The new GOP Bill. "Protect Life Act"

[Rocky1960]

We are arguing not for woman's rights but babies rights, both male and female.

Yes, and speaking of women's rights, how many that are killed by abortion are female? How ironic!

 

[lawtonfogle]

I lol at the fact that Lux et lux is the only woman posting in this thread, and really, the only one of us who has any right to an opinion on this, since she is the only one of us with the possibility of being pregnant and being faced with this choice.

But I suppose being an armchair health expert is fun.

Law doesn't work like that. Most of the times we make something illegal, especially in relation with what we can do with our bodies, we are making this choice for other people. Banning abortion isn't any different than banning certain couples from having sex in this regard.

 

[brindisi]

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

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

 

[purpledolphin8402]

If a five year old child was knocked senelss and we had no evidence that he she was self aware at that moment (but there is every reason to believe he or she would pull out of it a later date) would it be ok to kill the five year old? Even if the current speculation regarding the age at which a baby in the womb becomes self consious is correct I still don't see how that would authorize a person to kill the infant.

How are we able to tell they are not self aware? A fetus' brain isn't even fully formed. Is this kid in a coma? Is this kid in a vegetative state machines keeping him/her alive? "Knocked senseless" isn't the same as not having a fully developed brain and by that I'm mean not fully developed physically not cognitively.

 

[Rocky1960]

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

 

[brindisi]

How are we able to tell they are not self aware? A fetus' brain isn't even fully formed. Is this kid in a coma? Is this kid in a vegetative state machines keeping him/her alive? "Knocked senseless" isn't the same as not having a fully developed brain and by that I'm mean not fully developed physically not cognitively.

A fetus is no less a human being than you or I just because of his size and development. A fetus is exactly the human being is intended to be at that stage of development.

 

[Grizzly]

A fetus is no less a human being than you or I just because of his size and development. A fetus is exactly the human being is intended to be at that stage of development.

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?

 

[jamesrwright3]

If a five year old child was knocked senelss and we had no evidence that he she was self aware at that moment (but there is every reason to believe he or she would pull out of it a later date) would it be ok to kill the five year old? Even if the current speculation regarding the age at which a baby in the womb becomes self consious is correct I still don't see how that would authorize a person to kill the infant.

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

 

[brindisi]

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?

I can't answer that hypothetical, because it depends so much on the circumstances other than what you've just mentioned. This isn't to make light of your question though, as this is very nearly the kind of Sophie's choice presnted when circumstances really do come down to saving either the mother or the fetus. It should never be an easy choice.

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.

A fetus may not yet be a fully functioning human, but it's not nothing. So I hope in your hypothetical you're not implying that there is no moral dilemma, because either way, even if the five year old is saved, precious life will be lost.

 

[Rocky1960]

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?

I try to save them all. What a ridiculous question.


I say it yet again: You guys are using the same logic that was used to legitimize slavery. Your POVs are not science, they are is legalisms.

Scientifically, the fetus is human. It has human DNA, human blood: It is not a cat, or a dog or a monkey, it is huiman. That is SCIENCE.

You guys are talking legalisms, and you are finding a way to make a little human being of a certain age less of a person than you are. You are making the baby 3/5 of a person the same way they did to slaves. You consider them disposable, like slaves.

 

[Ton80]

You guys are talking legalisms, and you are finding a way to make a little human being of a certain age less of a person than you are. You are making the baby 3/5 of a person the same way they did to slaves. You consider them disposable, like slaves.

The government does not consider a fetus 3/5 of a person. A fetus is 0% person as far as the government is concerned. Pregnant women are not counted as two or more during a census.

 

[kiwimac]

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

 

[lux et lex]

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

QFT

 

[Ryal Kane]

Slightly OP but I'm watching a clip from the latest Rachel Maddow show about extremist pro-life groups actively bragging about their murders of abortion doctors. Very sad.

 

[brindisi]

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

The essence of human life, 'that of God within us,' is present from the instant of conception. There is nothing potential about it.

Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981. -- Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

"I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.... I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life...."

"I am no more prepared to say that these early stages represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty...is not a human being. This is human life at every stage."

 

[Rocky1960]

A foetus is a potential human-being, nothing more, nothing less

That is not science, that is "opinion" and "legalism". The DNA says that the baby in the womb is human.

please stop the ad hominem attacks otherwise you will be reported.

There is no "ad hominem attack" is speaking the truth. The baby in the womb is scientifically a human being. To destroy a human being is something that cannot be condoned by a civilized society.

Please feel free to report that.

 

[kiwimac]

According to statistics fully 30% of pregnancies miscarry [1], this is not considered a loss of human life but rather of potential life. Indeed 20% of these miscarriages occur BEFORE the women even knows she is pregnant. [2]

There is a difference between what the DNA tells us about a foetus and whether or not a foetus is the SAME in biology of Law as a a person ex utero like it or not they are not the same and have never been considered such. The Bible makes absolutely no mention condemning abortion, indeed it makes it quite clear that a child under 1 month is not considered worth counting. [3]

[1]: Petrozza and Berin in Recurrent Early Pregnancy Loss

[2]: ibid

[3]: Leviticus 27: Redeeming Persons and Property Dedicated to God

1 Now the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,
2 "Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: 'When a man consecrates by a vow certain persons to the LORD, according to your valuation,
3 if your valuation is of a male from twenty years old up to sixty years old, then your valuation shall be fifty shekels of silver, according to the shekel of the sanctuary.
4 If it is a female, then your valuation shall be thirty shekels;
5 and if from five years old up to twenty years old, then your valuation for a male shall be twenty shekels, and for a female ten shekels;
6 and if from a month old up to five years old, then your valuation for a male shall be five shekels of silver, and for a female your valuation shall be three shekels of silver;
7 and if from sixty years old and above, if it is a male, then your valuation shall be fifteen shekels, and for a female ten shekels.

 

[Rocky1960]

A foetus is a potential human-being, nothing more, nothing less

That is not science, that is "opinion" and "legalism". The DNA says that the baby in the womb is human.

please stop the ad hominem attacks otherwise you will be reported.

There is no "ad hominem attack" is speaking the truth. The baby in the womb is scientifically a human being. To destroy a human being is something that cannot be condoned by a civilized society.

Please feel free to report that.

According to statistics fully 30% of pregnancies miscarry [1], this is not considered a loss of human life but rather of potential life.

Considered by whom? The the person who wrote what you quoted? Is he God?
The DNA says that the baby in the womb is human.
Why you choose to ignore this fact I have no idea.
Any being with human DNA and a heartbeat is a human being.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That is not science, that is "opinion" and "legalism". The DNA says that the baby in the womb is human.



There is no "ad hominem attack" is speaking the truth. The baby in the womb is scientifically a human being. To destroy a human being is something that cannot be condoned by a civilized society.

Please feel free to report that.

I fail to see the significance to your point. Your skin has human DNA too. A single skin cell of yours could be used to clone you and make another human being. Is every skin cell therefore sacred? Are you therefore committing murder whenever you wash and bathe or do any of the innumerable quantity of activities that results in the 'death' of that cell?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

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

Sweeping generalisation. You loose. Thanks for playing.