Pro-life - Where is your support for this woman?

The right way is not always the hard way. Judging what is right for a pregnant woman carrying a seriously deformed fetus is only for that particular pregnant woman. WE are not making the choice, only the pregnant woman can do that with, of course, the advice of her medical and spiritual advisors.

 

Nope, no other homicide is handled in such a loose and thoughtless manner, and this one shouldn't be either!!!

 

Strawman coupled with an inability (apparently) to use the quote function

 

Weak dodge Bird, VEEEERRRRY WEAK.

 

Sorry but do you think a decision to end a much wanted pregnancy would be an "easy" decision to make? It is often horrendous and distressing for all involved but if the foetus is that abnormal then sometimes late term abortion is the best for all concerned

And here I usually post a you tube link about anencephaly - but do not worry it is a pro-life link in fact

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hQHLJTGdTU"]Anencephaly - YouTube[/ame]

 

Um...why?

I mean, if the fetus isnt a person, why is this such a big deal? I certainly would not get all emotional about making the decision to have my appendix or tonsils removed. Why would an abortion be any different?

What is so "horrendous and distressing" about making the decisions to remove an unwanted growth?

How is it a strawman? In one sentence she says a woman has a right to abortion for any reason or no reason at all. Then in the next sentence she starts placing restrictions on it ("for the health..."). Which is it?

That isnt a strawman. Her statements were inconsistent.

 

You are correct, it was a blatant dodge by her.

 

So here we go again excusing birth control abortions just because some miniscule percentage of births involve these deformities. Just foolishness.

 

The fetus is not viable for at least six months, the woman can and will make the decision to abort by then if the fetus is unwanted. No law is necessary to prevent a woman from aborting past 6 months, because no woman will choose abortion voluntarily by then. Women do tend to get emotional about late-term medically necessary abortions because those are NOT her choice.

 

As has been proven time and time again, "viability" is pure nonsense and a completely arbitrary threshold. A law is neccessary to prevent both scenarios you present because nobody can state that no woman anywhere at any time would have a late term abortion, with even an ounce of credibility.

 

So you are saying you want to tell the woman what she can do with her own body after the fetus is over 6 months?

Are you saying you believe the fetus is a person after 6 months? If not, who the hell do you think you are telling the woman what she can do with her own body?

If that is true, then why would you be in favor of any restrictions at all? What is the point of restricting something that wont occur anyway?


.

 

How do you explain the fact that Canada, with no law at all on abortion, has no more late-term abortions than the USA which restricts late-term abortions to the medically necessary ones? No law is necessary to prevent late-term abortions, and no law is effective in preventing earlier term abortions.

 

If it is so horrendous and distressing and the baby will die anyway, why would anybody make a sin and kill him before?

 

The fact is that you have no idea how many occur in Canada or here, but just to humor you:

No murder law is effective in stopping all murders either, should we abolish the murder laws?

There is no difference between avoiding abortion laws, and ignoring murder laws.

 

If murder laws don't REDUCE the number of murders, we should abolish them.

 

You are still struggling with your attempts at intelligent reasoning. Your inability to put viability in perspective and understand its significance does not at all alter why it is important and a crucial threshold. You are forgetting that many of your much touted fetal homicide laws also consider viability as the determining marker.

 

The difference is that the majority of Americans don't support the criminalization of abortion. They obviously don't view it as a crime.

 

Yea, but you are only stating the obvious.
Oddly enough whaler know this, he supplied the proof.

 

This is not proven. If it were true the pro abortion folks would not fight so hard to keep it from an open vote.

 

Not so much. Your inability to recognize it doesn't mean its not there.

 

Recognize what the meaning and significance of viability? It is you who does not.

 

Really? What did I not comprehend in his post?

 

15 kids is nothing. Most Mormons have 25.

what's the point of this thread?

 

you ever had a baby? THAT'S WHY!!!

Women beccome very emotional froim day one of becoming pregnant, that baby is dictating her emotions. that's hard!!!

Oh you're one of those pro-choicers with blinders on. I'm done.

 

Recognize that is has no significance? Yes that is exactly where you fail.