Women have the right to control their own bodies.

[Coyote]

So, you believe that a ten week old fetus is dead? Medical science says otherwise.

Medical science also does not call it a baby.

What else would you call it? At the moment of conception you had your own uniques human DNA which is exactly the same as you have now. It contained all the information of the person you would become, your hair color, your eye color, etc. You are as different today from the baby you were at the moment of your birth as that newborn baby was from the way it was at the moment of conception. For the first nine months of your life you were nurtured inside of your mother's body and then you were nurtured outside of her body for years more. Birth was no more than a marker of your progress from the moment of your conception to who and where you are today.

We all know it is a baby. We ask a pregnant woman about her baby, not about her fetus. The only time we call it a fetus is when we decide to kill it in an effort to dehumanize our intended victim to ease our consciences. If a woman wants an abortion, she should the character to acknowledge she wants to kill another human being.

Ever notice how liberals, when given a choice, always choose death for a fetus, then protest when a convicted murderer is about to be executed?

That is the funny thing isn’t it? You have no trouble executing people knowing some of them are likely innocent. I guess we aren’t so different after all.

That may be true, but 100% of all babies are innocent.

Exactly what difference does that make? Here is a thought: 100% of innocent people are innocent. Ever consider that?

 

[Beyond]

If the state want to controls the uterus they can raise what is developed there...

Honestly I’d rather have the State raise the child than any woman who would consider terminating a pregnancy. Of course the woman would lose all parental rights and interests in the child. They should never even see the child after birth, nor be told anything (including gender) about the child.

State care that is fife with child abuse? Why are people so concerned about fetuses, but cease to care for children and the adult they become, once they're born?

 

[ThisIsMe]

I am all for women being in control of THEIR bodies. You want a boob job, tummy tuck, butt lift, go for it. The pro-"choice" advocates pretend the fetus is an unnecessary piece of fat.

And the pro-lifers pretend the fetus is a full-fledged person. More importantly, they pretend that a pregnant woman's womb is public property.

The human fetus is a human being. Take an elementary biology class. Duh.

I understand the biology just fine. The question is whether a fetus is a separate legal person, with rights that should be protected by the government.

Where do the rights of a baby begin?

Some rights come with viability, but it cannot have rights equal to the mother’s until birth.

So viability determines personhood? There are a lot of people incapable of caring for themselves who would disagree.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

If the state want to controls the uterus they can raise what is developed there...

Honestly I’d rather have the State raise the child than any woman who would consider terminating a pregnancy. Of course the woman would lose all parental rights and interests in the child. They should never even see the child after birth, nor be told anything (including gender) about the child.

State care that is fife with child abuse? Why are people so concerned about fetuses, but cease to care for children and the adult they become, once they're born?

So tell us why you dont care for these people

 

[Coyote]

And the pro-lifers pretend the fetus is a full-fledged person. More importantly, they pretend that a pregnant woman's womb is public property.

The human fetus is a human being. Take an elementary biology class. Duh.

I understand the biology just fine. The question is whether a fetus is a separate legal person, with rights that should be protected by the government.

Where do the rights of a baby begin?

Some rights come with viability, but it cannot have rights equal to the mother’s until birth.

So viability determines personhood? There are a lot of people incapable of caring for themselves who would disagree.

Viability is not being able to care for oneself.

 

[Beyond]

If no women get preggers this all gets fixed. Think about it.

does that mean any ma who has sex outside a stable relationship should be castrated?

 

[BS Filter]

It's the woman's body. That's what we're told. Therefore, she's responsible.

And therefore, it is HER choice.

Yes. The woman will be judged by God.

Exactly. And as far as I can tell you aren’t God nor do you speak for God.

Never said I was God, but God's Word says you're a murderer if you murder an innocent defenseless human being.

God (or at least his Biblical spokesmen) also tells you it is ok to rape, take slaves, and stone women.

Meanwhile...if you are so keen on God’s words, why don’t you oppose capital punishment which kills innocent people along with guilty ones?

No, the Bible doesn't condone rape, slavery or stoning women. Jesus never condoned such things, and Jesus is the head of the Church. You're also twisting capital punishment. Our government doesn't deliberately sentence innocent people to death. You obviously don't understand the difference between the old and new Testament. The left deliberately twists Scripture to excuse their sin.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Let's be perfectly clear on one thing. This whole argument about abortion is not about whether a fetus is alive or not. It's about whether a person has a right to end that life. Medical science is clear about the first question. It's alive. Criminal law is also clear about the second. It's murder. There should be no debate about this.

And yet there is. That's usually an indication that there's disagreement over the premises of your argument. In this case you seem to be implying that 'alive' is synonymous with 'legally recognized person'. I'm not completely sure on where the legal statutes are on this, but there's clearly no consensus on when a fetus becomes a person. Some people think it's not a legally separate person, with distinct rights, until it's separated from the mother - ie 'born'. Other's think that from the moment of conception until birth, we are facing a situation of one person living inside another.

There's also a question of jurisdiction. I don't think government should be granted authority over the inner workings of a person's body, regardless of the excuse. Any kind of coherent picture of individual rights puts "self-ownership" front and center. Without that, as a basis, we have no rights at all.

I think Republicans are indulging the same conceit liberals are usually accused of: they think every problem in society can be solved by passing a law. And no matter how many times it's shown to them that law isn't, usually, the right answer - they are convinced that THIS time it's different.

I think this is more about the moral definition of personhood than the legal definition, honestly, at least from the right. However, the left seems to be looking at this from a legalistic standpoint.

Really? So, no one on the right is trying to make this a legal issue? If that were true, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Some are, some aren't. I think most of them view it as a moral issue, but that's not an argument you can have with Democrats, so, they have to use the legal argument.

 

[ThisIsMe]

I am all for women being in control of THEIR bodies. You want a boob job, tummy tuck, butt lift, go for it. The pro-"choice" advocates pretend the fetus is an unnecessary piece of fat.

And the pro-lifers pretend the fetus is a full-fledged person. More importantly, they pretend that a pregnant woman's womb is public property.

The human fetus is a human being. Take an elementary biology class. Duh.

I understand the biology just fine. The question is whether a fetus is a separate legal person, with rights that should be protected by the government.

Where do the rights of a baby begin?

‘The Court in Roe carefully considered, and rejected, the State's argument "that the fetus is a `person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment." 410 U. S., at 156. After analyzing the usage of "person" in the Constitution, the Court concluded that that word "has application only postnatally." Id., at 157.

[…]

…an abortion is not "the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection." Id., at 159. From this holding, there was no dissent, see id., at 173; indeed, no member of the Court has ever questioned this fundamental proposition. Thus, as a matter of federal constitutional law, a developing organism that is not yet a "person" does not have what is sometimes described as a "right to life." [n.2] This has been and, by the Court's holding today, remains a fundamental premise of our constitutional law governing reproductive autonomy.’

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

A child’s rights manifest once it is born; prior to birth, an embryo/fetus has no rights, it is not a ‘baby,’ and not entitled to Constitutional protections.

Ok then, so my question has been answered. Someone who kills a pregnant woman cannot legally be charged with double homicide.

This is apparently the case, according to the courts......

 

[Beyond]

And if they controlled them a little better, we wouldn't need abortions.

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

You gotta open them legs first. Unless it is rape, they have the ultimate control. Sperm is cheap, eggs are precious.

Any man who isn't man enough to take responsibility for what he does with his penis, should be castrated. That should decrease the abortion rates and clean up the gene pool. Why any man thinks a woman is responsible for his actions, I've no idea.

All that babel means fuck all logically. Keep your legs shut...whore...and you won't have to worry about men "taking responsibility".
Real simple. Ain't no one's fault but the woman who allows the man in.

Do you think men are too stupid to be held responsible for their actions?

 

[BS Filter]

The human fetus is a human being. Take an elementary biology class. Duh.

I understand the biology just fine. The question is whether a fetus is a separate legal person, with rights that should be protected by the government.

Where do the rights of a baby begin?

Some rights come with viability, but it cannot have rights equal to the mother’s until birth.

So viability determines personhood? There are a lot of people incapable of caring for themselves who would disagree.

Viability is not being able to care for oneself.

So when does our society start murdering the elderly?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Where do the rights of a baby begin?

At birth.

Thank you, your answer is noted. You believe in no charge of double homicide for killing a pregnant woman, even better yet, not even killing the woman, but simply punching her in the gut to kill the baby should be no more than domestic abuse of the woman.

Am I understanding you correctly?

 

[Beyond]

Let's get back on topic. I stated that abortions wouldn't be required if women just learned to say no. Can anyone refute this?

Abortions wouldn't be required if men just learned to say no. Can anyone refute this?

It's the woman's body. That's what we're told. Therefore, she's responsible.

Both men and women are responsible for their bodies and their actions. If a man is involved in creating a pregnancy, he shares responsibility with the woman for creating that pregnancy.

Are you under the impression men are moronic, lesser creatures who cannot control their actions?

 

[BS Filter]

And the pro-lifers pretend the fetus is a full-fledged person. More importantly, they pretend that a pregnant woman's womb is public property.

The human fetus is a human being. Take an elementary biology class. Duh.

I understand the biology just fine. The question is whether a fetus is a separate legal person, with rights that should be protected by the government.

Where do the rights of a baby begin?

‘The Court in Roe carefully considered, and rejected, the State's argument "that the fetus is a `person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment." 410 U. S., at 156. After analyzing the usage of "person" in the Constitution, the Court concluded that that word "has application only postnatally." Id., at 157.

[…]

…an abortion is not "the termination of life entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection." Id., at 159. From this holding, there was no dissent, see id., at 173; indeed, no member of the Court has ever questioned this fundamental proposition. Thus, as a matter of federal constitutional law, a developing organism that is not yet a "person" does not have what is sometimes described as a "right to life." [n.2] This has been and, by the Court's holding today, remains a fundamental premise of our constitutional law governing reproductive autonomy.’

Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)

A child’s rights manifest once it is born; prior to birth, an embryo/fetus has no rights, it is not a ‘baby,’ and not entitled to Constitutional protections.

Ok then, so my question has been answered. Someone who kills a pregnant woman cannot legally be charged with double homicide.

This is apparently the case, according to the courts......

Scott Peterson murdered his pregnant wife. He was convicted of double murder.

 

[BS Filter]

Let's get back on topic. I stated that abortions wouldn't be required if women just learned to say no. Can anyone refute this?

Abortions wouldn't be required if men just learned to say no. Can anyone refute this?

It's the woman's body. That's what we're told. Therefore, she's responsible.

Both men and women are responsible for their bodies and their actions. If a man is involved in creating a pregnancy, he shares responsibility with the woman for creating that pregnancy.

Are you under the impression men are moronic, lesser creatures who cannot control their actions?

The left says it's her body and the woman makes the call.

 

[Beyond]

Let's get back on topic. I stated that abortions wouldn't be required if women just learned to say no. Can anyone refute this?

Abortions wouldn't be required if men just learned to say no. Can anyone refute this?

It's the woman's body. That's what we're told. Therefore, she's responsible.

And therefore, it is HER choice.

Yes. The woman will be judged by God.

As will the man who carelessly distributes his sperm. (for those who believe in in god)

 

[ThisIsMe]

Medical science also does not call it a baby.

What else would you call it? At the moment of conception you had your own uniques human DNA which is exactly the same as you have now. It contained all the information of the person you would become, your hair color, your eye color, etc. You are as different today from the baby you were at the moment of your birth as that newborn baby was from the way it was at the moment of conception. For the first nine months of your life you were nurtured inside of your mother's body and then you were nurtured outside of her body for years more. Birth was no more than a marker of your progress from the moment of your conception to who and where you are today.

We all know it is a baby. We ask a pregnant woman about her baby, not about her fetus. The only time we call it a fetus is when we decide to kill it in an effort to dehumanize our intended victim to ease our consciences. If a woman wants an abortion, she should the character to acknowledge she wants to kill another human being.

Ever notice how liberals, when given a choice, always choose death for a fetus, then protest when a convicted murderer is about to be executed?

That is the funny thing isn’t it? You have no trouble executing people knowing some of them are likely innocent. I guess we aren’t so different after all.

That may be true, but 100% of all babies are innocent.

Exactly what difference does that make? Here is a thought: 100% of innocent people are innocent. Ever consider that?

Not someone who is convicted of a crime worthy of the death penalty. I dont quite understand how you folks are trying to draw a comparison of the abortion of a baby to the execution of a convicted criminal.......

 

[Beyond]

And if they controlled them a little better, we wouldn't need abortions.

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

You gotta open them legs first. Unless it is rape, they have the ultimate control. Sperm is cheap, eggs are precious.

Any man who isn't man enough to take responsibility for what he does with his penis, should be castrated. That should decrease the abortion rates and clean up the gene pool. Why any man thinks a woman is responsible for his actions, I've no idea.

All that babel means fuck all logically. Keep your legs shut...whore...and you won't have to worry about men "taking responsibility".
Real simple. Ain't no one's fault but the woman who allows the man in.

You seem to have very low expectations for the ability of men to control themselves.

I'm amazed at the low opionion some males have of themselves and their fellow men.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The human fetus is a human being. Take an elementary biology class. Duh.

I understand the biology just fine. The question is whether a fetus is a separate legal person, with rights that should be protected by the government.

Where do the rights of a baby begin?

Some rights come with viability, but it cannot have rights equal to the mother’s until birth.

So viability determines personhood? There are a lot of people incapable of caring for themselves who would disagree.

Viability is not being able to care for oneself.

There are some people who depend on others for survival. There are some people on life support. According to the left, these people are no longer viable.

 

[Beyond]

Women just get stuck holding the bag. They don't get pregnant by themselves. Could we could include another party that perhaps should control themselves a little better, too?

You gotta open them legs first. Unless it is rape, they have the ultimate control. Sperm is cheap, eggs are precious.

Any man who isn't man enough to take responsibility for what he does with his penis, should be castrated. That should decrease the abortion rates and clean up the gene pool. Why any man thinks a woman is responsible for his actions, I've no idea.

All that babel means fuck all logically. Keep your legs shut...whore...and you won't have to worry about men "taking responsibility".
Real simple. Ain't no one's fault but the woman who allows the man in.

You seem to have very low expectations for the ability of men to control themselves.

As low as your expectations for women to control themselves.

I've expressed no such opinion.