CivilLiberty
Active Member
no1tovote4 said:They have a right to pursue that but not at the expense of the rights of others. In this case reducing a human life to garbage in sacrifice to that right.
I read an interesting article today in researching some of my responses here.
The premise is this:
Let me put the issue plainly. If the unborn is not a human being, no justification for abortion is necessary. However, if the unborn is a human being, no justification for abortion is adequate. Some say the unborn is not a human being. They contend it's just a non-viable tissue mass, merely a part of a woman's body. Others say it's only a "potential" human, or a human that is not yet a person. If any of these options turn out to be true, then it's hard to imagine how any additional considerations could make a difference. No further defense would be necessary. Have the abortion.
On the other hand, maybe the unborn child is a bona fide human being, deserving of the same care and protection you and I enjoy. If that's the case, then abortion takes the life of an innocent child simply because she's in the way and can't defend herself. This is not a reason to kill another human being.
From:
http://www.str.org/free/solid_ground/SG9711.htm
It's an interesting paper, and it really boils it down to the SINGLE issue at hand.
And here's my point: At the zygote and embryonic stages, that insignificant lump of cells is not a human being. It has the potential to become a human being, but it is not a human being.
The Supreme Court has gone farther than I, in saying that even the fetus is not a human being till viable.
Having said all that, if you believe that even the zygote is a human BEING, what are you religious beliefs and how do they affect you perception?
Regards,
Andy