • Abortion (killing someone else) is legal, suicide (killing yourself) is legal. If that's not crazy, I don't know what is.
  • Meant to be a comment. Sorry
  • The government favors abortion because it results in lower costs in education and health care. Fewer kids, less cost to the government. But, they don't want you getting hurt in a wreck because you'll apply for disability, costing them money for years. They also don't want you dead because they lose tax revenue. It's a financial call. They don't care about you or the kids. They care about the money.
  • If seat belt laws were challenged constitutionally, they would be found unconstitutional, just like abortion prohibition. It's an issue of bodily self-determination.
  • It's stupid. It's my car, my body, and my life. Government, keep your hands off my body!! Next, they're gonna tell me I can't smoke inside my own house.
  • The government has no constitutional right to force me to wear a seat belt or prevent me from eating French fries.

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy