Allow the fetus to live past 26 weeks, perhaps much longer, say 8 years. Then allow that eight year old fetus to decide for themselves if they want their life terminated without committing a crime or due process under the legal system. Maybe they will just voluntarily rid themselves of life and be less burden on all of us more important folk.
2006-10-12 12:24:42 · 12 answers · asked by BABY 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Haha, that question is hilarious!
2006-10-12 12:27:53 · answer #1 · answered by Murfdigidy 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
By law you cannot kill a child outside of the mothers womb at any age, it would be considered murder.
By law a woman has a right to choose what she does with her body and that includes whats inside it, yes a fetus is included in that law.
your question is stupid as it isn;t a question, get the law changed and lets go back to women sticking coat hangers in their uterus's to terminate their own pregnancies, now we most likely lose 2 lives. But maybe you place no value on the life of the women doing that, so shes canceled out. Seems silly and ridiculous to me.
Do you think that if the law is overturned that magically abortion will never be performed again? I guess, by reading your question again, you really are that naive.
2006-10-12 16:48:12 · answer #2 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I trust you. i'm my mom's son, my spouse's husband and my daughter's father, yet whether i've got faith i'm useful to furnish suggestion approximately abortion, it may consistently be the female's selection. whilst my spouse stumbled on she became pregnant with our first toddler, extra desirable than one member of her (conservative, Midwestern) kin pronounced abortion by way of fact i became an entire-time student on the time and it may be financially confusing. My spouse and that i discussed it and desperate that there became not even a question - little doubt in our minds - that that became not a solid sufficient rationalization for an abortion. Our daughter would be 25 years old in 2 weeks. If my spouse had felt in yet differently, and theory she could desire to abort the being pregnant, i could have tried to cajole her to not, yet could have deferred to her selection in the top. Abortion isn't a call to be made gently, yet with careful theory approximately all recommendations and all outcomes. that's not a sort of beginning administration, neither is it a monetary making plans gadget. in the top, although, the only individual who has the two the properly suited and the duty to make that selection is the female herself. i don't think that abortion could desire to be thoroughly unregulated or obtainable on a whim. There are valid matters of public wellness and public coverage at stake. Neither of those instruments of matters, although, is sufficient to justify an entire ban or excessively restrictive prohibitions of abortion. whether clever people could have adjustments of opinion approximately such extreme matters, extremely clever people can arrive at a decision of those matters devoid of resorting to call-calling and extremism (which includes violence).
2016-10-16 03:20:40 · answer #3 · answered by binnu 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lisen here, there will always be pro-choice and pro-life, why should we make fun of people for what they beleive. It's their right to feel the way they do and who's to say who is wrong. Life starts at conception but it can not survive on it's own either. I don't condem either side.
2006-10-12 12:32:41 · answer #4 · answered by lorrina b 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
NO... I think a better choice is to deliver the fetus, and see if it is actually a seperate human life...if it is unable to live without signifigant tecnological help God doesn't want it to live
2006-10-12 12:29:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No no, let's ask the question much earlier. Let's ask when there's an almost indistinguishable clump of cells with no sentience, sapience, feelings, recognizable human features or signs of life besides DNA.
2006-10-12 12:31:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
50/50
2006-10-12 12:30:37 · answer #7 · answered by george p 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Aabortion sucks, too bad that anytime I want to show my support of anti-abortion laws I get flooded with religious crap.
2006-10-12 12:29:04 · answer #8 · answered by jedi1josh 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There is no ethical definition for the unethical choices of pro-choice.
2006-10-12 12:28:47 · answer #9 · answered by Robert L 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
last i read euthanasia was illegal and termination was legal....and your question proves how pathetically weak the "pro dictator" (or pro life as you like to call it) argument is....
2006-10-12 12:29:59 · answer #10 · answered by Aussieblonde -bundy'd 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Oh my god. How does anyone keep up with your lightning fast wit? *Yawn...*
Is this really a question?
2006-10-12 12:30:01 · answer #11 · answered by John S 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋