This is a sincere poll. I would appreciate honest answers. If you're willing, I would also appreciate your reasons. I will not criticize your choice. I would just honestly like to know where USMB posters stand on this issue.
NOTE: I know there are many possible variables, but this poll assumes "typical" circumstances. In other words, this is a superficial poll that assumes "normal/average" circumstances - meaning no rape, incest, health, deformity, financial, or other extenuating issues.
This is a surprisingly difficult question for those who want to have an honest discussion.
Giving legal rights to children is a way fraught with unintended consequences that only an anarchist could love.
However the founding principles of this country, found in the Declaration of Independence, declare that we, as Americans have a n unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
A unviable fetus is a human child waiting to be born, unless you can provide evidence that fetuses sometimes come out as something other than human children.
Still Democracy requires compromise and from a legal perspective, though immoral, the Mother has a greater right to decide the fate of her unviable fetus.
However, once that human child is viable the State has a right and a legal responsibility to protect the right of that unborn child to have life.
Do we not have a right to question WHY the ever moving target of viability is the deciding point?
Sure you do. Great question.
I'm thinking legally, not morally.
Until the unborn child is viable on its own, it's not a separate entity from the Mother.
Once viable, although still dependant on the Mother, the child could survive as a separate entity from the Mother.
That distinction is what makes viability a natural dividing line, from a legal perspective.
So what's your position on NY's new law?
Morally, it is offensive and wrong, under any standard of human behavior, which is ironic as there are numerous threads on this forum where atheists and agnostics argue they are more moral than Christians.
Spiritually, it's clearly ungodly. It's not a unheard of situation to bible believing Christians or their ancestors as the Caananites sacrificed children to Moloch back in Jesus' day, so the Bible does weigh in on the issue of killing children.
Legally, it goes beyond Roe v. Wade and thus it is ripe for challenge. I don't such a law could survive a challenge based upon current legal precedent with the current court.
Ironically, the laws ability to withstand legal challenge is stronger if the precedent represented by Roe v. Wade is overturned.
Politically, it highlights the way those on the left lie to advance their agenda.
During the recent hearing for justice Brett Kavanaugh I kept reading how if the supreme court (with his help) overturned Roe v. Wade, abortion would once again be illegal in the US.
On a more than likely basis, Roe would be overturned on the basis that the constitution simply does not guarantee a woman's right to end the life of an unborn child. This will free each state to write it's own law. Since NY (and other states) already have abortion statutes, in place, abortions can continue there unabated regardless of Roe.
With Roe gone challenging abortions rights will get much more difficult as a Conservative leaning court is unlikely to grant rights to children enabling them to challenge their parents.
Prophetically, it is a sign to me that the end times are at hand.
Did I miss anything?
