How? You yourself set the limit for late term abortions at post-viability. Though again, there is no scientific consensus on that.
SCOTUS gave women the right to decide life or no life. Societal beliefs and societal morality are no longer the arbiters. Men have 0 rights. The poll is flawed because it pre-supposes illegality of abortion.
life begins after sexual relations, and abortion should be illegal. it is akin to homicide, and is not justified because a mistake was made where protective devices weren't worn. the younger generation are less likely to be a victim to a drunken haze as the older generations who tended to drink more, so they should be anti abortion.
I wouldn't be comfortable with an abortion after 25 weeks on a personal level, as that's when the myelin sheathe begins to develop. It's the myelin sheath over nerve tissue that really allows for thought; before that, you couldn't really call the fetus a person; it makes several magnitudes of difference. Afterwards, it's a bit more morally ambiguous, though of course if the life of the mother is at risk you have to prioritize that.
23 weeks is the legal limit in most states based on viability. Yes, shutting down clinics results in poor women have a harder time getting a timely abortion.
And abortions after 25 weeks is RARE Also the longer the pregnancy continues the more likely it is to be for foetal abnormality
Why do I have this mental image of a Redneck wedding complete with shotguns and someone saying "We done found Mary lou has been having them sexual relations with Billy Bob so now theys got to git married!!" Sex does not equal pregnancy
Politicians should not be allowed to seize control of a pregnancy if and until a sentient, viable person has developed during gestation.
relations should not equal pregnancy in this day an age when there are protective devices to be worn, it is a lack of personal responsibility that causes the homicide of an unborn child to take place when they don't put the child in a safety seat. both involved should be charged with accessory to homicide if approved the abortion to take place.
it makes absolute sense, its negligent homicide if the child is not properly protected from death. everyone involved in the abortion should be charged accessory to homicide, and the doctor with voluntary homicide.
That photo is what you think is representative of a fetus ?!?!?! Maybe you should learn some things about gestation before posting.....
I think you are on the right track. The fetus is not a person until it begins thinking about itself and its surroundings. The development of the nerve sheath is one of many steps required before meaningful thought is possible. In recent years we have learned that the cerebrum is not prepared for meaningful thought until sometime in the third trimester, and (even at that point) the brain is sedated to the point that meaningful thought is not possible until birth. Reference: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-does-consciousness-arise/ They did not know this when they used viability to draw the lines with Roe vs Wade.
The child in the car seat is already been born, so it is an actual person from that moment until the mind no longer supports meaningful thought. The fetus (although alive, and bearing human DNA) is a life-support system being constructed to support the mind, so there is a significant difference between the two. The fact that you cannot discern the difference suggests you are in no position to judge those who can discern the difference. Since you believe the two are the same, what punishment do you believe to be appropriate for a woman who conspires to abort her fetus? The death penalty or life in prison?
your own argument says the fetus is alive, therefore to abort it is homicide. as for punishment maybe a reeducation camp for all involved in the homicide to understand why it was a crime, no death penalty or life in prison since that would be anti life just as the abortion was.
The fact that an organism is alive does not guarantee it should be protected, so if you are basing your argument on the fact that the fetus is a living organism, you have failed. It is considered homicide when a person is killed. It is NOT considered homicide when the hospital staff determines that meaningful thought is no longer possible and stops feeding a living human body after it is no longer inhabited. Your response "maybe a reeducation camp for all involved" makes it clear that you understand (even if only subconsciously) that this is different from murder or homicide. The zygote/embryo/fetus is not yet a person. If pro-lifers honestly thought they were the same, they would instinctively demand equal justice for termination of a zef. The
The common thread which is so offensive here is the idea that one persons personal beliefs should be imposed legally on another- that is a fundamental violation of freedom, virtually regardless of the argument. I believe that if any society is ever to make peace with itself and unite, such imposition must not be allowed. Thinking you are right and righteous does not authorize you to do that, even in the question of abortion. Abortion is an extremely personal question, and a very emotional one for most. Most who chose to abort a pregnancy have given it long and deep thought, and have their reasons- while most who oppose it are indeed trying to force their judgement on others.... then will walk away feeling good about themselves and have nothing to do with the consequences. I once knew a card-carrying, bumper-stickered demonstrating catholic anti-abortion protester- who wound up pregnant due to a situation of sex forced on her by an estranged and abusive husband she was divorcing. The circumstances created a huge emotional conflict, but she chose to abort, and to this day feels it was the right choice. Point is- it's easy to make a decision for someone else when you don't have to live with it. It's another thing when you do. We simply must allow each person the power over their own life decisions, including this one.
removing a feeding tube is allowing the living to die that has no future and is justifiable homicide, abortions cause the death of the living who will be a future baby. you have a duty to protect life that wants to live and evolve, an abortion is negligent homicide.
It is a brain dead human inside a living person. In the balance of rights the woman wins - - - Updated - - - What modern country operates this way?
Do you have a link to a legitimate (i.e. not pro-life or pro-choice biased) legal or medical resource explaining that removing a feeding tube in this scenario is "justifiable homicide" ? (or is that just what you want it to be?) An abortion can terminate the life of a partially constructed human body, but it is only one of many events that might prevent a specific potential baby from being created. Who says we have "a duty to protect life that wants to live and evolve" ? What about bacteria that wants to evolve to eat our flesh, or calves that want to live and frolic in the fields instead of ending up on your plate with Parmesan cheese?
