Rape does not justify abortion

[Liability]

A person does not exist till birth.

A statement of belief, not fact.

Age is measured from birth not conception.

Here, that is true. It is not necessarily true everywhere. But, regardless, it is totally irrelevant.

Sperm, eggs and embryos can all be frozen, then thawed and still viable to continue on into life. Once birth has occurred, we cannot freeze a breathing person and bring them back.

Is it a lack of technology or could it be that we cannot freeze and then thaw "life"?

I'm gonna go with: you've been drinking.

 

[Vidi]

A statement of belief, not fact.



Here, that is true. It is not necessarily true everywhere. But, regardless, it is totally irrelevant.

Sperm, eggs and embryos can all be frozen, then thawed and still viable to continue on into life. Once birth has occurred, we cannot freeze a breathing person and bring them back.

Is it a lack of technology or could it be that we cannot freeze and then thaw "life"?

I'm gonna go with: you've been drinking.

LOL

I did have three drinks at my sisters wedding this past weekend. Thats three more than Ive had in the last ten years, so maybe.

But reread what I posted and come back with a non humor response ( though this response was quite funny and clever )

I asked a question at the end of that post that I think is an interesting one...what do you think? Lack of technology or proof of life?

There is no "right" answer. Its not a set up...Im just asking your opinion.

 

[Liability]

Sperm, eggs and embryos can all be frozen, then thawed and still viable to continue on into life. Once birth has occurred, we cannot freeze a breathing person and bring them back.

Is it a lack of technology or could it be that we cannot freeze and then thaw "life"?

I'm gonna go with: you've been drinking.

LOL

I did have three drinks at my sisters wedding this past weekend. Thats three more than Ive had in the last ten years, so maybe.

But reread what I posted and come back with a non humor response ( though this response was quite funny and clever )

I asked a question at the end of that post that I think is an interesting one...what do you think? Lack of technology or proof of life?

There is no "right" answer. Its not a set up...Im just asking your opinion.

I still don't see the connection to the Topic.

 

[courseofhistory]

So a woman is raped, gets pregnant and the woman's life in endanger medically, the woman can't abort it per the law via GOP. So the rape victim dies giving birth. And the rape victim would have no choice in this matter.
That's the GOP way. Reminds me of the Taliban

That kind of brings it home, doesn't it? But it falls on repubs' deaf ears!

Swing State Polls as of 8/22/12​

Florida Obama 49 Romney 46
Ohio 50 44
Virginia 50 45
Colorado 49 46
Nevada 49 45
Wisconsin 50 45
MI 44 47
PA 48 42​

 

[Vidi]

I'm gonna go with: you've been drinking.

LOL

I did have three drinks at my sisters wedding this past weekend. Thats three more than Ive had in the last ten years, so maybe.

But reread what I posted and come back with a non humor response ( though this response was quite funny and clever )

I asked a question at the end of that post that I think is an interesting one...what do you think? Lack of technology or proof of life?

There is no "right" answer. Its not a set up...Im just asking your opinion.

I still don't see the connection to the Topic.

No one and I mean NO ONE, on either side of this particular issue, is saying we all dont have a right to life.

In fact, thats the wrong question...the question is: When does life begin?

If we can freeze embryos, sperm and eggs and thaw them out, implant and still make a baby, but we cant do that with a living breathing already birthed person, MAYBE that shows us where life is and where it is not

Its a thought...thats all nothing more...what do you think?

 

[Liability]

LOL

I did have three drinks at my sisters wedding this past weekend. Thats three more than Ive had in the last ten years, so maybe.

But reread what I posted and come back with a non humor response ( though this response was quite funny and clever )

I asked a question at the end of that post that I think is an interesting one...what do you think? Lack of technology or proof of life?

There is no "right" answer. Its not a set up...Im just asking your opinion.

I still don't see the connection to the Topic.

No one and I mean NO ONE, on either side of this particular issue, is saying we all dont have a right to life.

In fact, thats the wrong question...the question is: When does life begin?

If we can freeze embryos, sperm and eggs and thaw them out, implant and still make a baby, but we cant do that with a living breathing already birthed person, MAYBE that shows us where life is and where it is not

Its a thought...thats all nothing more...what do you think?

IF life begins at some point which we cannot with certainty "know," that does not mean that it doesn't begin at or around conception or some time not that long afterwards.

And if it starts that early, then all those clamoring for "abortion rights" ARE indeed saying that the pre-born don't have a right to life. To the extent we don't know, therefore, I say we are kind of obliged to err on the side of caution.

And cryogenics is an advancing scientific art. So your yardstick may be broken.

 

[Vidi]

I still don't see the connection to the Topic.

No one and I mean NO ONE, on either side of this particular issue, is saying we all dont have a right to life.

In fact, thats the wrong question...the question is: When does life begin?

If we can freeze embryos, sperm and eggs and thaw them out, implant and still make a baby, but we cant do that with a living breathing already birthed person, MAYBE that shows us where life is and where it is not

Its a thought...thats all nothing more...what do you think?

IF life begins at some point which we cannot with certainty "know," that does not mean that it doesn't begin at or around conception or some time not that long afterwards.

And if it starts that early, then all those clamoring for "abortion rights" ARE indeed saying that the pre-born don't have a right to life. To the extent we don't know, therefore, I say we are kind of obliged to err on the side of caution.

And cryogenics is an advancing scientific art. So your yardstick may be broken.

I can accept that answer.


Now let me take it a step further based on what youve said.

If we do not know, those who get abortions may indeed be violating the rights of a human being, but as we do not know for sure, they may not be.

Therefore, do we side with the actual right of the actual breathing person or the perceived right of the potential person?

 

[Vidi]

Do you also support free health care for all?

nope...and he hates regulations and he can't stand police. he's totally laissez faire...

except when it comes to women's bodies.

That's kind of what I suspected.

It is my opinion that if we are not consistent in our political beliefs, then we are only partisan slaves.

 

[jillian]

We all have a right to life, even if you don't believe that rights come from the government the right to life is written into the constitution.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

If the purpose of government is to protect the rights of those who cannot defend themselves because no one is less capable of defending their rights than an unborn child. Rape is a horrific crime, we all know that, but it does not justify anyone taking away the rights of an innocent person.

Roe v. Wade.

A woman does not need to justify anything to obtain an abortion. It is her body and she has absolute rights over her body.

they hate that.

 

[Liability]

We all have a right to life, even if you don't believe that rights come from the government the right to life is written into the constitution.



If the purpose of government is to protect the rights of those who cannot defend themselves because no one is less capable of defending their rights than an unborn child. Rape is a horrific crime, we all know that, but it does not justify anyone taking away the rights of an innocent person.

Roe v. Wade.

A woman does not need to justify anything to obtain an abortion. It is her body and she has absolute rights over her body.

they hate that.

Just imagine what the millions of slaughtered children might have to say about it had their lives and voices not been ripped apart.

 

[syrenn]

We all have a right to life, even if you don't believe that rights come from the government the right to life is written into the constitution.



If the purpose of government is to protect the rights of those who cannot defend themselves because no one is less capable of defending their rights than an unborn child. Rape is a horrific crime, we all know that, but it does not justify anyone taking away the rights of an innocent person.

Roe v. Wade.

A woman does not need to justify anything to obtain an abortion. It is her body and she has absolute rights over her body.

they hate that.

I agree. The OP argues the constitution...and yet Roe v. Wade is protected by the constitution.

 

[courseofhistory]

Right to life is a given but the right to create a life knowingly and willingly is also important. The woman's life supercedes the fetus' because she is a conscious, living, human being with awareness, needs and much more. The fetus will not be aware it is being aborted. I don't LIKE abortion but I also don't like denying a woman choice!

Swing State Polls as of 8/22/12​

Florida Obama 49 Romney 46
Ohio 50 44
Virginia 50 45
Colorado 49 46
Nevada 49 45
Wisconsin 50 45
MI 44 47
PA 48 42​

 

[Liability]

No one and I mean NO ONE, on either side of this particular issue, is saying we all dont have a right to life.

In fact, thats the wrong question...the question is: When does life begin?

If we can freeze embryos, sperm and eggs and thaw them out, implant and still make a baby, but we cant do that with a living breathing already birthed person, MAYBE that shows us where life is and where it is not

Its a thought...thats all nothing more...what do you think?

IF life begins at some point which we cannot with certainty "know," that does not mean that it doesn't begin at or around conception or some time not that long afterwards.

And if it starts that early, then all those clamoring for "abortion rights" ARE indeed saying that the pre-born don't have a right to life. To the extent we don't know, therefore, I say we are kind of obliged to err on the side of caution.

And cryogenics is an advancing scientific art. So your yardstick may be broken.

I can accept that answer.


Now let me take it a step further based on what youve said.

If we do not know, those who get abortions may indeed be violating the rights of a human being, but as we do not know for sure, they may not be.

Therefore, do we side with the actual right of the actual breathing person or the perceived right of the potential person?

If the right of a living breathing confirmed person to the convenience of choice trumps the right of the (arguable) human being to live, then sure.

Otherwise, clearly not. By default the right to life is the paramount right. No other rights exist for a person, at all, when his or her life is taken.

 

[syrenn]

Roe v. Wade.

A woman does not need to justify anything to obtain an abortion. It is her body and she has absolute rights over her body.

they hate that.

Just imagine what the millions of slaughtered children might have to say about it had their lives and voices not been ripped apart.

Alright..... C section it out. No ripping involved..... That way the woman gets what she needs...and it gets to live and have a voice of its own.

 

[PixieStix]

Roe v. Wade.

A woman does not need to justify anything to obtain an abortion. It is her body and she has absolute rights over her body.

they hate that.

Just imagine what the millions of slaughtered children might have to say about it had their lives and voices not been ripped apart.

Indeed. This is why many pro lifers speak up.

I was once an embryo, so was my son, you, jillian and everyone here that is speaking out, their voices are being heard.

While some may not have had great mothers, great lives, at least they were given a chance at life.

 

[syrenn]

they hate that.

Just imagine what the millions of slaughtered children might have to say about it had their lives and voices not been ripped apart.

Indeed. This is why many pro lifers speak up.

I was once an embryo, so was my son, you, jillian and everyone here that is speaking out, their voices are being heard.

While some may not have had great mothers, great lives, at least they were given a chance at life.

By a willing woman to carry cells to term......

 

[Wiseacre]

The basic issue IMHO is when the right to life starts; do we want to allow the termination of life prior to birth? 10 minutes prior? 10 days? 10 weeks? At conception? At what point should our society confer that most basic right: to life.

And then there's this - if you decide that the right to life begins at conception, then why should the circumstances of the conception influence the decision? Should we deny the right to life for a fetus based on those curcumstances? Where's the justice in that? The fetus is terminated due to events beyond it's control?

I understand the injustice of rape or incest, no question the victim already has to deal with a great deal of pain without an unwanted pregnancy as a reminder. But is that worse than terminating a life, even if an unborn one? Not an easy decision.

I think it oughta be a local or state decision for now, rather than a federal law or using federal funds. But thast's just me.

 

[jillian]

they hate that.

Just imagine what the millions of slaughtered children might have to say about it had their lives and voices not been ripped apart.

Indeed. This is why many pro lifers speak up.

I was once an embryo, so was my son, you, jillian and everyone here that is speaking out, their voices are being heard.

While some may not have had great mothers, great lives, at least they were given a chance at life.

and some of us wouldn't be alive but for reproductive choice.

and some of us wouldn't have had very wanted children via in vitro or other means if the radical right's 'personhood' laws were in effect.

for the upteenth time... no one is wise enough to make moral choices for others. so those choices should be left between the woman and her doctor.

we are not idiots who can't make decisions but for the dictates of a bunch of religious extremists who think they're more moral than the rest of us.

 

[syrenn]

The basic issue IMHO is when the right to life starts; do we want to allow the termination of life prior to birth? 10 minutes prior? 10 days? 10 weeks? At conception? At what point should our society confer that most basic right: to life.

And then there's this - if you decide that the right to life begins at conception, then why should the circumstances of the conception influence the decision? Should we deny the right to life for a fetus based on those curcumstances? Where's the justice in that? The fetus is terminated due to events beyond it's control?

I understand the injustice of rape or incest, no question the victim already has to deal with a great deal of pain without an unwanted pregnancy as a reminder. But is that worse than terminating a life, even if an unborn one? Not an easy decision.

I think it oughta be a local or state decision for now, rather than a federal law or using federal funds. But thast's just me.

The whole OP is a none issue.


There is no ....need.... for any justification.... to anyone at all for having an abortion.

 

[Avatar4321]

We all have a right to life, even if you don't believe that rights come from the government the right to life is written into the constitution.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

If the purpose of government is to protect the rights of those who cannot defend themselves because no one is less capable of defending their rights than an unborn child. Rape is a horrific crime, we all know that, but it does not justify anyone taking away the rights of an innocent person.

Roe v. Wade.

A woman does not need to justify anything to obtain an abortion. It is her body and she has absolute rights over her body.

She doesnt have rights over her child's body.

And no. She doesnt have an absolute right over her body. None of us do. There are alot of things we cant do to our body.