Oldgamer
Diamond Member
- Jan 15, 2013
- 3,280
- 1
- 0
My belief is that human life (and all the rights therein) begins when the fetus can biologically/biochemically survive on its own.
Agreed..
My belief is that human life (and all the rights therein) begins when the fetus can biologically/biochemically survive on its own.
I was just gonna say, it is only a matter of time when people will make legal challenges to these laws, in fact some will say this is a round a bout way of making abortion legal by setting up so many obstacles, hurdles that a woman can't get abortion services.
The only assumption I made is that you were trying to make a point with your OP. Apparently I was mistaken and you could be replaced by any search engine which harvests articles complete with unrelated comments from the peanut gallery. Sorry I gave you so much credit with my assumption.Of course you assumed.. you assumed I was making (or intending to make) an argument in the OP, when it was really nothing more than an editorial comment.
The only assumption I made is that you were trying to make a point with your OP. Apparently I was mistaken and you could be replaced by any search engine which harvests articles complete with unrelated comments from the peanut gallery. Sorry I gave you so much credit with my assumption.
You, who admitted you had nothing of substance to add to your own OP yet felt the need to create a thread, are now calling me an attention whore? As long as we're clear...Fuck you. You just like to see your typed remarks appear on the Internet, apparently.
Scope creep is just getting annoying. Abortions are legal. It's a civil rights issue for women and has been granted as legal by the SC. I do however at this point feel that the federal government should lay a few laws out. That states should not try to play additional emotion burdens on women looking to have an abortion. That an abortion is legal up until week number X. That X should never be fucked with again.
Unless X=40 you are violating a woman's right to make choices about her body, or you are conceding that Arkansas has a point. Take your pick.
No you are not. You can easily say prior to viability an abortion is legal, afterwards a woman is free to birth the fetus but not abort.
You are still allowing the mother the choice as to whether she is a host.
Unless X=40 you are violating a woman's right to make choices about her body, or you are conceding that Arkansas has a point. Take your pick.
If you think abortion should be legal because its a woman's body and you don't support abortion up til 8.9 months for any reason you are either a hypocrite or a liar.
You've overlooked the obvious. Example:
Are you for free speech? Yes or no.
Do you think that slander and libel, falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, inciting a mob to riot, and making verbal threats that cause a reasonable person to fear for their life - do you think that all of these forms of speech should be 100% protected and legal?
Well, it's completely reasonable and rational and NOT hypocritical to say "Yes" to the first question and "No" to the second, because rights under the Constitution aren't absolute. For the very simple reason that rights often conflict with other rights, and it's been up to the courts to decide where the limits of various rights lie.
Abortion is no exception. The rights of the woman to control her own body conflict with the rights of a viable human fetus to live. And it's up to the courts to decide where the balance of those conflicting rights lies So it's completely NON hypocritical to believe that a woman's right to control her own body is not an absolute right.
You, who admitted you had nothing of substance to add to your own OP yet felt the need to create a thread, are now calling me an attention whore? As long as we're clear...
You have to draw the line somewhere, I think almost everyone could agree that a third trimester abortion is disturbing, whereas aborting a zygote very few would find disturbing. Setting the line at heartbeat does not sound like an unreasonable thing.