Many of those who think letting states decide things like abortion means they can decide things like guns. They forget the part of the Constitution that says whatever is not declared herein is left to the state and individual. Guns are declared a right therein, abortion is not.
Get ready to rumble!
-
Babies have been born at 18 weeks and lived, so there's that
-
I think abortion is horrible. I don't see a way it cannot be legal at some level. I look to the behavior of the nannying government for my reasons why. The second we fully support that an unborn baby has rights we will look to use that to infringe on the rights of the mother in even more ways. This won't just be the rights of mothers that are "forced to carry" their unborn baby, but all pregnant women. Their behavior will now be regulated as a function of preventing child abuse.
There was a day when the government was more about live and let live. Those days are long gone. Rolling back RvW will not be occurring with the same government that existed in the 70s. It would just be the tip of the iceberg for government interference and an opportunity to start raising your children even sooner.
-
What more basic human right is there than the right not to be murdered for convenience?
-
Well so long as it's leftists I'm good with it.
-
What more basic human right is there than the right not to be murdered for convenience?
The right to raise your children as you see fit.
-
they have to live first
-
Oh... so now that matters? The parent's rights trump the child's. That's how it should be. You can make laws to regulate things, but those are increased intrusion into the household. The bar is already bad enough for that intrusion. This would openly invite worse. There are two people who's rights are at steak and they can be in conflict. I'd rather this conflict favor the parents than the state.
-
No wonder we have a society of sociopaths, whenever it is ok to murder your own human child for convenience, there is no depth of depravity you will not sink to after that.
-
No wonder we have a society of sociopaths, whenever it is ok to murder your own human child for convenience, there is no depth of depravity you will not sink to after that.
It's not a coincidence that the people that think it's OK to kill their baby (and many take PRIDE in doing so) also makes up 99% of all mass shooters. And genocidal maniacs.
-
No wonder we have a society of sociopaths, whenever it is ok to murder your own human child for convenience, there is no depth of depravity you will not sink to after that.
I don't think it's OK. I abhor the very idea. I also don't like the dehumanization of the "fetus" to make it more palatable.
I also abhor child abuse in any form.
The sad thing is that our government and our constitution doesn't really allow for leniency, here. The parent's rights trump children's rights. They always have. There's no law that specifies that's only for good parents. It applies to horrible ones too. The sad truth is that the lengths the government would go to restrict the rights of parents knows no bounds... especially as we start using words like "overpopluation".
It has to be legal. It is tragic, but inevitable. I'm all for social stigmatization and trying to convince folks not to do it... but there is no way around the parent's rights.
-
The parent's rights trump children's rights. They always have.
Diane Downs shot her children, killing one. She went on trial for murder and went to prison.
Parents cannot kill their children, the only difference between Downs and an abortion is when we believe life begins.
-
*I'm not reading all of this.
Dianna Ross and the Supremes will blink. No way do they want the heat of deciding either way. They'll figure out how to make a bullshit non-decision.
-
Diane Downs shot her children, killing one. She went on trial for murder and went to prison.
Parents cannot kill their children, the only difference between Downs and an abortion is when we believe life begins.
We have laws that regulate certain actions. Still... parents rights trump children's rights. The process for taking her remaining children away was still complicated... as it should be. Parents rights trump children's rights.
Once you assign the same rights to an unborn baby that a parent has, you get into a whole new area for government opportunity... and that's not just for the babies of people we don't care about... this is everyone's child.
The simple question is if government protection is better than the alternative. I think, given the current climate, it is not.
-
The process for taking her remaining children away was still complicated... as it should be. Parents rights trump children's rights.
It was not complicated.
-
It was not complicated.
Sure, it was. Watch anything on it. This happened in my home state. Hell... even the child she had in prison was a complicated situation. It always should be in order for the state to take away someone's children. It was just as complicated when murder was involved. I want that at all levels. Unfortunately, that favors horrible parents. But then.. how would your parents be viewed today?
-
You are making it too complex. When is a fetus a viable human being? Science should be able to answer that better than the nuns who taught me.
lazs
It's a human being at conception, check the DNA. At worst it is alive as soon as it's heart starts beating. Emergency rooms around the world pronounce people dead when their heart stops beating and it can no longer be jump started so logically the opposite is also true. The heart starts beating long before the child can survive outside the mother.
-
How viable is a baby outside the womb if no one feeds it or takes care of it? That "viability" argument is senseless.
The key is that it's a human life.
-
What more basic human right is there than the right not to be murdered for convenience?
Participate now!
Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!