Then why don't you vote for Chuck Baldwin?
I do not want to see Obama win So I have to vote for the best chance of beating him.
Your original research and the limited perspective you have gained through personal experience is not exactly equivalent to the personal experience of a large number of people.
All together at least a hundred. In differnt groups at different times. The professionals who helped us had experience in the thousands for all the women they treated over time. It was more than just me and 3 others in some little group for a week.
I agree that Terri Schiavo should not have been starved to death. A lethal injection would have been far more humane. At any rate, any number of children you could have potentially conceived would have had those same unique characteristics. If you had used contraception or been celibate during the act that led to your son's conception, you would have caused his nonexistence. Would you hold that it was morally wrong for you to do so? (By the way, since you insist on "regular English," tummy is slang for stomach, and your son was not in your stomach but in your uterus.
But as with the musician, an unwanted pregnancy is the result of forced dependency of another being upon you. But answer the question.
We've held your definition of a "person" for centuries now. How is it that you portray maintaining this definition as "moving forward?" My definition of personhood is based on Enlightenment values. What is yours based on?
A human fetus has more rights than an owl's egg. I'll say that right now if you want me to. But it doesn't have more rights than a living owl because an owl possesses at least a rudimentary capacity to view itself as a distinct entity that exists over time.
Then why don't you vote for Chuck Baldwin?
I do not want to see Obama win so I have to vote for the best chance of beating him.
Your original research and the limited perspective you have gained through personal experience is not exactly equivalent to the personal experience of a large number of people.
All together at least a hundred. In different groups at different times. The professionals who helped us had experience in the thousands for all the women they treated over time. Personal experience in something is more helpful to me than a survey given especially if there is an agenda involved.
I don’t know why we need to go on about this particular topic, we can agree to disagree. I think a child being raped is far more traumatic than an adult though both are bad and you don’t. This topic was never meant to be a topic in the first place. My original question to you was in comparing putting a killer to death and having an abortion. I had added child rapist to hopefully not get the argument side tracked on what did the guy do wrong and then start justifying what the hypothetical murderer did that he does not deserve to die. It did not work, now we are having an argument on what the hypothetical murderer raped and murdered a child and that’s not as bad as raping and murdering and adult. Ok we can just disagree and move on.
I agree that Terri Schiavo should not have been starved to death. A lethal injection would have been far more humane. At any rate, any number of children you could have potentially conceived would have had those same unique characteristics. If you had used contraception or been celibate during the act that led to your son's conception, you would have caused his nonexistence. Would you hold that it was morally wrong for you to do so? (By the way, since you insist on "regular English," tummy is slang for stomach, and your son was not in your stomach but in your uterus.
She did not deserve to be put to death, not by starvation not by lethal injection.. Your non person hood is literally out of Hitler’s play book. He justified the murder of people with retardation, Gypsies and Jews all on your same theme of non personhood.
No it would not be morally wrong to not get pregnant. Killing someone is morally wrong. You say that a murderer should not be put to death for murdering but its ok to give a woman a lethal injection because you have decided she is a non person. And the point of this thread is you thought Sarah Palin is hypocritical. Amazing!
But as with the musician, an unwanted pregnancy is the result of forced dependency of another being upon you. But answer the question.
If the musician were my personal responsibility my offspring It would be my responsibility. The comparison is flawed because no one at any time has ever asked a woman to carry a child that was not their own. The only children that anyone has suggested a woman carry is the child SHE is responsible for conceiving.
We've held your definition of a "person" for centuries now. How is it that you portray maintaining this definition as "moving forward?" My definition of personhood is based on Enlightenment values. What is yours based on?
Mine is based on basic common sense and reasoning. Also consistency. I am against the death penalty and I am against abortion. I am consistent in my pro life stance. I do not think it is right to hunt animals for the fun of it, though I don’t see anything wrong with hunting for your food since people eat meat. I think you are all over the board with your justifications for who should die and who should live, and I say life is valuable.
A human fetus has more rights than an owl's egg. I'll say that right now if you want me to. But it doesn't have more rights than a living owl because an owl possesses at least a rudimentary capacity to view itself as a distinct entity that exists over time.
This is absolutely not true. A human child in the womb does not have the same rights as an owl’s egg or an eagle’s egg or the eggs of other thing the government has deemed worth value. There are federal laws protecting those eggs fertile or not. There are not laws protecting all children in the womb.
