Has anyone ever changed their stance on whether they are pro choice or pro life (federal government, federal)

[oz in SC]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

It wasn't a lightly decided stance on my part.

Well it isn't for a lot of people,but that is because a lot of people don't really think too much on issues.

If you think it is a woman's body and hers alone,you cannot logically then decide that is irrelevant because of viability...

[Magritte25]

Originally Posted by oz in SC

Well it isn't for a lot of people,but that is because a lot of people don't really think too much on issues.

If you think it is a woman's body and hers alone,you cannot logically then decide that is irrelevant because of viability...

Yes, I can because there does come a point where the fetus is able to be separate from the woman's body. I still think the woman's life takes precedence, therefore I believe allowances for health and life of the mother should apply in LTAs.

[Lahaina Lopaka]

Originally Posted by oz in SC

Marriage is none of my business....you marrying a dog is none of my business...unless it is my dog.

What YOU and the other statists feel is you have the right to decide what another human being can do with their body,based upon YOUR beliefs.

Mind your own business.

What business is it of your if a woman wants to abort on her due date?
Unless YOU want to raise the child, butt out.

So unless I want to raise you, I should be okay with somebody cutting you into little pieces. I, and society, should "butt out"?

I don't think that wanting to protect the lives of the vulnerable and innocent among us qualifies as "statism". It is, however, humanism.

[oz in SC]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

Still not understanding why this makes my stance make little sense.

I was replying to Annie53.

She believes a woman should have her rights abrogated in the third trimester,due to viability.

But a fetus is viable well into the 2nd trimester...undermining her position.

[oz in SC]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

Yes, I can because there does come a point where the fetus is able to be separate from the woman's body. I still think the woman's life takes precedence, therefore I believe allowances for health and life of the mother should apply in LTAs.

Why do you keep bringing up the fetus,it has nothing to do with the woman and her right to her own body.

You DO realise you support forcing a woman to have a baby right?
Based upon your belief that the fetus takes precedence over her body.

[oz in SC]

Originally Posted by Lahaina Lopaka

So unless I want to raise you, I should be okay with somebody cutting you into little pieces. I, and society, should "butt out"?

I don't think that wanting to protect the lives of the vulnerable and innocent among us qualifies as "statism". It is, however, humanism.

It isn't a person,it is a fetus.

It is simply a more developed fetus.

It is still a non-person.

If you believe a woman has the right to her own body,you cannot then support taking that right away because of your beliefs.

[Magritte25]

Originally Posted by oz in SC

Why do you keep bringing up the fetus,it has nothing to do with the woman and her right to her own body.

You DO realise you support forcing a woman to have a baby right?
Based upon your belief that the fetus takes precedence over her body.

Yes, I do realize that. However, I also realize that MOST women would not abort a late term pregnancy unless there were severe cause to do so.

LTAs are the province of last chances and hail marys. They are certainly not synonymous with 8 or 9 week abortions. To compare the two is to show ignorance of each procedure.

[oz in SC]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

Yes, I do realize that. However, I also realize that MOST women would not abort a late term pregnancy unless there were severe cause to do so.

LTAs are the province of last chances and hail marys. They are certainly not synonymous with 8 or 9 week abortions. To compare the two is to show ignorance of each procedure.

How nice of you to allow a woman to have an abortion in the 3rd trimester if the conditions are severe enough...

Are you familiar with the abortionist in Philly?
He specialised in late term abortions and was quite popular.Unfortunately,he was also a butcher.
Women forced to go to him because of the restrictions on late term abortions.

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by expatChicagoan

I wouldn't tell her what to do, but I would like her to witness what they would do need to do to her fetus at that point - you know, the whole part about 1/2 delivering the fetus, so that the legs and torso are out of the body, then thrusting a pair of scissors (or some other surgical instrument) into the fetus' skull to suck the brains out...

Please, you need to do some research on this.

Women who have late term abortions WANT the baby.....but something has gone horribly wrong and they will either die if the pregnancy continues or the baby is seriously malformed and will only suffer in agony and die shortly after birth.

As if this isn't putting the mother through enough torture already.....you want to force her to watch the procedure?

How utterly barbaric and disgusting.

Would you like to force parents to watch the autopsy of their child if it accidently drowns in the family pool? It would serve them right, huh? After all....if they were watching their child like they should have been, it wouldn't be dead.

[oz in SC]

Dr Kermit Gosnell performed late term abortions,the women CHOSE to go there.