Is Roe v. Wade at Risk???

No, it is de facto only a potential fully developed life until it is fully developed. If you do not understand this, you need to get yourself a dictionary.

It is a life in the same sense viruses, cancer cells, skin cells and sperm cells are also lives. It is, however, not a life in the human sense of the word until it is born.

When it is born. Duuuuuuh.

What do you mean by "natural right to life"?

It is not born until it is born.

Because parenthood is - or at least should be - something chosen because it is something one desires. Parents take care of their children because it is enormously rewarding and seeing one's own child(ren) growing and doing well is very enjoyable.

If you become a parent because you feel it is your moral obligation and duty and a sacrifice, you are doing it wrong.

The best parents are selfish.

We get that even with abortion being legal, so imagine what it would be like if it was illegal.

Parenthood is and should be a choice and not something the State imposes on us. If you want that, there are plenty of non-free countries out there for you to move to.

 

Your approach is to subject women to legal scrutiny at a terrible time in their lives to catch the rare woman and rare doctor who would kill a viable fetus.

 

Lock up? Yes. Prison? No.

Our prisons often create worse criminals.

 

Yes and if nature "was allowed to have its course", we would not be here on the Internet having this discussion.

It can interact with its environment independently.

So does bacteria, egg cells, viruses and whathaveyous, so I am not sure what your point is.

What I am saying is that the fetus is not physically distinguishable. Is it?

Are they physically attached to another human being living of it like a parasite?

Correct, but what is your point? We are discussing fetal development here and the fetus' potential has not been actualised until it is born.

 

My approach is to respect the sanctity of life when dealing with a child that is wholly viable outside of the womb. My position is in the overwhelming majority.

 

So with a person with violent outbursts related to their impulse control issues caused by bipolar, that subsequently commits murder... you do not believe they should be in prison? You are entitled to your own opinion of course, but WOW! I find that to be preposterous, and I do not believe you will find a whole lot of people that agree with that sentiment.

There is an enormous difference between an insane person that truly does not understand right from wrong, versus what amounts to a hot head with a really bad temper.

 

If you are going to discuss something in a discussion forum you should be able to discuss it....not duck the question:

FoxHastings said: ↑
What TF does "sad" have to do with rights or laws or ANYTHING pertaining to the topic??

 

Ask the person to whom I responded that made that assertion. Your ignorance of what they said is NOT my emergency.

(The scroll function is your friend)

 

Aside from adoption, that is the only way for a woman to become a mother.

 

Only as an expecting mother.

 

No, the arguments that are easy are those of the anti-abortionist since they are entirely subjective and often based on - or at least conditioned by - religious whim and superstition.

 

They lost one of their desires and are more than right in being devestated.

 

Well that's absurd, if it's not even human until it leaves the womb.

 

Read it again. Pause and think. Then read it again and think some more.

You will get it eventually.

 

Define life.

 

A thinking human being that is able to pursue values.

It is not merely a biological function.

 

So a person stops being alive in a coma?

 

In a sense, yes although of course not literally.

What is this obsession with comas anyways?

 

It's a condition that commonly makes pro-abortion definitions of life meaningless.

 

Outside the womb = born. Viable fetus is what the vast majority of women would have delivered rather than terminated if they were too ill to continue their pregnancy. Abortion of healthy, late-term fetuses isn't a big problem.

 

Why are you dodging my post by talking about other people in third person?

This obsession with comas perfectly illustrates my previous point about anti-abortionists being anti-life; to you, there is no difference between living a life as a value-pursuing, healthy and conscious adult and living a vegetative life in the hospital bed as a coma patient. To you, there is no difference between a baby laughing of joy as their mother pushes the swing and the completely unconscious embryo in the womb.

This is a truly degrading view of human life.

"BuT, bUt, DnA, LiMbS aNd HeArTbEaT!" Give me a break, won't ya.

 

Great diversion from having no argument...

 

There is no need to punish people who blow it, but it may be necessary to lock them up for a long time, maybe forever.

 

That’s not the definition of life. Otherwise deers aren’t life. Whales aren’t life. Bacteria on Mars isnt life. Somebody in a coma isn’t life.

 

I was answering YOUR question about why I frequently refer to "comas". I know you're not the only one I talk to here.

Maybe give a better definition then.