What Are Pro-Life People Going to Do with These Unwanted Children after Birth? (drug, death)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For those of you who are totally against abortion, what are you going to do when women have babies they don't want and can't afford? Are you going to take them in? Pay for them? Comforting these babies when they wake up crying four times each night? Pro-life means respecting life from cradle to grave, after all. What's the plan after they are born? After these bans are enacted, there are consequences. This is real life. It's messy. It's not ideal. The problem won't magically solve itself just because Louisiana bans abortion. Once they are born, our taxes will go up, because the children will need CHIP, SNAP, and Food Stamps. Are you willing to pay more taxes?
Nothing. They aren't my responsibility. They are the parent's responsibility.
I am not sure how much more it can move, either. At some point a fetus has to be too small to intubate. Idk where that is but looking up a 12 week fetus, for example, looks like it'd be pretty damn difficult. Intubation tubes can only be so small and the smaller a premature baby, the tougher it will be to successfully intubate and overall keep it alive.
Stages of development are stages of development. We can't make that move any faster, all we can do is help them breathe and provide other necessary care and hope for the best, really. If we can't even help them breathe, there's nothing else we can do.
Science will always push that envelope, perhaps even creating an artificial Uterus. I suppose the argument could then be, can someone give up parental responsibility. Even if they know they are not in the position to raise a child.
Will the pro-life movement shift to the responsibility movement? The goal posts will change, and it boils down to personal responsibility not to have sex. I say not have, because the driving force behind this will or has already started limiting access to responsible birth control.
Government forcing women to bear children they can't afford and don't want is slavery.
The situation gets no better after birth.
Adoption? Get real. Over a hundred thousand children in foster care waiting to be adopted at this very moment.
Over a million childless couples wanting to adopt actual infants.
Why do you people always bring this foster care crap up? Foster children are not the result of forcing women to carry babies to term. They are the result of parents that have failed in one way or another to raise their children.
The fetus is at a "significant disadvantage" because you recognize that there are differences between it and a living person, like the mother. Yet you still think it is a person entirely equal to the mother even though it can be unborn, non-viable, and the size of a pinky finger or smaller when aborted.
Those "disadvantages" include that it is too early in development to even have a well functioning brain, at an early enough stage. It cannot see or hear for months, it doesn't know of or understand its existence - or lack thereof. Contrast this to the average woman and you can't even compare. Yet you want to, and you want to tell her, sorry you're out of luck, in favor of an unborn "person" so small and underdeveloped it is not very similar to human who have been born in any way.
I recognize that the fetus cannot talk to defend him/her... When people are that disadvantage, I will give them preferential treatment... Yes, I think that fetus is every bit a person as the mother and I value that same mother when she was a fetus... that value never changed when she was a fetus... A person who cannot hear is equal to the mom, a person who cannot talk is equal to the mom, a person who cannot see is equal to the mom, any person on any place is equal to any another person .... Its current inability to think, talk, hear, or whatever you can come up still makes it a person...
A fetus is not a person. It is not a someone. It is not logical to think a fetus is a person.
If a fetus is a person, a someone, why don't father's pay fetal support? Why aren't father's responsible for half of its medical bills?
You're mixing science with law and I am therefore confused as to your point. The fetus is a human being - there is no question there. if you want to dehumanize it and deny it's legal "person-hood", historically you aren't in good company with that tactic.
I recognize that the fetus cannot talk to defend him/her... When people are that disadvantage, I will give them preferential treatment... Yes, I think that fetus is every bit a person as the mother and I value that same mother when she was a fetus... that value never changed when she was a fetus... A person who cannot hear is equal to the mom, a person who cannot talk is equal to the mom, a person who cannot see is equal to the mom, any person on any place is equal to any another person .... Its current inability to think, talk, hear, or whatever you can come up still makes it a person...
So should fetuses be given social security numbers if they are people? When a woman finds out she's pregnant, fetus is given one at that point? Should the fetus, a person, have its own health insurance policy during pregnancy and claims are submitted on behalf if it and not the mother if the test or procedure is primarily for it and not the mother (like tests to check whether the fetus has Down Syndrome or other genetic issues)? Should miscarried fetuses be given autopsies to find out how the person inexplicably died? Should it become the cultural norm to have full funerals or other similar services for 6 week miscarried fetuses, since they are people?
It doesn't happen all the time... I am not asking you to risk your life...
Yes you are, in fact, you aren't asking, you want the government to force me to risk my life against my will.
Women can die and that is all that matters. You can't promise a woman it won't happen. The best doctors in the world cannot stop it from happening.
Should I be able to force you to parachute out of a plane against your will just because you probably won't die?
Should I be able to decide for you what risks I think you should take with your life?
How about this? I think you should sign up to be a living donor and if you are a match, you should give up a piece of your liver to keep a child alive. Yes, you could die but it's not likely.
So, should I or the government be able to force you to risk your life to save a life against your will?
Last edited by Annie53; 06-13-2019 at 01:47 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
