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.
1. If an abortion or a miscarriage was classified as 'death' why do women who have miscarriages (which happens all the time) not have to get a death certificate for the embryo/fetus?
2. In fact, if we take it to the extreme and classify "life" from the time of conception/fertilization, should women get a death certificate every time they menstruated just in case? There is often a fertilized egg which just didn't quite attach to the uterine wall properly which is not even noticed by the woman.
3. And pregnancy can result in death of the mother too- a fully grown thinking person where a death certificate is required.
4. What are your thoughts about the State ordering a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term, and she dies or is permanently disabled because of complications?
1. Because embryos and fetuses are not legally considered persons yet. Likewise, why doesn't someone have to get a death certificate if a chicken, fish, pig, et cetera dies? For the same reason.
2. This would be too hard, and probably a waste of time, to accurately measure.
My answer here is No.
3. Yes, I know.
Even from an ideal perspective, there should be an exception when it comes to ectopic pregnancies. Of course, from a practical perspective, there might need to be a broader maternal life exception as a compromise measure.
4. I am very willing to support a maternal life and a severe maternal health exception in an abortion ban if necessary.
When obviating that risk requires killing someone else, yes it should.
Pregnancy isn't cancer. All of life comes with certain risks. Your fearmongering is ridiculous.
Choosing to have sex is choosing the risk of pregnancy. You conveniently leave that part out. Should the state force her to put her health at risk? Didn't she already do that herself when she had intercourse?
Which again invokes the question from earlier in this thread which is, what about rape. If you both believe that abortion is murder, what about abortion during rape makes it less so and if it doesn't wouldn't your entire 3rd part about a choice be irrelevant to your actual goal.
These arguments for "choice" are really veiled an anti-responsibility arguments...in many cases there is little or no consideration of equality of life and when there is, it's in cold terms of "the law", overpopulation, cost, care, even "wanted" vs "unwanted", etc.
Why is it that we, as human beings who are supposed to be superior to the rest of the animal world, cannot find a way to rise to the needs and challenges, morally and ethically, to actually value life except as it is defined by law, or in light of economic or societal considerations. Is it that liberals don't want to do that because it would cramp their style, or just can't see the need for reaching for higher ground?
1. Yeah but the state doesn't and shouldn't consider fetuses as persons any more then it considers frozen embryos persons.
2. The state cannot just ignore their own laws with regards to statutory provisions if the statute say pay they have to pay and I seriously doubt aid to unwanted children will ever end.
As to forced abortions I don't see why the state would have an interest great enough to outweigh a person's reproductive liberty. Whenever you have a conflict between state and individual interests they need to be weighed.
As to safe haven rules if that happens without the father's knowledge chances are he somehow waived parental rights or it would turn into a giant lawsuit.
"Yeah but the state doesn't and shouldn't consider fetuses as persons any more then it considers frozen embryos persons."
Government has no business deciding who is or is not a person as this power gives them a trump card over the Bill of Rights.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness..."
Are these unalienable rights bestowed upon us by our creator at any time except the moment of our creation?
"Yeah but the state doesn't and shouldn't consider fetuses as persons any more then it considers frozen embryos persons."
Government has no business deciding who is or is not a person as this power gives them a trump card over the Bill of Rights.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness..."
Are these unalienable rights bestowed upon us by our creator at any time except the moment of our creation?
Good job, momonkey!
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.
