House GOP: mandate Ultrasounds before abortions

[BlindBoo]

Have they done anything to help the President fight ISIS. Or Ebola, or stem the hoards of illegal Latin American children trying to destroy our way of life.

Failures.

 

[SwimExpert]

If not alive why double homicide charges for those that kill pregnant women?

Because the government chooses to do so. Your false dilemma is used often to challenge the validity of abortion permissibility, however it does not add up. Really, it's a red herring and false comparison.

Many people believe that personhood begins at conception. Typically, this belief is predicated on religious belief. If that's your belief then that's your belief and you're entitled to your belief. However, this is not a position that can be supported by scientific facts. It is not a position that can justly be established into law as superior to individuals' rights to privacy and to choose what medical procedures to undergo, or what future medical risks to take on.

What is rarely disputed, and is typically can not be disputed effectively, is that the "magic moment" when personhood begins occurs before birth. In addition, where a woman has not had an abortion, there is substantial reason to expect that the intention is to carry the pregnancy to term, resulting in the birth of a human being. Thus, a person who murders a pregnant individual commits a more egregious crime than a person who murders a non pregnant individual, because they have not only taken one human life, but have also, at the very least, prevented the in progress development of a future human life, as was intended or desired. Some form of enhanced charges is reasonable for such an enhanced crime.

States that wish to establish some form of enhanced charges for these scenarios have the right to reasonably do so as they wish. States can treat it as an involuntary abortion procedure, or they can apply a secondary homicide charge, or however they wish to handle it. Such laws are not perfect by any means. But there is no requirement that laws be perfect. Only that they be reasonable.

 

[hortysir]

If not alive why double homicide charges for those that kill pregnant women?

Because the government chooses to do so. Your false dilemma is used often to challenge the validity of abortion permissibility, however it does not add up. Really, it's a red herring and false comparison.

Many people believe that personhood begins at conception. Typically, this belief is predicated on religious belief. If that's your belief then that's your belief and you're entitled to your belief. However, this is not a position that can be supported by scientific facts. It is not a position that can justly be established into law as superior to individuals' rights to privacy and to choose what medical procedures to undergo, or what future medical risks to take on.

What is rarely disputed, and is typically can not be disputed effectively, is that the "magic moment" when personhood begins occurs before birth. In addition, where a woman has not had an abortion, there is substantial reason to expect that the intention is to carry the pregnancy to term, resulting in the birth of a human being. Thus, a person who murders a pregnant individual commits a more egregious crime than a person who murders a non pregnant individual, because they have not only taken one human life, but have also, at the very least, prevented the in progress development of a future human life, as was intended or desired. Some form of enhanced charges is reasonable for such an enhanced crime.

States that wish to establish some form of enhanced charges for these scenarios have the right to reasonably do so as they wish. States can treat it as an involuntary abortion procedure, or they can apply a secondary homicide charge, or however they wish to handle it. Such laws are not perfect by any means. But there is no requirement that laws be perfect. Only that they be reasonable.

So it's a life until the mother chooses to have an abortion....then it becomes a fetus or embryo

 

[SwimExpert]

So it's a life until the mother chooses to have an abortion....then it becomes a fetus or embryo

Do you always make up such ridiculous lies?

 

[nodoginnafight]

"Many people believe that personhood begins at conception. Typically, this belief is predicated on religious belief. .... this is not a position that can be supported by scientific facts. "

It absolutely is supported by scientific fact.

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

 

[BlindBoo]

"Many people believe that personhood begins at conception. Typically, this belief is predicated on religious belief. .... this is not a position that can be supported by scientific facts. "

It absolutely is supported by scientific fact.

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

It's true, everyone alive today began as a single fertilized egg. But not every fertilized egg implants in the womb. It's gods roll of the dice..........

 

[nodoginnafight]

"Many people believe that personhood begins at conception. Typically, this belief is predicated on religious belief. .... this is not a position that can be supported by scientific facts. "

It absolutely is supported by scientific fact.

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

It's true, everyone alive today began as a single fertilized egg. But not every fertilized egg implants in the womb. It's gods roll of the dice..........

Well, THIS Christian is a firm believer in the separation of church and state.

Me personally - I prefer a legal definition that says when a fertilized egg begins showing characteristics that are uniquely human, that human is entitled to protection under U.S. law.