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.
(hint: 18, 21, and 65 don't determine by law the intrinsic value of a life.)
20 or 24 weeks does not either. The Supreme court was not attempting to determin or qualify the "intrinsic value of life". The 24 week gestational period was a baseline to bring about order in when "viability" would be established.
No court case in America has addressed the issue "intrinsic value of life".
Those aren't magic numbers, but they're set by elected officials, subject to change by vote vs. 5-9 unelected judges. They're also easy numbers to understand vs 'viability.'
Then your problem is not with abortion, it is with the manor in which disputes are settled in America. Come up with a better system.
20 or 24 weeks does not either. The Supreme court was not attempting to determin or qualify the "intrinsic value of life". The 24 week gestational period was a baseline to bring about order in when "viability" would be established.
No court case in America has addressed the issue "intrinsic value of life".
They don't even know when life begins, much less pass judgment on the value of a life.
When medical advances enable earlier viability, then what?
You have a 30 year old and a 75 year old who need a new heart, both are otherwise healthy and expected to live a normal life after transplant.
Who gets the heart?
The one whose heart is in worse condition, since both lives have value. Throwing age into the mix as a consideration becomes highly subjective and puts us on dangerous ground.
The one whose heart is in worse condition, since both lives have value. Throwing age into the mix as a consideration becomes highly subjective and puts us on dangerous ground.
What if they are equally in need?
Life isn't always simple black and white. Sometimes tough decisions have to be made.
They don't even know when life begins, much less pass judgment on the value of a life.
When medical advances enable earlier viability, then what?
It wasn't their concern to pass judgement on when life begins or its value. Roe v. Wade was not ajudicated to decide when life began.
You seem to be having a hard time understanding the role of the court in this case. Roe v. Wade was not to answer all the ethical questions of life or it's beginings. It was to determin if a woman had the right to terminate her pregnancy and when that termination could occur.
If you want all your questions answered, I or the Supreme court will not be able to help you.
What's so magic about the number 20? C'mon, now, really...at 19 weeks it's ok to kill it, but at 20 weeks it's not? How about our definition of when a human life is "over" in terms of "usefulness".
Let's look at the other end of the life span. When should a person be said to have lived long enough?
What criteria are used? How should we value someone's life? By $$ signs, or by the contribution they've made to society, or according to whom they know/how "important" they are?
Should we put 5 people in a boat, ages 1 to 100 years and ask, "whom shall we toss overboard, because we don't have room for 5?"
Pro abortion arguments don't make any more sense than that, and neither do government end-of-life arguments. When we allow laws and regulations to determine at which point value of life begins and ends, then we've given government way too much power and have lost something immeasurably and significantly human, which separates us from the rest of the animal world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCN
By George, you get it. Bunch of ignorant people on here who do NOT get it. Wonder what happened to their upbringing that they are so uneducated about the value of human life?
I'm not pro abortion, I don't support abortion by anyone I know. However I have read enough about biology and understand the reproductive process enough to form my opinion.
I am not going to change yalls minds. I could go to a long post about viability, and the percentage of miscarriage in the first 3 months of pregnancy, and all other kinds of factual information. It won't do me any good, as I said, I would never change your mind.
My opinion is that if my neighbors want an abortion, it doesn't effect me, so I don't care.
Because I don't look at a bundle of cells as a life. I don't support abortion beyond 20 weeks, but I am also a guy who believes in liberty. As such, I'm not telling anyone what they have to do.
We are simply going to have to agree to disagree on our definition of a live human.
You wouldn't have to pay an abortionist to kill it if it weren't alive.
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.
