What's even more bizarre is the fact that, if a woman just gave birth to a baby and then, the next day, she killed him or her, she would be arrested and charged with murder. Yet, if she did the same thing only months earlier, she would not be arrested and charged with murder!
Now, if I were to stab a pregnant woman in the stomach and kill her and the unborn child, I'd be arrested and charged with double homicide. Yet, this same woman can kill that unborn child and she isn't arrested or charged with homicide!
In the Scott Peterson case, he was found guilty of murdering not only his wife Lacy, but their unborn child Conner. However, in the United States, if Lacy was the one who murdered her own unborn baby, a.k.a. abortion, she would not have been arrested and charged with murder. Why is that?
And please don't use the utterly worthless "It's her choice because it's her body" defense because you can't have it both ways!
2007-01-09 13:05:22 · 19 answers · asked by Big D 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
If it's truly her body and her choice, why is it that law enforcement will arrest a woman for using drugs like heroin and crack cocaine? She isn't hurting or killing anyone else by using those drugs. After all, according to pro-choice (a.k.a., pro-murder) activists, it's her body and her choice, right?
That female drug addict is arrested for doing something that doesn't hurt or kill anyone but herself and for doing something to her body, which is her choice! What she did is considered illegal, yet it is legal when that same woman has an abortion, which is a nice way of saying "commits murder against her own child."
Why the double standard and hypocrisy?
2007-01-09 13:06:47 · update #1
I agree. Murder is murder. But many politicians are afraid to do what is right. Why? They may lose votes, God forbid. That is the problem with politics sometimes. Many politicians dont even care what is right, they care what is beneficial.
2007-01-09 13:09:58 · answer #1 · answered by Daniel 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Let me see if I can shed some light on how our courts have decided this. A fetus is NOT considered viable until a certain timeframe. Somewhere in the 7- 8 month range, Not exactly sure where they have decided. Anyhow, Abortion is only legal up to this point. Anything after this point, has to have a medical necessity, i.e. the mother’s health is in danger. This is where People v. Peterson came into play. In this case, the fetus was considered viable and in legal terms a baby. This is how Scott Peterson could be charged with the murder of the unborn baby.
As far as abortion is considered regardless of how a person feels about this issue. Abortion should not be a governments concern. If you start allowing the government to enter into our personal, medical situations, where does it end? When a person turns a certain age, they can not drive anymore, live by themselves? Laugh, but it could go that far. People have legal abortions for many reasons. Unplanned pregnancy is a major one. If society got involved and demanded a law against all abortions, we should be concerned about a person who has a baby that does not have the means to support it. Do we need to force a person who for whatever reason made the mistake of getting pregnant to have a baby that cannot be taken care of? Now this has a direct effect on others because either the child becomes a burden on the state, or the people when he decides to commit crimes and blame it on his childhood. Where is the government’s role? This country was founded on freedom of religion. Religion plays a large role in this countries laws and morals as does freedom of speech. I truly believe that if a female who does not believe in abortion was to become a rape victim and became pregnant, they would look to abortion as the alternative.
This opinion was stated not to begin a religious or political battle; however a person needs to look at the larger picture of society and not just the picture of an abortion.
2007-01-09 13:53:27 · answer #2 · answered by bwetzel76 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The reason that there is so much double standard and hypocrisy is that if every woman that had a baby would have to to through with it so many things will go wrong. If the average high schooler that got pregnant went through with the birth, how would she pay for that? That puts her in a position that she might have to drop out of school and take up a job to support the baby. That makes less and less students get a decent high school education. Most guys are not willing to help the girl in most cases. Also babies that the mom and dad are not able to support could just be thrown away. Or put into Orphanages. After that more and more orphanages get over crowded and then they would start to grow bankrupt. After a while the towns would be overcrowded with people trying to find some to take there baby. I do agree with you and believe it is murder, but some things have to be done to keep other bigger problems from escalating.
2007-01-09 13:25:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Exactly it makes no sense at all. There needs to stop being double standards on everything and it's a shame that the USA is this way. Blame the feminists for this because it's their fault abortion became legal. If a man can kill a woman and be charged with murder than the woman who knowingly gets pregnant and commits murder(abort) her child she should be charged with murder. Also if she was raped and terminates her pregnancy should also be charged with murder as well as teen girls who get abortions and the parents should be charged as contributing to the crime. And people need to get over themselves and start treating the unborn baby like a human and not a parasite. If it has a heartbeat,brainwaves, moves, it's a living human being. Someone needs to protect the unborn child.
2007-01-09 13:15:50 · answer #4 · answered by robedzombiesoul 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Wow now there's some skewed thinking.
Well one, abortion occurs before the fetus has reached the point of viability, meaning it cannot survive outside of the womb - if it cannot live, then it cannot be "murdered" as you so put it.
Secondly, all the bleeding heart Bible thumpers who denounce a womans right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy should open your homes and your wallets to pay for their care because ya know what I sure as hell don't want to do it.
I personally do not believe in abortion, but I also do not believe in bringing a child into this world that you have no intention of caring for. Don't give me the "adoption" bull **** either -- there are literally thousands of children in this country who were born to parents who didn't give a rats left nut about them in the foster care system who need adopting but Americans are flocking to other countries to go pick up babies -- don't clean up your neighbors mess before you clean up your own for pete sake.
Ever seen a child with failure to thrive from lack of attention? A preemie infant going through meth withdrawl? Cigarrette burns on a baby because they cried too long?
Some people should not breed - and if to prevent them for making a childs life hell on earth they choose to terminate the pregnancy then so be it. Better a child who never knew life than one who lived in hell.
2007-01-09 14:20:28 · answer #5 · answered by Susie D 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, in humans. Since the good Lord put the animals here for our use I would disagree with your chicken theory. The chicken egg is deposited outside of the chicken. In humans of course the egg remains inside the mother. When the child is wanted, then any termination by various means would be murder. On the other hand if the unborn child is not wanted it can be aborted and is acceptable by law. Ask PETA about protecting the chicken species, that is their specialty.
2016-05-23 01:27:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the law says that abortion is legal, then the law doesn't recognize a fetus as a living human as you do. Once you get the lawmakers to recognize a fetus as a living human, then abortion will be considered murder. I understand you see a fetus as a living human, but your question asks why is it okay for a woman to have an abortion, and that is because the lawmakers disagree with you.
2007-01-09 13:14:40 · answer #7 · answered by The Maestro 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Morally The Baby is alive inside her, but has no taken the first breath of life, so technically the baby is not alive until he is giving birth too, that is why when women practice an abortion the baby is killed inside of her!
I agree is wrong and murder is murder in any degree, but our sistem in too rotten to worry about a baby`s life!
2007-01-09 13:16:59 · answer #8 · answered by CuyabroNJ 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That is just how screwed up our legal system. It has been infultrated by liberals and torn to shreads. Abortion should be out lawed and the only hope for it is execptions which i can see. But over all inless u are going to die u should have the kid u could not wait to have and put it up for adoption. There are plenty of people that would love to adopt the child.
2007-01-09 13:12:34 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It is strange isn't it? Is it still illegal to commit suicide? I guess you could use the same argument, it's my body. Then again, what about assisted suicide? If someone wants to die, but needs help. That's illegal. It does seem as though we have a lot of double standards. Hopefully, we will one day put everything in order.
2007-01-09 13:23:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
In defense of Its her choice. Guess what IT IS. A woman's body does NOT in any way belong to a man. Nor is any woman answerable to A MAN. Once again I may not be in favor of abortion as birth control however Men have No say in what Women should or can do with their bodies. ( In defense of Women)
2007-01-09 14:02:11 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋