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.
christian doesn't mean conservative, and it would be faulty logic to assume that because most christians are (for the sake of argument) conservative, then those christians that turn to abortion must be from the same subset.
By the same token, it would be faulty logic to assume that all women who get an abortion are liberal. I gave my view on why I think a conservative is more likely to abort, you're free to disagree.
What I don't understand about the anti-abortionists is how can you stop an abortion? It's like making suicide illegal.
Mothers will just go back to using wire hangers and drugs to "illegally" abort anyway.
The argument is a loop that cannot be broken by anyone except the woman making the decision.
Two NEARLY entirely separate issues there, Mach. Abortion is a "moral" question, and the law pertaining to it has a moral dimension. Unlike real estate law, tax law, or building codes, abortion law is more equivalent to laws pertaining to assault, or rape, or child molestation, or 'kiddie porn'.
Either abortion is an entirely neutral act, (like excising a tumor, or extracting a wisdom tooth), or it's NOT..in which case it's the termination of a human fetus, which is one stage in a human life.
If it's a 'neutral' act, then so be it. If NOT, however, we can't condone legalizing abortion because "if we didn't, they'd do it anyway". That may be true, but it's not a defense for ANY wrongdoing. Murder, rape, assault, and fraud are things that are illegal, but people "do them anyway". We can't STOP them, we can only deal with those who DO these things after the fact. Nevertheless, we don't legalize these things just because they're things people "do". We prosecute them, because they're WRONG.
If abortion is "wrong", it should be illegal. In that case, no third party should make it his business to "aid" in this wrong.
Not a popular position these days...only making a point. Cats, dogs, and chickens have no control over their behavior. They go into "heat", they mate, and they get pregnant. They "don't know what they're doing".
Human beings DO know what they're doing. If they don't want a pregnancy, there are ways to avoid it. Once it's "underway", though, we can't morally "end it". At that point, what's done is done. If you REGRET getting pregnant, I completely understand... but "snuffing it out" at that point isn't an option.
I'm sure there are PLENTY of people who "regret" giving birth to a boisterous 5-year old, or a grumpy, churlish, disrespectful teen. There are several things that can be DONE in that case, but "killing the kid" is generally looked at as "not an option', no matter HOW inconvenient he may be. Killing one's "kid" is illegal (even for REALLY ROTTEN kids), and it will most likely STAY illegal, even though a few people every year "do it anyway".
Hey Mac the reason I equate abortion to suicide is because what are we going to accomplish by making either of those illegal?
You can't throw someone who has committed suicide in jail.
Can we throw a mother who takes a pill to abort her baby in jail?
Maybe it is apples and oranges, but I see similarities in that: Moral as many think it may be, I don't see a logical punishment for these crimes.
If it were a crime, and a mother said "I rejected the baby" or "I don't want it" isn't that part of natural selection?
It just seems to be nothing more than a religious argument, and religion much of the time is not logical. I am not even saying I agree with abortion, but what can really be done about it?
Bald Eagle - WDNR (http://dnr.wi.gov/ORG/LAND/ER/factsheets/birds/eagle.htm - broken link)
"" Bald eagles are protected by both state and federal laws. Violators face penalties of up to $20,000 in fines and/or 1-5 years in prison. ""
I didn't hatch that egg so it is not MINE to break. That egg is not inside the Eagle and therefor is able to survive on it's own UNLESS someone comes along and BReAKS it.
A fetus -until it is viable WITHOUT being inside of me- is not ALIVE and therefore has no rights.
When does this non-viability cross over to viability? Couldn't an embryo be removed from a woman after conception and then placed in another woman and it would be viable? If you leave the embryo alone, it will live. If you transplant it, it will live. If you abort it, it will die. Nature chooses life. It is people that choose either death or life.
Just letting that embryo sit on a countertop after it was removed from a woman would it be viable?
No it would not, it would need dramatic medical intervention- unlike the EAGLE EGG.
Not the same thing at ALL.
Eagles are a threatened species.
Humans are not.
When/IF we dwindle down to endangered/threatened numbers, I am sure abortions would become illegal.
At what point do the pro-choice believe it is a life? Is it only at birth? 20 weeks? 30 weeks?
Actually about 22 weeks is the first time a fetus could live if it was outside the womb. Anything earlier than that has little to NO chance of survival even with all the medical help in the world.
So untill 22 weeks i would say the fetus has no rights.
Actually about 22 weeks is the first time a fetus could live if it was outside the womb. Anything earlier than that has little to NO chance of survival even with all the medical help in the world.
So untill 22 weeks i would say the fetus has no rights.
Oh, the right to life goobers won't think much of that...they think cells in a petri dish have rights.
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.