US Becoming Pro-Life

[Pandora]

The problem is this. The Anti-Choice side wants full personhood at conception so even just a a few fertilized cells is a problem for them. Eventually even the Birth Control Pill would be too much for them. That's why the courts have decided "viability" is the time that after passed an abortion should not be performed. And that makes sense to me.

I don’t agree with abortion but I am not anti choice. I want the right to choose if I have to wear a seat belt, motor cycle helmet, I want lots of choices and I don’t want my frakin government to make them for me. You only talk about choice in the choice to kill your child, I talk about real choice to do what I want without my government telling me no. I think half the pro life people would be happy if they just limited abortions to the first 3 months, didn’t force tax payers to pay for them and the women having the abortions were educated SEREIOUSLY educated as to what they were doing. There will always be some who are trying to end all abortions just like there will always be some who insist on abortions up to the due date and even to refuse living children medical treatment because they are unwanted by their biological mothers.

And another thing you've said a few times really does need cleared up. It's in regard to two different things late term abortions... and President Obama & the "born alive" after van abortion issue. These have been vastly inaccurately portrayed.

sorry but obama is not only for partial birth abortion he has said he does not agree with the born alive infant protection act, he refused to let the bill come up when he was in charge in the senate and when someone else was in charge he voted present and later he voted no to the bill then he lied and said he would vote yes if it were like the federal bill then it came out that it was exactly like the federal bill. He can’t even say when life begins because it’s above his pay grade. I always thought Barbara boxer was the lowest form of human waste when it came to this topic but obama beats her even, who would have thought that was possible.

On late term abortion that ONLY happens in life of the mother and late term diagnosis of super extreme handicap. First off the woman's life ALWAYS trumps the fetus because there's just no way we'll ever make women die in childbirth against their will. And on the severe handicap that's a doctor saying things are so bad the baby probably wouldn't even live in the first place and if it did it's most likely in a vegetative state. Both these also seem reasonable to me.

This is not true, its “health” of the mother not life of the mother and when they say health it can mean anything from ill be depressed if I don’t get rid of this kid to what ever the doctor can come up with.

Using basic common sense Top Gun…. A woman is 8 ½ months pregnant, it turns out she for what ever reason will die if she carries this baby another two weeks so the doctor has to turn the baby so it comes out breach on purpose because if the head comes out it’s a baby… he induces labor and makes the woman deliver the baby feet first… so far the baby is alive and well.. feet are out, butt is out… the process is taking a long time, a c-section would be much faster or a normal delivery but to make sure you can stab the baby in the back of the neck before the head comes out (making a successful and legal abortion) you have the woman do the very dangerous process of a breach baby. So now everything but the head is out, the doctor now holds the head inside the woman till he can get the sharp object in the back of the babies head then he twists it till the little feet stop kicking and once he knows this baby is dead he lets the head come out.

Please Top Gun, using reasoning and logic how was that going to help or save this woman? You are kidding yourself if you think forcing a woman to have a baby breach then when the baby is finally almost out you hold the head in till you can kill the baby is doing ANYTHING for the life of this mother and I use that term mother very loose when it comes to this.

On the Obama "born live" vote you have to remember that the medical board in Illinois had the exact same opinion on the issue. They reality is that if a fetus survived an abortion it would set up a system where they then had to try and reverse all the damage done from the abortion to save a fetus... 99. something % of the time impossible. Then that opened them up to massive lawsuits from the mother who wanted and paid for an abortion. So the decision was made, no life saving effort after a abortion. So there is reasons for this. It's not at all like those on the Right tend to portray it. The doctors wanted it this way.

The born alive infant protection act is now law and no thanks to obama or the corrupt Illinois board. He was wrong they were wrong Barbara boxer is wrong and the act is a law now.

Taxpayers don't pay anything for abortions, they are paid for at the time of service... so we're in agreement here.

Taxpayers don’t pay anything for abortion? Are you high ? making a joke or really you don’t know.

Obama has changed the rules, we do pay for abortions and not only that we pay for abortions in china now. Its kind of funny we borrow money from china to keep the government working then we pay for their abortions. Tax payers do pay for abortions and we will be paying to cut up aborted babies to do experiments on too, and we will pay to clone aborted babies so we can cut them up and learn god knows what. But Michael j. fox will be happy and all the others who feel they matter more than others.

I don't see any reason to put the woman through any forced classes on abortions. Every woman knows what an abortion is. This is not something taken lightly.

That is bull, I did not know. I asked if I was going to kill a baby, the doctor said no. he said it’s a mass of tissue. It was 3 years later on a date to the local fair that I found out exactly what I had done. I had a mental break down right in front of the right to life booth. All information I had asked for but said didn’t exist. I was removing a tumor.

And we are in agreement that more should be done to first promote ways not to get pregnant and secondly to help fund programs that would help women that choose to have a child. The problem here is whether it's right or wrong it's the Conservatives that fight this type of funding tooth & nail in fact constantly trying to cut back on the current spending levels for things like you have recommended.

I don’t want government funded programs to educate people seeing abortions or educate people mothering their children, that can be done by private citizens.

So we have some common ground which is good. To be honest I'd love to see a compromise... but it will never happen because both sides want it all their way.

there will always be the extreme people who insist on killing in the 9th month or after the baby is born and there will always be those who think children, all children have a right to life… though I don’t think all women have a right to be a mother.

If say there was an agreement between the Right & Left for a bipartisan Constitutional Amendment to be put forward that a woman had a guaranteed right to an abortion but the time-line was pushed back to say just a little over the first trimester... between 3 & 4 months... I would probably see that as a compromise to consider.

id be happy to see that but ill always want education on what your doing, I learned first hand that they don’t tell you. Not only do they not tell you that the 3 month baby inside of you had its own heart and DNA they don’t tell you that abortion can make having a baby later harder, also there are studies but I don’t think its provable that people who get abortions are more inclined to getting cervical cancer.

But like I said before... we still managed to find some common ground which is a start.

yeah we fought lots less this time didn’t we

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Originally Posted by Pandora
I am not saying that its never heart wrenching to have an abortion I am saying that for most women it is not. there is always that case of rape, incest or pregnancy in the tubes where there it is heart wrenching, its just that is the exeption, not the rule.

And then I posted: > But it isn't the rule and on that we'll agree to disagree...and you have no knowledge to justify that statement!

And then you misquoted and replied with this:>I would be very interested in your data that rape and incest is the rule rather than the exception in abortions. I know its less than 5% for both but you seem to call that an opinion, please give data showing rape and incest is the leading reasons for abortions.

Do try to stay focused and on POINT...it really is tiresome to have to keep dragging who said what/when/where back into the current topic.

We were discussing the heart wrenching choices and decisions that these women were having to make...REMEMBER!!! LMAO

All you have is your 'biased hard wired right wing' attitude to reinforce your thoughts about how those thousands of women 'FEEL' you have no REAL idea and no FACTS to support that either!

And to refresh your failing memory: >
if you think abortion is ok to do then why the frak to you care how often its done, if its ok to do then it shouldnt matter if a woman does it as a form of birth control, its only bad to see it as birth control if you consider it a child that is being killed!

To which I responded:> Aww...here is where your lack of knowledge leads you straight into that 'locked door for understanding'. The damage that is done to a woman's womb by multiple abortions is permanent and the future ability to have a full term birth is much compromised by these events!

And then you added this real pearl of wisdom:> I have no lack of knowledge in the damage of a woman’s body from abortions. Its in fact one of my many gripes, doctors do not warn women up front how damaging it is to their body. I could have told you that if I thought you wanted to know but I thought the topic was babies who are ripped apart limb by limb not the dangerous after effects to the woman who causes it.

Your ability to be so graphic...in your descriptions of the abortion process...serves what purpose???...to bolster your hard arsed attitude that you walk taller/carry a larger chip on your shoulder/carry a huge pack of guilt as your yoke of past bad decisions...GET OVER IT ALREADY.

Your inability to stay on point {any point} makes this topic and the conversation just leads me to believe that your own sense of 'GUILT' from your past has clouded your ability to be objective and open minded. So, I'll leave you, your "Pack of Guilt" and bid this topic off limits for discussion with you. ENJOY

 

[Pandora]

Murder is the purposful taking of a human life for reasons other than self defense.

It does not have to be pre planned. Premeditated murder is dealt with more harshly, but crimes of passion can also be murder.

Killing non humans is not murder.
Killing during war is not murder.
Killing in self defense is not murder.
Accidental killing is not murder.

Murder is universally condemned by the laws of every nation on Earth, or at least, every civilized nation on Earth.

If abortion any time after conception is murder, then why shouldn't it be banned? No other sort of murder is allowed by law, is it?

The question boils down to when a human becomes a human. If it is, as many contend, at conception, then abortion at any stage is the taking of an innocent life, and is therefore murder, even if the zygote consists of a few microscopic cells.

I don't think you really believe that abortion is murder (well, maybe partial birth abortion, or even late term abortion), but certainly not any abortion. If you really believed that killing a zygote that could only be seen in the microscope was murder, then there is no argument that could sway you to support legalization at any stage.

I think you're using the word "murder" as an emotional statement.

Well we agree that murder is Murder is the purposeful taking of a human life for reasons other than self defense.

and yes I think when someone delivers a live baby all but the head then stabs the head to kill the baby they murdered that baby. That baby would have lived and breathed had the doctor not stabbed them in the back of the head.

Putting a living baby in a soiled utility room to die refusing it any medical treatment is murdering that baby.

The Supreme Court when ruling on roe v. wade said that a woman could have an abortion up until the fetus was VIABLE. That baby who was sent to the utility room to die was VIABLE, a baby in the womb at 8 months and purposefully delivered early and breach only to stab it in the back of the neck before the head can come out would have been VIABLE. Those cases are all against the Supreme Court yet they are done. You ask why is murder allowed, I would say for the same reasons that babies who are VIABLE are murdered even though there is no ruling by the Supreme Court saying you can kill viable children.

 

[Pandora]

you have no knowledge to justify that statement!

All you have is your 'biased hard wired right wing' attitude to reinforce your thoughts about how those thousands of women 'FEEL' you have no REAL idea and no FACTS to support that either!

I think im the only one in this conversation that actually has facts.
Here is my proof that rape and incest is not the major reason people have abortions.
I thought it was 5% but I was wrong its 1%

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/13/us/rape-and-incest-just-1-of-all-abortions.html


Why do the other 99% of women have abortions…

Why Do Women Have Abortions?
- a statistical breakdown*

Responses listed as primary reason %

Social Reasons (given as primary reason)
- Feels unready for child/responsibility 25%
- Feels she can't afford baby 23%
- Has all the children she wants/Other family responsibilities 19%
- Relationship problem/Single motherhood 8%
- Feels she isn't mature enough 7%
- Interference with education/career plans 4%
- Parents/Partner wants abortion <1%
- Other reasons <6.5%
TOTAL: 93%
(Approx.)

"Hard Cases" (given as primary reason)
- Mother's Health 4%
- Baby may have health problem 3%
- Rape or Incest <0.5%


TOTAL:


7%
(Approx.)


http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/reasonsabortions.html


There are TONS more websites out there that are creditable and support this same information, if one bothered to look.

Your ability to be so graphic...in your descriptions of the abortion process...serves what purpose???...to bolster your hard arsed attitude that you walk taller/carry a larger chip on your shoulder/carry a huge pack of guilt as your yoke of past bad decisions...GET OVER IT ALREADY.

My ability to be so graphic is due to the fact I really hate fluffy words to make things "seem" better, words like choice when it really means abortion not real choice. Or words like "fetus" for a living child who was taken to a utility room to die because someone did not want the baby and didn’t want to adopt the baby out.

Guilt? Yes of course I have guilt. I killed a child, how can I not have guilt over that? Get over it? I don’t take killing my children as lightly as you do, there is no getting over it, there is only living with it and hoping that I can help even just a few people before they make that same mistake there is no turning back from.

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

I think im the only one in this conversation that actually has facts.
Here is my proof that rape and incest is not the major reason people have abortions.
I thought it was 5% but I was wrong its 1%

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/13/us/rape-and-incest-just-1-of-all-abortions.html
Why do the other 99% of women have abortions…
Why Do Women Have Abortions?
- a statistical breakdown*
Responses listed as primary reason %
Social Reasons (given as primary reason)
- Feels unready for child/responsibility 25%
- Feels she can't afford baby 23%
- Has all the children she wants/Other family responsibilities 19%
- Relationship problem/Single motherhood 8%
- Feels she isn't mature enough 7%
- Interference with education/career plans 4%
- Parents/Partner wants abortion <1%
- Other reasons <6.5%
TOTAL: 93%
(Approx.)

"Hard Cases" (given as primary reason)
- Mother's Health 4%
- Baby may have health problem 3%
- Rape or Incest <0.5%
TOTAL:7%
(Approx.)
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/reasonsabortions.html
There are TONS more websites out there that are creditable and support this same information, if one bothered to look.

My ability to be so graphic is due to the fact I really hate fluffy words to make things "seem" better, words like choice when it really means abortion not real choice. Or words like "fetus" for a living child who was taken to a utility room to die because someone did not want the baby and didn’t want to adopt the baby out.

Guilt? Yes of course I have guilt. I killed a child, how can I not have guilt over that? Get over it? I don’t take killing my children as lightly as you do, there is no getting over it, there is only living with it and hoping that I can help even just a few people before they make that same mistake there is no turning back from.

Here once again you obfuscate the POINT that I was discussing with you...in your vitriolic/hysteria induced/guilt ridden mental state...you've crossed over the point of clear/concise thought process AGAIN!!!

Come down off of that self inflated pedestal that you've placed yourself on and think for one minute, just one nano second about your ability to think that you are the ONLY ONE THAT DOES THE RESEARCH...LMAO. Does your ego and your person fit into the same room???

You keep stating that "those women don't suffer any gut wrenching feelings' and I keep telling you THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY 'F'N IDEA WHAT AND OR HOW THEY ALL FEEL AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY PROOF OF YOUR CONTINUAL ERRONEOUS STATEMENT TO SUPPORT THAT!!!

And then you change the conversation back into your data sheet about the numbers of abortion. Your hate and guilt derail your thought process to make a conversation with you impossible...YOU CAN NOT STAY ON POINT. Good luck with that supposedly noble soap box that you'll preach from...in your current state you'll be able to terrify quite a few people {they'll think your are quite the CRAZY lady} and it won't change a thing!!!

 

[Pandora]

Here once again you obfuscate the POINT that I was discussing with you...in your vitriolic/hysteria induced/guilt ridden mental state...you've crossed over the point of clear/concise thought process AGAIN!!!

Come down off of that self inflated pedestal that you've placed yourself on and think for one minute, just one nano second about your ability to think that you are the ONLY ONE THAT DOES THE RESEARCH...LMAO. Does your ego and your person fit into the same room???

You keep stating that "those women don't suffer any gut wrenching feelings' and I keep telling you THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY 'F'N IDEA WHAT AND OR HOW THEY ALL FEEL AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY PROOF OF YOUR CONTINUAL ERRONEOUS STATEMENT TO SUPPORT THAT!!!

And then you change the conversation back into your data sheet about the numbers of abortion. Your hate and guilt derail your thought process to make a conversation with you impossible...YOU CAN NOT STAY ON POINT. Good luck with that supposedly noble soap box that you'll preach from...in your current state you'll be able to terrify quite a few people {they'll think your are quite the CRAZY lady} and it won't change a thing!!!

You are really a different sort of person. Are insults all you have to offer? It’s all I have seen you offer so far to anyone who dares to disagree with you and slobbering adoration for those who do agree with you.

Not much to talk about if that’s all you have to offer, apparently its time to move on and not bother to look for the daily insult rather than an actual conversation.


Have a very nice day.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

More Americans “Pro-Life” Than “Pro-Choice” for First Time

"So where did this sudden seismic shift in public opinion come from?

From sloppy poll-taking, and journalists and editorial staff who are lazy, biased, or bothhttp://www.newshounds.us/2009/05/19/gallup_fox_nation_abortion_poll_churnalism.php#more, that’s where."

​

Gee.....whatta shocker.......

​

 

[PLC1]

Well we agree that murder is Murder is the purposeful taking of a human life for reasons other than self defense.

and yes I think when someone delivers a live baby all but the head then stabs the head to kill the baby they murdered that baby. That baby would have lived and breathed had the doctor not stabbed them in the back of the head.

Putting a living baby in a soiled utility room to die refusing it any medical treatment is murdering that baby.

The Supreme Court when ruling on roe v. wade said that a woman could have an abortion up until the fetus was VIABLE. That baby who was sent to the utility room to die was VIABLE, a baby in the womb at 8 months and purposefully delivered early and breach only to stab it in the back of the neck before the head can come out would have been VIABLE. Those cases are all against the Supreme Court yet they are done. You ask why is murder allowed, I would say for the same reasons that babies who are VIABLE are murdered even though there is no ruling by the Supreme Court saying you can kill viable children.

I can find nothing to disagree with in your post at all.

The difference between partial birth abortion, and dashing a newborn's head against the wall is simply that one is legal, while the other is not.

I think we also agree that abortion is not something to encourage or to celebrate, but is something we need to limit.

When, though, does abortion cross the line between something undesirable, and the murder of a child?

The Supreme Court says it is after the baby is born.
Many argue that it is the moment of conception.

I say we it is somewhere in between, and that no one really knows.

When does a fetus become conscious? When does the soul enter the body? When does human life really begin?

No one can answer those questions, so we're stuck with the argument between extremists.

 

[Pandora]

I can find nothing to disagree with in your post at all.

The difference between partial birth abortion, and dashing a newborn's head against the wall is simply that one is legal, while the other is not.

I think we also agree that abortion is not something to encourage or to celebrate, but is something we need to limit.

When, though, does abortion cross the line between something undesirable, and the murder of a child?

The Supreme Court says it is after the baby is born.
Many argue that it is the moment of conception.

I say we it is somewhere in between, and that no one really knows.

When does a fetus become conscious? When does the soul enter the body? When does human life really begin?

No one can answer those questions, so we're stuck with the argument between extremists.

Can you show me where the S. Court said that its after the baby is born. I only know of the roe v. wade case where they said abortion is ok up till the point the baby or fetus is viable, i know of no case where they ruled that its not a baby till its born.

California had the Scott Peterson case where he was charged with two murders because his unborn son Conner was killed when he killed his wife Lacy. Had that gone against the S. Court I am sure they would not have let that case go through. I am not sure what case you are talking about, please show me.

 

[top gun]

I don’t agree with abortion but I am not anti choice. I want the right to choose if I have to wear a seat belt, motor cycle helmet, I want lots of choices and I don’t want my frakin government to make them for me. You only talk about choice in the choice to kill your child, I talk about real choice to do what I want without my government telling me no. I think half the pro life people would be happy if they just limited abortions to the first 3 months, didn’t force tax payers to pay for them and the women having the abortions were educated SEREIOUSLY educated as to what they were doing. There will always be some who are trying to end all abortions just like there will always be some who insist on abortions up to the due date and even to refuse living children medical treatment because they are unwanted by their biological mothers.

HOW ABOUT THIS!!!!!!

I agree with everything you said here. In fact I was in the original helmet protests in Ohio way back in the 70's that ended up doing away with a helmet law in Ohio. And I also always thought vseatbelt laws were over reaching for adults. Kids should have to be buckeled in but adults should not be fined for their choice.

I agree wih everything else you said here too.

sorry but obama is not only for partial birth abortion he has said he does not agree with the born alive infant protection act, he refused to let the bill come up when he was in charge in the senate and when someone else was in charge he voted present and later he voted no to the bill then he lied and said he would vote yes if it were like the federal bill then it came out that it was exactly like the federal bill. He can’t even say when life begins because it’s above his pay grade. I always thought Barbara boxer was the lowest form of human waste when it came to this topic but obama beats her even, who would have thought that was possible.

I'm just saying there were very legitimate reasons WHY he went that way. You can look it up the doctors association was 100% with the same position. Obama also said he felt this might be a back door way to get around the Roe decision and he was against that as well.

But like I said... I'm in favor of partial birth abortion myself. If it's for the live of the mother. And that's the only real issue with partial birth abortion.

Granted there are people that would always push for NO RESTRICTIONS. I am not one however.

This is not true, its “health” of the mother not life of the mother and when they say health it can mean anything from ill be depressed if I don’t get rid of this kid to what ever the doctor can come up with.

It's worded loosely. But it's still set up to be a doctors call whether it's psychological or physical. And health might mean a lot of very serious physical conditions as well.

I appreciate that this troubles you. I think it's rare and I like some medical discretion on this matter. But I respect your take.

Using basic common sense Top Gun…. A woman is 8 ½ months pregnant, it turns out she for what ever reason will die if she carries this baby another two weeks so the doctor has to turn the baby so it comes out breach on purpose because if the head comes out it’s a baby… he induces labor and makes the woman deliver the baby feet first… so far the baby is alive and well.. feet are out, butt is out… the process is taking a long time, a c-section would be much faster or a normal delivery but to make sure you can stab the baby in the back of the neck before the head comes out (making a successful and legal abortion) you have the woman do the very dangerous process of a breach baby. So now everything but the head is out, the doctor now holds the head inside the woman till he can get the sharp object in the back of the babies head then he twists it till the little feet stop kicking and once he knows this baby is dead he lets the head come out.

Please Top Gun, using reasoning and logic how was that going to help or save this woman? You are kidding yourself if you think forcing a woman to have a baby breach then when the baby is finally almost out you hold the head in till you can kill the baby is doing ANYTHING for the life of this mother and I use that term mother very loose when it comes to this.

That's a whole lot of one scenario. Things often move very fast & still there are a lot of different factors here.

The born alive infant protection act is now law and no thanks to obama or the corrupt Illinois board. He was wrong they were wrong Barbara boxer is wrong and the act is a law now.

That's how the process goes. People have positions and things go through a process. I'm simply saying there were many legitamate points the created a problem with the legislation. I believe in fact removing doctor liability was addressed in the final offering.

Taxpayers don’t pay anything for abortion? Are you high ? making a joke or really you don’t know.

Obama has changed the rules, we do pay for abortions and not only that we pay for abortions in china now. Its kind of funny we borrow money from china to keep the government working then we pay for their abortions. Tax payers do pay for abortions and we will be paying to cut up aborted babies to do experiments on too, and we will pay to clone aborted babies so we can cut them up and learn god knows what. But Michael j. fox will be happy and all the others who feel they matter more than others.

Now you're starting to leave the reservation a little.

Planned Parenthood and other groups that receive federal dollars do not use THOSE funds for the abortion part of the many services that they offer. Be it here or in China or anywhere else. Planned Parenthood does provide abortions but it's a separate thing.

And anybody against stem cell research is both tyrannically over zealous and lacking compassion in my book.

That is bull, I did not know. I asked if I was going to kill a baby, the doctor said no. he said it’s a mass of tissue. It was 3 years later on a date to the local fair that I found out exactly what I had done. I had a mental break down right in front of the right to life booth. All information I had asked for but said didn’t exist. I was removing a tumor.

I can't speak to what was actually said to you... I wasn't there. But any girl old enough to be pregnant knows that an abortion kills the thing that makes her "pregnant". Seriously I know of not one girl over 12 years old that doesn't fully know that.

But I'm still sorry for your personal distress.

I don’t want government funded programs to educate people seeing abortions or educate people mothering their children, that can be done by private citizens.

Well that's how it would have to be funded. There's not even in a million years close to enough money private money out there for this. The Pro Life groups have been trying forever and they have basically almost nothing except for some medical bill help.

So if you're not for government funding... you are in reality saying it's not going to happen.

yeah we fought lots less this time didn’t we

Happily things did go uncharacteristically smooth...

 

[PLC1]

Can you show me where the S. Court said that its after the baby is born. I only know of the roe v. wade case where they said abortion is ok up till the point the baby or fetus is viable, i know of no case where they ruled that its not a baby till its born.

California had the Scott Peterson case where he was charged with two murders because his unborn son Conner was killed when he killed his wife Lacy. Had that gone against the S. Court I am sure they would not have let that case go through. I am not sure what case you are talking about, please show me.

What I'm referring to is the partial birth abortion. As long as the baby is killed before it sees the light of day, it's all legal. That's where I'm coming from when I say that abortion is legal up until birth.

Note, I didn't argue that it should be legal. As I said earlier, there is no real difference between that "procedure" and dashing a newborn's head against the wall.

In rare, very very rare, instances it might be a choice between the life of the baby, and the lives of both mother and infant, in which case it's better that one die than both.


The Scott Peterson case, like other similar cases, is quite interesting. Charging the killer of a pregnant woman with a double murder does seem to be a conflict with the assertion that a baby isn't a baby until it's born.

As I said earlier, no one really knows when a human life begins, so there are bound to be contradictions, and endless arguments on both sides of the question.

 

[GenSeneca]

When does a fetus become conscious?

Conscious in what manner? Its not till hours after our birth (once we've come out of the shock of being born) that we begin to notice we have digits and limbs attached to our body and its that type of cognizance that leads us to the realization we have some control over our motor functions.

When does the soul enter the body?

When does the soul leave the body? Can you really say someone is dead without this knowledge? We have only mapped about 75% of the genomes contained in DNA, perhaps the "soul" will be found coded in the areas we are yet to unlock.

When does human life really begin?

At conception. At no point is a fertilized human embryo something other than human. The DNA is distinctly human. If they were not species specific, we wouldn't have to worry about harvesting embryonic stem cells from human embryos, we could simply harvest them from any mammal we wanted.

No one can answer those questions, so we're stuck with the argument between extremists.

You can't answer the questions, so you stopped looking.
No, we're not stuck between the extremes. Watch the video above and tell me at what point (how many weeks) you think the "fetus" is human enough to no longer be denied his right to life.
There is simply no excuse for the barbaric practice of partial birth abortion:

Its absurd to argue that is not a human being... Just as it was absurd that people once argued blacks were not people, but chattle or property. For Progressives to claim themselves as the "enlightened" ones, they certainly have a pension for supporting brutal acts against their fellow man.

----------

Post Scriptum:
PLC1, I didn't see your answer to my question... Was slavery also a "gray" zone?

 

[Pandora]

What I'm referring to is the partial birth abortion. As long as the baby is killed before it sees the light of day, it's all legal. That's where I'm coming from when I say that abortion is legal up until birth.

I have never heard of or seen a ruling by the Supreme Court on partial birth abortion, can you tell me what case you are talking about?

In rare, very very rare, instances it might be a choice between the life of the baby, and the lives of both mother and infant, in which case it's better that one die than both.

in the most rare or very rare cases where a woman’s life is at risk of being lost if she doesn’t end her pregnancy in the 7th 8th or 9th month how could it ever benefit her to be forced to have her baby breech and if the point is to end the pregnancy ASAP then why hold the baby’s head inside the woman till you can stab it in the back of the neck? How can that ever help a woman survive?

I can see in some cases rare but probably not even that rare a woman has to induce labor early, the doctor positions the baby to come out normally and they do what they can to help the baby survive and if the woman is really ill perhaps a C section, that seems very reasonable to me, but to say to save a woman’s life they have to turn the baby inside her to make it come out breech then hold the baby in long enough to kill it can ever save any woman’s life just seems ridiculous to me. Do you really truly think there is ever a time when a woman’s life could be saved by making her have a breech baby and holding the baby in just long enough to kill it? Honestly?

 

[Pandora]

HOW ABOUT THIS!!!!!!

I agree with everything you said here. In fact I was in the original helmet protests in Ohio way back in the 70's that ended up doing away with a helmet law in Ohio. And I also always thought vseatbelt laws were over reaching for adults. Kids should have to be buckeled in but adults should not be fined for their choice. ​

I agree with you about the kids, we should protect kids and they can decide about if they want to wear seat belts when they grow up. You are rarer than you might think, I know many many people who believe in abortion rights but don’t think I have the right to not wear my seat belt or a helmet when riding a cycle.

I still don’t agree with you on obama’s position but you made some great points, its nice when we can disagree respectfully

Dang we will have to find something new to fight about now
After Israel bombs Iran’s nuclear plants we might be able to get a heated debate going again ​

 

[Pandora]

Conscious in what manner? Its not till hours after our birth (once we've come out of the shock of being born) that we begin to notice we have digits and limbs attached to our body and its that type of cognizance that leads us to the realization we have some control over our motor functions.


When does the soul leave the body? Can you really say someone is dead without this knowledge? We have only mapped about 75% of the genomes contained in DNA, perhaps the "soul" will be found coded in the areas we are yet to unlock.


At conception. At no point is a fertilized human embryo something other than human. The DNA is distinctly human. If they were not species specific, we wouldn't have to worry about harvesting embryonic stem cells from human embryos, we could simply harvest them from any mammal we wanted.

You can't answer the questions, so you stopped looking.
No, we're not stuck between the extremes. Watch the video above and tell me at what point (how many weeks) you think the "fetus" is human enough to no longer be denied his right to life.
There is simply no excuse for the barbaric practice of partial birth abortion:

Its absurd to argue that is not a human being... Just as it was absurd that people once argued blacks were not people, but chattle or property. For Progressives to claim themselves as the "enlightened" ones, they certainly have a pension for supporting brutal acts against their fellow man.

----------

Post Scriptum:
PLC1, I didn't see your answer to my question... Was slavery also a "gray" zone?

Thanks for posting the videos, many people still dont know what a partial birth abortion is. I have seen a real partial birth abortion done on a baby of 7 months, it was horrible.

I liked your example of how black people used to be considered non persons too just like they are doing to babys today and your line about progressives being enlightened was priceless