I was reading about the progression and stages genocide, and in America, The stages of genocide have long since passed with Roe vs Wade. Pre-born children are being killed at an alarming rate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide#Stages_of_genocide_and_efforts_to_prevent_it
2006-12-18 06:20:49 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Wow, so true!
1. They are not "babies", they are "fetuses"
2. maybe not this one...
3. They are not even human until they are born.
4. Abortion clinics?
5. All the pro-choice propaganda...
6. Babies are seperated into the different trimesters, where it is OK to kill some but not others.
7. I mean, this one is pretty straightforward.
8. This one, too
Wow, I never thought of it this way.
2006-12-18 06:21:57 · answer #1 · answered by i hate hippies but love my Jesus 4 · 2⤊ 4⤋
You asked for an explanation, then here goes.
1. Classification - Genocide pertains to people
The classification of fetus into a person is still wrapped in controversy. According to law, a fetus is not yet a person, even though the potential exist.
2.Symbolization - hate is involved in Genocide - hate is not the same as unwanted
3. dehumanization - does not apply.. There is no question on wither or not it has human origins. Obviously it is human
4.Organization into specialized units or armies.... Does not apply. The concept of freedom of choice means that a potential mother can decide. I have yet to see a baby carried to full term in multiple wombs.
5. Polarization - unavoidable. If you can't find middle ground between pro choice and pro life, then the world is polarized when looking at it through a polarized thought process.
6. Extermination - "It is "extermination" to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human." If abortion was extermination, then it would apply to all children everywhere regardless wither or not the mother wanted the child. That is not the case.
7. Denial - Regardless wither or not you are pro life, or pro choice, There is always plenty of denial to go around for everyone.
2 out of 7 does not qualify as Genocide
Your question was wither or not abortion was genocide.... not the moral aspect of abortion.
2006-12-18 06:45:23 · answer #2 · answered by Mr Cellophane 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
The definition of genocide is "Deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group".
This imples the victims are LIVING. A foetus is not a living person, it is a bunch of cells that one day, maybe, might become a person (considering that over 50% of pregnancies end before a woman is even aware she's pregnant, the odds are stacked against).
If you want to get angry about genocide, get angry about the one in Sudan. Over 400 000 people have been murdered by the Sudanese government and their allied militias because they are black rather than arab, yet all the US and UK governments are doing is wringing their hands and tutting.
2006-12-18 06:40:55 · answer #3 · answered by Cardinal Fang 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
It is a fetus and everyone has the choice to have the baby or terminate the pregnancy. I think it is wrong that we are living in the year 2006 and a woman has to put up with serious side effects from birth control. We should have a method where you can enjoy sex, has a 100% success rate, has no negative side effect and is affordable. In order for it to be murder you have to kill a being who is able to think, feel, and has a will to live. Brain dead people are taken off life-support all the time, and that is not considered murder. Women don't wake up and think "I am going to get an abortion today." It is a difficult decision and she has the right to have access to a safe abortion.
2006-12-18 06:32:30 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Before Roe vs Wade fine young women were dying at an alarming rate for botched abortions and infections. Is a bundle of cells worth more to you than a fine grown woman? I know Catholics think so.
2006-12-18 06:34:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
I'm a firm believer that justice doesn't proceed from the courts. I also don't think it drags it's feet. Has anybody noticed we're at war? And if one fizzles out, another one is sure to start up? Has anybody noticed AIDS appeared only in this time frame in history? Is anyone aware of the skyrocketing murder rates in any major urban center? How about the absolute corruption of any manifestation of anything anywhere like a government? This is only to name ... a few.
2006-12-18 06:25:09 · answer #6 · answered by vanamont7 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Do you really want to open up the old abortion/pro-life argument again? I wonder how you would feel if you were, say, 14 and had been impregnated by your retarded brother, or a single adult woman who was pregnant by a rapist? This is not a black or white argument, it's full of gray areas. I do not endorse abortion just because someone got lazy with birth control; each case should be examined for what it is.
2006-12-18 06:24:21 · answer #7 · answered by harlowtoo 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Interesting... yes progressive judges decided this in the 1970's...
2006-12-18 06:37:59 · answer #8 · answered by Scott 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It is even worse if you consider the plight of pre-conceived children who meet their end before it starts as a result of birth control pills.
2006-12-18 06:23:28 · answer #9 · answered by Kokopelli 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Many people do not realize that 4,200 babies are killed in one day in the US, which is alarming. Apathy. I wish people would understand it is not a choice, it is a child.
2006-12-18 06:23:20 · answer #10 · answered by Local Celebrity 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋