Why should we move on- since 27 states disagree with your assessement? http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/health/fetal-homicide-state-laws.aspx
Read the actual language of the laws. The fact that there is one law that defines a fetal homicide as involving a human being at any stage of development is enough to prove my position correct.
If they obviously were homicides, as you demand, then there would be doctors being arrested. The fact is you are just promoting your opinion, which is an anti-choice opinion- and stamping your feet and demanding that is must be obvious to everyone. But of course in the real world- we disagree- which is why doctors and women are not getting arrested for homicide.
Do they? Simply because they set some arbitrary age threshold on the law? In my opinion that doesn't disprove anything I have said. If a fetus at any age is a human being, a fetus at any age is a human being. Logically there is no argument to the contrary.
That's really just your opinion that it's not self defense because based on my knowledge of what is involved in pregnancy and childbirth it most definitely is very similar to killing in self defense. There are many risks involved in pregnancy/childbirth/c-section and no person should be forced to face unwanted risk against their will whether it's to save/protect the life of another or not, at least that's my reasoning behind why it's justified, amongst a variety of other reasons. There are risks with abortion as well and I believe women should have an informed decision on both choices and should be free to choose which risks they would rather face in the long run.
Wow talk about delusion. I have decimated your so called arguments. Move along now..... - - - Updated - - - Yeah there is no meat there, ust an unsupported opinion. Its not a simple choice, it is a homicide which should not be permitted without substantial scrutiny and oversight.
Well then if that is the case- where are the doctors and women being arrested for homicide? I read the article you cited- which said that only 23 states had language referring to the death of the fetus. That means 27 states disagree with what you claim is an absolute certainty. What we have is just you stomping your feet and demanding that you are correct and that anyone who doesn't agree with you must be wrong. Well of course that is just a stupid way to argue. You can argue with yourself- I have made my point.
You have yet to answer even the most fundamental question asked in this pseudo debate, you have expressed opinion with no Data to back it. You have avoided answering every rebuttal through somewhat pathetic and obvious subterfuge, cowered in the face of actual debate....and to be honest seem rather dim. Either you are new to this concept, or have nothing but opinion to offer. That is NOT debate....thus your have failed. Your position has been shown to be incorrect through somewhat detailed and verifiable data.
You're giving opinions and I am giving opinions. I have yet to see you back up your opinion at length as to why it is unjustified homicide, or prove why my opinion is wrong. If you want proof that pregnancy carries risk here is a list for you. http://www.thelizlibrary.org/site-i...#soulhttp://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm And here are the risks of abortion. http://women.webmd.com/tc/abortion-before-during-and-after-an-abortion-when-to-call-a-doctor?page=1 Pregnancy and childbirth directly affect a woman's physiological and psychological health and considering that it should be up to her whether or not she wishes to continue the pregnancy or not. Women should not lose the medical authority over their own bodies solely based on the status of their uteruses. No matter what condition she is in she still owns her autonomy and still has a right to make decisions about what happens to it and what she wants to put her mind and body through.
Nope, you were responding to me and I have been talking about your false premise, namely Quote Originally Posted by Whaler17 View Post So far you have given no substantiation (valid or otherwise) for your claim that a zygote is a living human. Your premise is therefore a fallacy ( assumed premise) An argument consists of a premise ... and a "because" statement. A zygote is a living human, because ....... Homicide laws have nothing to do with this question. You are confusing me with another poster methinks.
He had no point except to make himself feel superior by claiming to himself that he's right....about something....??? It's kinda funny.... especially since no matter what HE calls it, abortion is still legal...
Still waiting for you to show the dishonesty of my post, or are you claiming that your interpretation of the English language is superior to the people who compiled the Oxford dictionary?
However he failed, the English dictionary is very precise in its definition of Human Being and as he is trying to use actual precise definitions to support his view that abortion is a homicide, then I can use actual precise definitions of human being, which according to the dictionary is - "a man, woman, or child of the species Homo sapiens, distinguished from other animals by superior mental development, power of articulate speech, and upright stance." A fetus is not a man, woman or child and therefore according to the precise meaning an abortion cannot be a homocide, a homocide is the killing of one human being by another .. a fetus, by dictionary definition, is not a human being.
I really just wanted to see what else he had if you admit that it's a homicide. Apparently, it's not much. LOL
Seems the black stinky cloud that was prevelent in this forum (not just this thread) has dissipated The fresh air is delightful.....
Nothing else is needed! Argument complete and premise proven! - - - Updated - - - Nothing else is needed! Argument complete and premise proven!
Yep. Call it what it is. If abortion weren't so bad, its defenders wouldn't need to continuously sugarcoat it. That's why if you call it a baby for your choice of words, they scream bloody murder and demand you call it a clump of cells or a fetus or whatever word they need to distance the humanity of the child whose life they don't stand up for.
No, they don't sugarcoat it, they use accuate scientific terms. Calling it a "baby" doesn't make it a "baby"...... And, I haven't seen anyone but Anti-Choicers screaming (in all caps) about bloody murder in here.
Baby is a perfectly valid term. If you don't like it then you need to get on to Webster about it. I'm not referring to calling the baby a fetus as sugarcoating, rather I'm referring to the insistence that it can't be called a baby.
You never even addressed my post where I brought up the physiological and psychological ramifications of pregnancy, childbirth, c-section and abortion on a woman, so I don't understand what you think has or has not been proven.
1ba·by noun \ˈbā-bē\ plural babies Definition of BABY 1 a (1) : an extremely young child; especially : infant (2) : an extremely young animal b : the youngest of a group 2 a : one that is like a baby (as in behavior) b : something that is one's special responsibility, achievement, or interest 3 slang a : girl, woman —often used in address b : boy, man —often used in address 4 : person, thing <is one tough baby> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/baby fe·tus noun \ˈfē-təs\ : an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind; specifically : a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fetus?show=0&t=1363812348 Perhaps you should be the one contacting Websters Dictionary.
Sure some abortions, and sometimes all abortions, are classified as abortions by some courts. Other courts say otherwise. That courts make laws based on religious belief is no surprise. Heck, adultery is still illegal in some states because religious wingnuts managed to force people to abide by their religious beliefs by making laws. Appeal to authority is a fallacy and a lame argument. What interests me is what science has to say, not what a bunch of religious people who still believe that in the early part of the 3rd millenium Noah's flood wiped out all living creatures (save Noah, his family and the animals on the boat) and still believe the earth is only 6000 years old.
Yeah. Did you not see: "an extremely young child". That's exactly what they are. They are children so young that they're not even born yet. I don't know why you're quoting the word fetus, because I never said fetus wasn't an equally valid term. I use the term myself sometimes, depending on the context.
Yep, it's so clearly a homicide that the Supreme Court said abortion was legal in the 70s, just to (*)(*)(*)(*) with people's heads. The Supreme Court was "punking" us. Those wily old men.
