End the Abortion Debate

[lehighguy]

They are bad examples in that poster also supports them. The main defense against abortion is the fetuses rights, not a mitigation of the mothers rights.

[Utah]

I think you missed my point as I am not making a pro or anti adoption argument. I was simply pointing out the weakness of a specific arguement:


"I feel it's a personal, moral decision that is none of the government's business.....The collective has no business involving the government in the personal healthcare choices of its citizens. "

The "collective" is already heavily involved in the healthcare choices of its citizens (e.g., I cant legally pay my friend Mike to perform surgery on me) and the government already has its hands all over our bodies. I am simply saying that if you blindly accept the argument that the governement cant touch us then you logically must accept that argument everywhere.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I know I said I wouldn't say any more, but aside from this particular debate, how is allowing everyone to make up their own mind and act on their moral belief imposing anything on anybody?

[lehighguy]

Your imposing it on another human being, the child, by killing it. This is what people never seem to understand. Abortion is different from drugs or sex or anything else because there is a second non-consenting party.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
Majority rules and the law goes into effect for 25-50 years

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you put on this condition?

I'll re-worded. We would like to take away womens rights and privacy for 25-50 years.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

No "child" is involved. As long as you continue to distort reality in the debate, your argument has no credence. A fetus is not a child.

[ QUOTE ]
I have argued this a lot... and I seem to get nowhere. Life ends where life begins -- with cognizance, measured by higher brain-wave activity. This is measurable around the 26th week of pregnancy. It may not be exact, but it's a damn good compromise, I think. A woman should have until the 2nd trimester to legally abort for whatever reason. After that, abortion only in the case where the mother's life is in danger.

[/ QUOTE ]

RETRACTION (for future reference): I used the word "cognizance" not knowing what the true definition was. I'm not sure what word describes what I'm saying: someone is alive when they have a functioning brain. This is what Terry Schiavo did NOT have according to most of the doctors that examined her. That means, she was no longer a person (with the right to life).

[Olof]

[ QUOTE ]

RETRACTION (for future reference): I used the word "cognizance" not knowing what the true definition was. I'm not sure what word describes what I'm saying: someone is alive when they have a functioning brain. This is what Terry Schiavo did NOT have according to most of the doctors that examined her. That means, she was no longer a person (with the right to life).

[/ QUOTE ]

Would this apply even if it were virtually certain that her brain would begin to function normally in less than nine months?

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
No "child" is involved. As long as you continue to distort reality in the debate, your argument has no credence. A fetus is not a child.

[/ QUOTE ]
What is a child?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

RETRACTION (for future reference): I used the word "cognizance" not knowing what the true definition was. I'm not sure what word describes what I'm saying: someone is alive when they have a functioning brain. This is what Terry Schiavo did NOT have according to most of the doctors that examined her. That means, she was no longer a person (with the right to life).

[/ QUOTE ]

Would this apply even if it were virtually certain that her brain would begin to function normally in less than nine months?

[/ QUOTE ]

If her brain would "begin to function normally", then that would mean that it's not right now. Which means, right now, she's not a person. In the case of a fetus, you could say it is a "potential person", since it's brain will develop to the point of being a person. But, a "potential person" is not an actual person. Any sperm and egg is a "potential person" given the right set of circumstances. We protect actual people, not potential people.

That being said, in the case of Terry Schiavo, if there was a chance that her personhood could be restored -- meaning she was a person, but died, and there was a way to bring her back to life, then I think it would be good to bring her back to life. I hope the distinction is self-evident to most. To those that think using condoms or birth control is immoral, I'm sure this distinction is not clear.