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.
the point is anyone can care for them. people not willing to care for them are not forced to do so. how do you want to force women to take pregnancy to term if they don't want to? birthing camps perhaps?
One person's inconvenience doesn't trump another's right to live. In most cases, they have their own short sightedness to blame for getting pregnant before they wanted to. Consequences.
In many cases it's not a matter of just anyone caring for them, it may take a very educated, specialist to care for some people, something in short supply often.
No, you are missing the point. It isn't about who needs assistance surviving OUTSIDE the womb. With a typical abortion, the fetus aborted is in no way able to survive outside the womb.
Yeah, after having one's brains sucked out or being poisoned or something like in some abortions, it might be hard to survive.
If you have the technology to keep a fetus of two months alive outside the womb, you should really patent and publicize that technology.
I have technology that will keep that human alive. It's called a law against murder and involves a prison cell for those who are so selfish they think they have a right to murder.
You really missed the point. Neither newborns and very young children nor some disabled adults can live on their own. They are entirely dependent on another to live. Does that mean they have no right to live?
Embryos and pre-20 (some say 24) week fetuses are unable to sustain basic life functions outside of the womb. They can't LIVE on their on their own.
Embryos and pre-20 (some say 24) week fetuses are unable to sustain basic life functions outside of the womb. They can't LIVE on their on their own.
I hope you are being deliberately obtuse.
But they are a living human.
And some people need a machine to keep them alive. Ever see the iron lungs used years ago?
Does that dependence mean it's not a human? Does it magically become a human at 6 months or whatever other random date murderers choose?
Given the abortion industry's close early history with the eugenics movement, which did advocate killing the disabled, I don't see anything wrong with my examples here.
I have technology that will keep that human alive. It's called a law against murder and involves a prison cell for those who are so selfish they think they have a right to murder.
There are places where the opinions/religious beliefs of men hold dominion over the lives of women. The US is not one of those places - perhaps you should think about relocating.
And some people need a machine to keep them alive. Ever see the iron lungs used years ago?
Does that dependence mean it's not a human? Does it magically become a human at 6 months or whatever other random date murderers choose?
Given the abortion industry's close early history with the eugenics movement, which did advocate killing the disabled, I don't see anything wrong with my examples here.
A living human possesses the quality of sentience. Can't say the same for embryos/fetuses. Critical difference.
There are places where the opinions/religious beliefs of men hold dominion over the lives of women. The US is not one of those places - perhaps you should think about relocating.
I haven't referenced religion once in this thread. I don't need to either. This isn't a women's rights issue. This is a matter of murder not being tolerated. Plenty of women are being murdered by abortionists, what about their rights?
Quote:
A living human possesses the quality of sentience. Can't say the same for embryos/fetuses. Critical difference.
the point is anyone can care for them. people not willing to care for them are not forced to do so. how do you want to force women to take pregnancy to term if they don't want to? birthing camps perhaps?
Really?
Parents are not forced to care for their children? Is child neglect no longer illegal?
Non-custodial fathers aren't forced to make child support payments under threat of imprisonment?
Sorry but you'll have to come up with a better argument than that.
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.
