If abortion isn't murder...

[Jade Margery]

"Different means of dying can qualify as manslaughter. Either way a fetus is dead as the result of unintended forces. That would qualify all miscarriages as possible manslaughter."

So we're back to the old 'because the results are the same, we have to call it the same thing!' fallacy. Which you rejected when it came to miscarriages. And you're questioning our logic?

I could post images of fetal remains from the result of abortions, to prove my point, but I'm sure none of us want to see that.

Showing an ugly picture doesn't make your point. It's an appeal to emotion at best, hysterical hyperbole at worst. If you must resort to grossing people out to make your argument, it probably wasn't a very strong one to begin with.

 

[Skaloop]

Different means of killing can qualify as murder.

Correct. Abortion is not one of those means of killing that currently qualifies as murder, provided eat meets certain requirements. Punching a woman and causing a miscarriage is one of those means of killing that qualifies as murder.

Either way a fetus is dead as the result of willful violence. That would qualify both situations as murder. I could post images of fetal remains from the result of abortions, to prove my point, but I'm sure none of us want to see that.

Abortion is not violent. You can post your images all you like (I've seen them) but all that proves is that abortion can be visually disgusting. But the same goes for any surgery, so it doesn't really help your case.

"Similar to how a doctor cutting me is not assault, but a guy on the street doing it would be."

No, it's not similar to a doctor cutting you. From the point of view of the fetus, abortion is similar to the guy on the street cutting you to pieces and throwing your body parts in the trash, against your will.

Hence, his whole comment didn't make sense.

Your reading comprehension is at fault for this one. The severity/outcome is not what's similar. The similarity is in the fact that an act can be legal and illegal depending upon context. Do you agree or disagree with that?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

His whole logic didn't make sense. And your comments didn't remedy that.

"But beating up a woman and causing a miscarriage is not an abortion, so it could qualify as murder even though an abortion wouldn't."

It wouldn't qualify as a murder by the law.

 

[medieval_lady83]

"Different means of dying can qualify as manslaughter. Either way a fetus is dead as the result of unintended forces. That would qualify all miscarriages as possible manslaughter."

So we're back to the old 'because the results are the same, we have to call it the same thing!' fallacy. Which you rejected when it came to miscarriages. And you're questioning our logic?

No, your view is an extreme one, because it is clearly understood that miscarriages commonly happen through no fault or intention on the mother's part. So that fact would be taken into consideration in any legislation. I already acknowledged that you would not be able to catch every case of willfully induced miscarriage. No reasonable lawmakers would begin punishing mothers for involuntarily losing their child. But I understand you want to keep making this point. So be it. The question is is there reasonable evidence to suggest that you intentionally ended the life of a child. In an abortion the answer is a clear yes. As I've said before intentionality is key.

Showing an ugly picture doesn't make your point. It's an appeal to emotion at best, hysterical hyperbole at worst. If you must resort to grossing people out to make your argument, it probably wasn't a very strong one to begin with.

It's not necessarily about making an emotional appeal. But if you can see a pile of chopped up fetal remains and you feel no concern for the loss of life, that's very sad. But even emotions aside. Seeing chopped up body parts is usually an indication that a murder took place. That is the intention. Not to move anyone to tears, but to show the reality. This isn't about my right to do what I want with my body. This is about what is happening to someone else's body.

But quite frankly, truth, reason, and consistent logic are overwhelmingly on the side of pro-life. Having read the various comments over the last few pages has been disturbing and eye opening. To see the lengths people will go to argue for the right to abort. Suggesting that a fetus is property. People wringing their hands at the thought of having to not do drugs while pregnant. Showing animated photos of people punching themselves in the stomach, mocking the realities of abortion. I mean really, these pro-abortion comments have been absurd. And then people complain "you act as if we don't value human life". Gee, could it be your comments leading me to that conclusion????? No, you're right, I just pulled that idea out of the sky, with no support what so ever. So, I'm just done. Sorry if I don't respond to anyone else's comments, insults, etc. The conversation is getting circular anyway. Take care!

 

[Jade Margery]

The point you keep dancing circles around is simply this:

When similar acts or events occur under different circumstances, they are called and treated differently. Do you really disagree that this is the case?

The point about miscarriage was simply to illustrate this. As I can tell by your last paragraph, you have completely missed everyone else's actual arguments. Mine, for instance, was not bemoaning asking mothers not to do drugs, but pointing out that when you are advocating taking control of a part of someone's body for somebody else's sake, there is no logical limit so long as you can increase the safety and living quality of one at the cost of the other's less-valuable freedom. But if you would rather assume the worst of us than actually try to understand us, I will happily bid you fair well from this thread.

 

[Ariadne_GR]

The point you keep dancing circles around is simply this:

When similar acts or events occur under different circumstances, they are called and treated differently. Do you really disagree that this is the case?

The point about miscarriage was simply to illustrate this. As I can tell by your last paragraph, you have completely missed everyone else's actual arguments. Mine, for instance, was not bemoaning asking mothers not to do drugs, but pointing out that when you are advocating taking control of a part of someone's body for somebody else's sake, there is no logical limit so long as you can increase the safety and living quality of one at the cost of the other's less-valuable freedom. But if you would rather assume the worst of us than actually try to understand us, I will happily bid you fair well from this thread.

This!

 

[Talen Ortz]

Yahoo website today has run news item of a woman jailed eight years for late term abortion.

Recently, DNA test on the blood of an expecting woman, can detect the DNA of the unborn baby... which is different from mother's.

Go figure.

 

[Skaloop]

Yahoo website today has run news item of a woman jailed eight years for late term abortion.

It wasn't a legal abortion, obviously, due to the late-term part. But even if she had done what she did much earlier (use non-prescribed drugs to induce a miscarriage) there was still the potential that she would face charges because that's not a legal abortion either; it needs to be under the direction of a doctor.

The story, for those who want to read it for themselves:

Woman Jailed Over Full-Term Home Abortion - Yahoo! News UK

Recently, DNA test on the blood of an expecting woman, can detect the DNA of the unborn baby... which is different from mother's.

Of course it's different. So?

Go figure.

Figure what?

 

[Boondock_Saint]

...if someone punched a pregnant woman in the stomach and caused her to have a miscarriage, should they only get the basic assault charge that one would get if she wasn't pregnant at all?

As a firm pro-lifer, I would say your question was guided to enrage the pro-choice. What ever I think on the matter doesn't matter. A baby can only be aborted during a medical procedure. It is otherwise murder. One does not have the right of choice outside of a hospital. One can only choose to make an appointment to remove a fetus. Anything outside that is murder.
It is interesting. When it happens on accident, it is murder. But when you make an appointment to do the same thing, it is suddenly just fine.

But then again, I don't know what I would do when asked to choose between my wife and a child who can feel no pain. I truly don't know what I would do.

 

[Skaloop]

As a firm pro-lifer, I would say your question was guided to enrage the pro-choice. What ever I think on the matter doesn't matter. A baby can only be aborted during a medical procedure. It is otherwise murder. One does not have the right of choice outside of a hospital. One can only choose to make an appointment to remove a fetus. Anything outside that is murder.

It is interesting. When it happens on accident, it is murder.

If it was by accident, it would more likely be manslaughter than murder. It would be murder if on purpose (and without consent and/or not under physician care or instruction).

But when you make an appointment to do the same thing, it is suddenly just fine.

Just like any surgery performed by a doctor. Having an appointment to get an appendix removed is A-OK. Assaulting someone and cutting open their abdomen, accidentally removing their appendix, is not.

 

[Paradoxum]

It's not necessarily about making an emotional appeal. But if you can see a pile of chopped up fetal remains and you feel no concern for the loss of life, that's very sad. But even emotions aside. Seeing chopped up body parts is usually an indication that a murder took place. That is the intention. Not to move anyone to tears, but to show the reality. This isn't about my right to do what I want with my body. This is about what is happening to someone else's body.

I hope you don't mind if I reply to this.

I think what you describe here is an emotional appeal. People know that abortion means death, but your intention seems to be to appeal to the part of the brain programmed not to like seeing dead things, especially dead humanoids.

But quite frankly, truth, reason, and consistent logic are overwhelmingly on the side of pro-life.

I'd like to hear this truth and reason then. Why is abortion wrong and should it be illegal?

Having read the various comments over the last few pages has been disturbing and eye opening. To see the lengths people will go to argue for the right to abort. Suggesting that a fetus is property. People wringing their hands at the thought of having to not do drugs while pregnant. Showing animated photos of people punching themselves in the stomach, mocking the realities of abortion. I mean really, these pro-abortion comments have been absurd.

I don't think saying the fetus is a type of property is absurd. I can explain why I don't think it is, but can you explain why you think it is first?

And then people complain "you act as if we don't value human life". Gee, could it be your comments leading me to that conclusion????? No, you're right, I just pulled that idea out of the sky, with no support what so ever.

I don't value human life just because it is human. That would be sort of racist. Well specist actually. I value all living things to some degree, but I value persons more.

So, I'm just done. Sorry if I don't respond to anyone else's comments, insults, etc. The conversation is getting circular anyway. Take care!

Well hopefully you will reply.

 

[medieval_lady83]

I hope you don't mind if I reply to this.

I think what you describe here is an emotional appeal. People know that abortion means death, but your intention seems to be to appeal to the part of the brain programmed not to like seeing dead things, especially dead humanoids.



I'd like to hear this truth and reason then. Why is abortion wrong and should it be illegal?



I don't think saying the fetus is a type of property is absurd. I can explain why I don't think it is, but can you explain why you think it is first?



I don't value human life just because it is human. That would be sort of racist. Well specist actually. I value all living things to some degree, but I value persons more.



Well hopefully you will reply.

I don't mind if you reply. I personally decided to back away from the conversation because it was getting circular. For example, I've already explained pretty clearly why abortion is wrong and should be illegal. I'd be interested to see others weigh in on this though.