Thank you for your admission that you can't prove your contention that "They always are considered human beings, the law just says it will not prosecute abortion homicides."
It allows that exception, I have never claimed otherwise. Another example of manufacturing a phantom argument just to claim you won. I am saying that exception is illogical, and we treat no other homicide anywhere as callously as we do abortion. It is a national disgrace.
I see....so it is just a stage of the Human Being? Interestingly it does not carry the rights of most "Human Beings". Perhaps because to do so would remove rights from the human being it lives within? Is it just that you feel your OPINION should define how strangers live their lives?
It is just a stage of a human being. Since killing these people is a homicude, and therefore society's business, yes I do think there should be oversight and wanton homicude without oversight shouldn't be allowed. - - - Updated - - - That is blatantly untrue, but you know that. Abortion is clearly a homicide.
Duh, you still don't get it !!!! See if what YOU say is true , that fetuses are persons, the UVVA would not be necessary......the fetus would already be covered under existing laws !!! And you can't get that !!! - - - Updated - - - A human fetus is always "human" but it is not A "human" in the sense it is a person. BTW , I think it's time we end the "every thread in the abortion forum is about the UVVA" theme ....anyone else interested?
See YOU still don't get it. The UVVA is a 2004 law, Roe V Wade is from the dark ages. The UVVA represents an evolution in understanding and recognition that a child in utero, at any stage of development, is a human being and; therefore, a person. The abortion ruling error clouded the issue, so the UVVA clarifies it. Doesn't matter that you cannot comprehend the logical problem with Roe V Wade, thinking people see it clearly. I don't take orders from you, so I will not be silent about the UVVA, although I can see why you would want people to stay silent about it! A human fetus is a human being, logically, legally, rationally. Yuk it up, you are the one looking silly here.
Sure have, Scott Peterson http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/15/us/scott-peterson-trial-fast-facts/ Ouch, the truth hurts eh?
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/05/20/us/when-the-death-of-a-fetus-is-murder.html Think the courts are opposed to fetal human rights? Think again! Read the article linked. "In the latest ruling on the question of when a fetus should have the legal status of a person, the California Supreme Court decided on Monday that an assault on a pregnant woman that kills her fetus can be prosecuted as murder, even if the fetus is not viable." So you are clearly wrong in asserting that a fetus is not a human being or person. No non person can be the victim of a murder!!!! Game Over!
Only in California : """There are 2 counts because of California's fetal homicide statute, any fetus-meaning eight weeks of development and onward-is considered an equal victim. "" That was before UVVA. ....and does say ""is considered any equal victim"", NO where does it say "person". IF abortion was murder where are all the other convictions for "murder".....there were thousands of abortions....
Wow you really don't pay attention do you! I never said abortion is illegal, I only said it is a homicide, which is clearly and undeniably is!
Blue bolding above, mine. Now maybe you could try to address the post of mine you quoted: Quote Originally Posted by FoxHastings View Post Only in California : """There are 2 counts because of California's fetal homicide statute, any fetus-meaning eight weeks of development and onward-is considered an equal victim. "" That was before UVVA. ....and does say ""is considered any equal victim"", NO where does it say "person". IF abortion was murder where are all the other convictions for "murder".....there were thousands of abortions....
Abortion is a homicide, the UVVA and numerous state fetal homicide laws bear that out. A homicide cannot be committed against a non person.
All the UVVA (which is irrelevant to my country) does is declare it so solely for the purposes of that law. Which it had to do to make someone killing a woman's zef against her will murder. Abortion is not homicide, if it were, the police would have to investigate each and every abortion. Kinda like how tomatoes, which are a fruit, were declared a veggie for the purposes of import taxation.
Fifty-five million - who would have raised them? Who would have supported them? Would they have all become productive members of society or would they be ghetto dwellers? One day have a look at the map of abortion laws and look at the countries with overpopulation problems and poverty Quite a match - - - Updated - - - It is simplistic rubbish Is a woman who has just tested positive for pregnancy and then takes a tablet to block the hormones that support pregnancy being a murderer?
Not in law. Legally, a person does not become a person until they exit the womb. And it's quite sensible. It can't survive outside the mother's body, it can't breathe for itself, until it has completed the gestation period and is born. Yes, a baby can be born prematurely and survive, but by that stage an abortion is absolutely and totally illegal unless the mother's life is at extreme and imminent risk! Saying over and over that it's a baby or it's a person from the moment of conception doesnt make it true. I could say the Lochness monster is real over and over and it still wouldn't be.
We'd do what we did last time, Bowerbird, we'd institutionalise them, so they could grow up knowing from a very young age that they were unloved and unwanted. Adoptions are a thing of the past, of course, now that we have IVF, but all the people I've ever known who were adopted have had dark nights of the soul because of it. None of them ever got over that deep, hurtful, gut wrenching rejection completely. It didn't matter how loving and safe their lives with their adoptive parents was. It didn't matter how often they heard the old " you are so special because we chose you" or how young they were when they started hearing it. And when they had children of their own, the pain came back tenfold when they held their newborn children. And now there won't be any loving adoptive parents at all anyway, there'll just be institutions. Honestly, I do not understand how anyone can wish a life of knowing your own mother didnt love you or want you on anyone! What sort of cruelty lurks in a human heart ready and willing to inflict that pain on another human being in the name of "morality"?
And once again I would fall on my knees and thank God for not making me an American if I believed in one.
