After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? (independent, compare, support)

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge

1. The Catholic Church used to have a rule about fetal viability as well. They referred to it as when life "quickened" in the womb.

2. Mother Nature is still the most prolific abortionist, if we are to take your point of view.

1. Yes, and this is relevant here because? The Catholic Church historically wasn't exactly pro-science, so yeah.

2. There's a huge difference between someone dying naturally and someone being killed.

[HistorianDude]

Originally Posted by Futurist110

1. Here you go:

Well, I stopped taking that video seriously after checking on just the first four quotations. The first three were not even scientists, but two philosophers and an English major. The fourth was from a Physician who opposes abortion becuase he is a committed Catholic, not because the science demands it.

Many of the others do not actually say what you want them to say, and most are tendentious quote mining. Many do not talk about human life beginning, but "human development" beginning.

You got anything better than a propaganda piece with a bad soundtrack?

[weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by PJA

My point was he said that marriage wasn't originally between a man and woman and I said up until recently it was. I wasn't commenting on whether it was wrong or right so don't get your panties in a bunch.

Well sure, Skippy! Anyone who makes an innocuous statement that you don't like, is "getting their panties in a bunch".

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

1. Well, I stopped taking that video seriously after checking on just the first four quotations. The first three were not even scientists, but two philosophers and an English major.
2. The fourth was from a Physician who opposes abortion becuase he is a committed Catholic, not because the science demands it.

3. Many of the others do not actually say what you want them to say,

4. and most are tendentious quote mining.

5. Many do not talk about human life beginning, but "human development" beginning.

6. You got anything better than a propaganda piece

7. with a bad soundtrack?

1. Did you watch this entire video?

2. How exactly do you know why Lejeune opposed abortion? Also, even if so, how exactly does it make what he said about when a new life begins invalid?

3. And yet I just looked at this video again and there do appear to be quotes from some scientists and/or medical professionals (after 1:35 on this video) which explicitly state that (a new) life begins at conception.

4. And you know this how, exactly?

5. The thing is that it all depends on how exactly one defines "life"; hence, it is a tautological issue/debate. Yes, the development of a new human being begins at conception, and if that is how one defines life, then a new uman life begins at conception as well.

6. Is any video which attempts to present a case for or against a specific position a "propaganda piece", even if the information which it presents is accurate?

7. You know that you can simply turn the sound off for the time being, correct?

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by West Coast Republican

Anyone who votes yes is going to hell.

Does Hell even exist, though?

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by hothulamaui

1. an "after birth abortion" is called infanticide. it is illegal as it should be.

Out of curiosity, playing Devil's Advocate here (if it is okay to do so):

Why exactly do you think that infanticide should be illegal?

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

The word was "ethically." Not "ethnically."

Yes, I know. That was a typo on my part. People sometimes make typos, so yeah.

I already knew that he wrote "ethically"; I simply misspelled it when I was responding to him.

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

It's entirely arbitrary.

At some points along the 9 months of pregnancy, something that is obviously not a human being (i.e. a fertilized ovum) becomes something that obviously is a human being (i.e. a full term fetus). During much of that time it is not obviously either.

Any attempt to draw a bright line when one becomes the other is entirely arbitrary.

How exactly are you defining a "human being" here and why exactly are you defining it this way?

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by HappyTexan

Unless you murder a pregnant woman and then you are tried for two murders.

Not in my state. The law was recently changed (I think) so that people could be prosecuted for murder of a fetus, but a Catholic hospital in CO fought a lawsuit based on CO law that a fetus was not a person.

Lawyers for Catholic hospital argue that a fetus is not a person - CNN.com
Free Colorado: Law Should Protect Wanted Fetuses While Allowing Abortions

[Futurist110]

Originally Posted by Katiana

Not in my state. The law was recently changed (I think) so that people could be prosecuted for murder of a fetus, but a Catholic hospital in CO fought a lawsuit based on CO law that a fetus was not a person.

Lawyers for Catholic hospital argue that a fetus is not a person - CNN.com
Free Colorado: Law Should Protect Wanted Fetuses While Allowing Abortions

Wait--I just want to clarify--Colorado passed a law which made it homicide to kill a fetus, but then had this law changed to make the killing of a fetus to be a lesser crime, correct?