How many in America are both opposed to Animal Cruelty and Pro-Choice in America?

How many of you in America are both:

Vehemently opposed to Animal Cruelty

AND

Pro-Choice

in America? What is your reasoning behind your views on these issues?

Originally posted by managerie
How many of you in America are both:

Vehemently opposed to Animal Cruelty

AND

Pro-Choice

in America? What is your reasoning behind your views on these issues?

I am personally against both. I don't think animals should be tortured, beaten, etc. However, I don't see slaughter houses as animal cruelty because I like my beef, chicken, pork, etc. As long as the animals are killed in a "humane" way, meaning they suffer in the least amount, I am fine with it. But to those sick people who torture pets, or any animal for that matter, make me sick.

I am also strongly against abortion. I don't see how one can justify killing an INNOCENT human being. Especially being so small and helpless. I believe life begins at conception.

My question is How many people are Pro Choice, and yet strongly oppose the death penalty. Why can we kill small babies, yet to punish a murderer, is wrong? You've got me. Most women and\or couples should think about a better form of birth control if you ask me. Use a condom, fem-condom, the pill, the patch, ABSTINENCE, but don't kill something that you have created.

i guess it may appear to be odd at first glance, but i am a pro-choice, anti-cruelty vegetarian.

first of all, the wording of this topic is a bit deceptive. it kind of gives off the impression that the vast majorty of pro-choice advocates are in favor of savagly torturing and mutilating animals

the distinction that i draw between these two topics is that while i am not in favor of abortion, i do not believe that i (or anyone else) has the right to say that it is wrong. Secondly, there is a distinct difference between the two practices. Animal cruelty is a malicious act, one that does intentional harm to animals simply for the thrill. Abortion, while a negative thing, is in some ways required. what if a woman is raped? should she be forced to carry out the pregnancy? additionally, what if the birth of the child will in turn kill the mother?

as a sidenote (once which i am not a large fan of), is the theory proposed by malthus - stating that if we do not have some form of human population control, the inevitble population spike will cause mass hunger and famine, thus killing many more people.

these aren't the best arguments in the world, but i want to see if it will spike some conversation before i devote significant time to it.

I personally don't understand the phrasing of this question at all. Think about it, who in their right mind is going to stand up and say, "I strongly support animal cruelty and all it stands for!"? The answer to this question is no one, unless he or she is trying to be mildly amusing, or is a rather sick individual. What do you want people to say, "I believe in the right for a woman to choose whether or not she wishes to have a baby, and because I believe in that right I believe that I should go punch a dog in the face." Obviously people who are pro-choice do not believe that abortion is anything comparable to beating a poor, defenseless animal.

In response to the brief mention of Malthus, I believe that perhaps this is the best way to avoid the possible extinction of mankind. If population continues to grow at this exponential rate, eventually many, many people will die. The planet already has four billion more people than it was meant to support, adding billions of more people is only going to destroy everything that we have worked for thousands of years to create.