are-pregnant-women-persons-after-20-weeks-gestation?

The bill makes an exception for the woman's life, but where does it make an exception for her health?

 

Each year, six million women in the United States become pregnant. Approximately four million women go to term, one million have abortions, and nearly one million experience pregnancy losses, including thousands of stillbirths that occur after 28 weeks of pregnancy. All of these women are at risk when legislators attempt to establish a point in pregnancy when women may be deprived of their civil and human rights.

 

Sterilization is reasonable for those who already have all the children they want, and for those who are sure they do not want any. Unwanted pregnancies can still happen even with sterilization, though it is fairly uncommon. Some people have success with diligent use of a reliable form of birth control, hormonal or IUDs are the most reliable. That is why safe abortion is necessary for a back-up measure, people believe that childbirth can and should be controlled, that bearing children is NOT inevitable.

Having children out of wedlock has always happened, throughout all of human history, and shaming and guilting has never prevented them. I believe people want to move away from shame and guilt as a motivation, it's not so much an approval of out-of-wedlock births as a reluctance to punish a blameless child. Even those who may vote abortion to be "morally wrong" may choose to have abortions themselves and don't want it criminalized. Many people realize that it is not the proper place of government to enforce a particular moral code, and that, in fact, government does not have the ability to enforce abortion bans (we have seen that before).

 

http://christiananswers.net/q-sum/q-life011.html

 

Sam, the purpose, the only purpose, of a secular government is to maintain order in society. Many regulations that are necessary for maintaining order in society overlap the moral-immoral category. Laws such as murder, for instance, are necessary for maintaining order in our society, but murder is also immoral. There really is no question of the immorality of murder, there is a CONSENSUS in our society against allowing murder. There is no consensus in society opposing abortion. Whether abortion is moral or not is an opinion not shared by a consensus of the people. Abortion definitely does not disrupt order in our society. So to pass a law using the force of government to implement one or several sect's beliefs about morality would be, in itself, immoral, i.e. violating the very purpose of our government.

Now, it has been tried many times by many people, sometimes successfully, to pass laws that they feel strongly are necessary to force others into the moral patterns they consider are the only way to live. Unless those laws are supported by a consensus of the people, they fail, as government simply does not have the power to enforce purely moral legislation. Independent people just disobey those laws they feel are unjust.

 

Animal abuse is illegal, but it doesn't affect society as a whole. It doesn't disrupt order in our society. Explain that.

 

I think it does. People get very angry when they see animals mistreated, and eventually it would lead to fist fights or worse, thereby disrupting order and affecting all of society. Do you think there is a consensus in our society about humane treatment of animals?

 

Yes. There is no consensus in our society about abortion, however. HOWEVER, during the 1800s, there was no consensus about slavery. Does that mean that slavery is okay?

Btw, im not trying to compare abortion with slavery, it's just the easiest analogy for me to use.

 

This statement is contradictory. You are not trying to compare abortion to slavery but then do you know the meaning of analogy?

a·nal·o·gy
əˈnaləjē/Submit
noun
1.
a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.

So are you trying to make the comparison or not? lol Kind of funny...

 

Basically, I'm not trying to say that pro-choicers are equivalent to people supporting slavery. I'm just trying to show an example of the fallacies of pro-choice arguements.

 

Ah, well that makes a little more sense, thank you for the clarification.Still I think bringing up the issue of slavery might also be considered a Red Herring or even a False Analogy, which are also formal fallacies in debate.

 

Government CAN NOT enforce morality laws without the support of a consensus of the people. Remember prohibition, speeding laws in the 1970's, gambling laws, drug laws, and previous anti-abortion bans. NONE of them were effective because independent people make up their own minds about morality issues.

 

You still didn't respond to my slavery analogy.

 

There really is nothing to say since abortion is not like slavery.

 

I wasn't saying that abortion was like slavery.

However, I was simply making a comparison. There was no consensus on slavery during the 1800s. So does that mean that slavery should be legal?

 

There's a consensus on it now. The consensus is that people should be free, not held in slavery.

 

So because there was no consensus on slavery in the 1800s...it should still be legal now? Eh? What? I have no idea who taught you history, but I am definitely going to find them and slap them silly. And slavery was of great concern during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 and it was the very thing that would go on to divide and separate the Northern and Southern states and what ultimately lead to the Civil War of 1812.

So yes, there was very much a consensus (although it was split by North and South) and concern regarding slavery in the 1800s. Your analogy is extremely flawed good sir!

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_ccon.html#slavery

 

Now Sam, I don't know if pro-lifers are willing to go so far as to start a civil war (and kill thousands, if not millions of people) in order to achieve bringing legal status and personhood to embryos and fetuses, but if you really want to make the comparison of abortion and slavery, you have to admit there is really not very much at all to compare...

We may have red states and blue states that seem divided on the issue even, but most states don't want to see an all out ban on abortion, at least not past the first trimester. You can view each states laws on abortion here all in a neat little chart > http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_OAL.pdf

I suppose if pro-lifers truly believe abortion is murder though then maybe starting a civil war would bring their point across. The Northern states back in the early 1800s certainly saw slavery as something worth killing over, to free people, but the question you are bringing up now is, do pro-lifers believe that fetal personhood is worth killing over?

 

Why were people in the North against slavery if most people in America were racist up until the 1960s? I'm learning about this in history class, but it seems very contradictory to me.

 

You can be racist and still be against the slavery of other human beings. But racism, as well as slavery, goes very far back in history, long before our nation was ever founded.

But let's take a look at Thomas Jefferson, one of our own founders and presidents of the United States. He was also a slave owner. The man was clearly extremely conflicted on his personal views of slavery in an ideal society and of course by his own business and wealth which was fueled by slave ownership.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_slavery

Even while slavery is now seen by the vast majority of our society is totally wrong and unacceptable, that still doesn't stop negative stereotypes and racism from running rampant in society. It takes a lot of hard work and a lot of time to change people's views of other races.

 

I think the real most accurate question is....are women mothers when they carry their offspring. And do humans at all stages of development have right to life.

pro-choice people seem to have pure hatred for human life. Its a war to them.

 

Pro-life people? I thought you were pro-life CKW. Typo maybe...?

 

Oops. Thanks for the catch. Doing this from my phone....makes it hard to catch errors..

 

Oh man, Internet debating on a phone? lol That's rough.

 

Waiting for my car to get fixed. Its either PF or reading sports magazines.