The new GOP Bill. "Protect Life Act"

[Archaeopteryx]

The one I asked. Read the thread. Not repeating myself.

Unless you directed the question to me, I do not feel obligated to search for it - at my inconvenience - to answer it, just because you demand that I do. I note, however, that you've avoided my questions. Too difficult to answer I suspect?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

In other words, to save the life of the mother, correct?

Most of the parents whom I know would glady trade their own life to save the life of their child. I have never known any who would not, and I have known parents who have had to look upon the graves of their own children. What mother would rather sacrafice her child rather than herself? This is what I find appaling.

What male will ever stand in an equivalent position to make such judgment - a far more interesting question.

 

[Rocky1960]

Maybe we should be able to abort a babies until they can recognize themselves in a mirror. That would make the left happy.

Believe it or not, there are those on the far far left who think it is okay to abort a baby even after it has come all the way out.

 

[kiwimac]

And then there are those on the Right who see nothing wrong with that child they worked so hard to protect in utero starving to death, dying of illnesses, being physically abused because the right has cut subsidies or benefits or medical insurance.

 

[lawtonfogle]

A foetus is a potential human-being, nothing more, nothing less and please stop the ad hominem attacks otherwise you will be reported.

Under some definitions. When my cat is pregnant, she has kittens, not potential kittens. To argue for abortion based on if the fetus is alive or not moves abortion to be fully decided on which ever group can get the vote. That is why I treat abortion as an issue related to bodily integrity.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Ok. Time to take the fertility clinic quiz.

Imagine a fertility clinic has caught fire. You run in to save as many people as you can, but the fire is getting big. You've got time to save either one 5 year old child or a set of 20 test-tubes - each containing zygotes ready for implantation. What do you do? Do you save one child or 20?

Easy. Almost everyone will save the 5 year old child as they feel a much stronger emotional attachment. Even if a person fully logically believes the 20 are equal to the one, during such a situation they will not be displaying logical behavior.

 

[lawtonfogle]

You already have, and, fortunately you weren't killed for it.

Sorry, never been in a woman's body who didn't want me there. My mother was trying for a child for some time when she had me, having had a few miscarriages. Being in a woman's body when she wants you there isn't anything special at all, being allowed to enter even if she doesn't want you to, that is special.

 

[brindisi]

Sorry, never been in a woman's body who didn't want me there. My mother was trying for a child for some time when she had me, having had a few miscarriages. Being in a woman's body when she wants you there isn't anything special at all, being allowed to enter even if she doesn't want you to, that is special.

Your comment seemed to indicate under other circumstances as well as when unwanted. I think I would have understood your comment the way you meant it if you had left off the word 'even.'

Also a fetus does not have a right to enter a woman's body, the fetus has no choice at all about it.

Hey, can I have the right to enter a woman's body even if she doesn't want me there too?

I'm gald your mom was finally able to have a normal prgnancy and have the child she so much wanted. I think all of us probably know someone we love who's had to endure the tragedy of repeated miscarriages, my sister-in-law in my case.

 

[SOAD]

The religious right will not be satisfied until a pregnant woman is stripped of the right to treat her body however she wants. A pregnant woman will be arrested if she smokes or drinks because it harms a fetus. A pregnant woman will be arrested if she eats the wrong foods. The religious right does not believe in freedom of individual.

 

[Grizzly]

Believe it or not, there are those on the far far left who think it is okay to abort a baby even after it has come all the way out.

What world do you actually live in?? Apparently in this country you see liberals killing infants and purposefully destroying families to further their goal of complete state dependency. If Bill O'Reilly were here he would cut your mike. Your statements have no grounding in reality.

 

[lawtonfogle]

The religious right will not be satisfied until a pregnant woman is stripped of the right to treat her body however she wants. A pregnant woman will be arrested if she smokes or drinks because it harms a fetus. A pregnant woman will be arrested if she eats the wrong foods. The religious right does not believe in freedom of women.

History of women and sexual freedom... very interesting subject.

 

[jamesrwright3]

Sweeping generalisation. You loose. Thanks for playing.

I loose? I am not loose.

 

[jayem]

My concern about abortion is not those circumstance where very morally difficult, heart rending, and life altering choices have to be made. That's when everyone but the woman and her loved ones and her doctor needs to back away and not judge. There are such times when a choice between human lives can't be avoided. It's the use of abortion as birthcontrol or a matter of convenience for maintaining lifestyle that I object to.

I don't disagree. But I'm a practical person. I'm concerned about the practical effects of our laws. The biggest problem I have with pro-lifers is that their only legal approach to abortion seems to be criminalization. Criminal law is such a blunt instrument. If abortion is criminalized, how do you deal with the hard cases? What hoops will a sick woman have to go through in order to get a necessary medical procedure? Will there have to be hearing before a judge? And are we going to have over-zealous prosecutors second guessing physicians as to whether an abortion was really necessary? Conservatives talk about government intrusion into our health care and our personal lives. Don't you see how this could be an egregious example of such? Aren't there ways to reduce abortions without using the police power of the state?

 

[DaisyDay]

In other words, to save the life of the mother, correct?

Most of the parents whom I know would glady trade their own life to save the life of their child. I have never known any who would not, and I have known parents who have had to look upon the graves of their own children. What mother would rather sacrafice her child rather than herself? This is what I find appaling.

Supposing most of them do, does that mean that the ones that don't should be compelled to, say, donate their heart if the child needs it to live? Or even sacrifice a expendable kidney, a bit of bone marrow or liver - should the parent be required under law to make that sacrifice if that might save the life of their child? If not, why not?

 

[Christos Anesti]

SOAD,

If you operate under the assumption that the child in the womb is not a person then what you are saying might be a logical complaint. If on the other hand the child in the womb is a person then your complaint isn't logical at all. It would be on par with me saying "it's my body if I want to ball my hand up into a fist and swing it forward really hard when another person is standing in front of me then thats my right... don't tell me what I can't do with MY body".

 

[Sketcher]

It's amazing what lies the pro-abortionists will tell to keep their precious murder-for-convenience legal and state-funded.

 

[SOAD]

SOAD,

If you operate under the assumption that the child in the womb is not a person then what you are saying might be a logical complaint. If on the other hand the child in the womb is a person then your complaint isn't logical at all. It would be on par with me saying "it's my body if I want to ball my hand up into a fist and swing it forward really hard when another person is standing in front of me then thats my right... don't tell me what I can't do with MY body".

I made no assumption on whether the fetus is a person or not. I commented on what I believe is the endgame for the religious right.

 

[Christos Anesti]

To an extent I can empathize with the argument that a person should be able to do what they want with, or make use of, their body in the manner they see fit. Even in areas like drug use or prostitution I think a legitimate argument on those lines could be made. When the use of the body involves direct physical harm or even the death of another person we need to have limits though. That argument [do what I want with my body] doesn't hold much weight when it comes to abortion. It's on par with an argument like this: "If I want to ball my hand up into a fist and swing it forward really hard over and over when another person is standing in front of me then that is my right.... don't tell me what I can or can not do with MY fist, MY body." It involves more than one person. One the persons ends up dead.

 

[SOAD]

To an extent I can empathize with the argument that a person should be able to do what they want with, or make use of, their body in the manner they see fit. Even in areas like drug use or prostitution I think a legitimate argument on those lines could be made. When the use of the body involves direct physical harm or even the death of another person we need to have limits though. That argument doesn't hold much weight when it comes to abortion. It's on par with an argument like this: "If I want to ball my hand up into a fist and swing it forward really hard over and over when another person is standing in front of me then that is my right.... don't tell me what I can or can not do with MY fist, MY body."

I read your analogy the first time, and it is still irrelevant to my comment.

I get it, you are part of the religious right, and you would like to see pregnant women held accountable for things that may harm their growing womb.

 

[Christos Anesti]

oops, I didn't notice that the earlier post posted. I got disconnected from the internet. Sorry if the second one seems to repeat the same thing.