Whats the difference btwn having an abortion for medical reasons &killing innocent iraqi children/adults?

Question

When people go to war it is a GIVEN that many innocent children/adults will die, you cant call them accidents.
If killing is killing, what is the difference?

tuff...are you telling me that NO innocent iraq children/adults died inadverently from US bombs and guns?

Answer 1

One is choosing to not bring a life into this crazy world and the other is choosing lives to be removed from this crazy world.

Answer 2

Abortion has strict guidelines too, you cannot abort a 9 months old baby no legitimate doctors will do that for you. The state law says that abortion is only allow for foetus less than 14 weeks old. Any abortion after 3 1/2 months is consider as homicide or killing. If abortion need to be done after 14 weeks due to medical reasons, doctors and the parental consent must be sign under another set of regulatory rules.
In the civil society we live in, killing is view as most heinous crime of all but as in times of war killing maybe inevitable to protect and defend another lives. Both are innocent lives but the gravity of offences maybe view differently and circumstantial

Answer 3

There is no difference. Killing innocent human beings, whether in the womb or in Iraq, is wrong. I am a pro-life activist who is against abortion without exception. I go to the places where abortion is being committed and offer information and help to women arriving for their abortion appointments. I am 100% against the war in Iraq, as are the vast majority of pro-lifers standing with me outside the "clinics." I didn't vote for Bush and I encouraged others not to vote for him. There are many pro-lifers against the war, particularly the ones who are actually DOING something to stop abortion. Take a look, for example, at the articles on this page:

http://www.advocatesfortheinnocent.com/war.html

For more information on abortion, visit http://Abort73.com

Answer 4

If an abortion is for medical reasons, it means it needs to be done because the pregnany is not viable and could kill the mother. In war innocent people always die because that always goes along with war. There is no real difference. It's things that can't be helped.

Answer 5

How do you spell knaive, childish, uneducated, simpleton, misinformed, shallow? You should be a Democrat candidate for president.
A question like yours from me.......

Given you are both plummeting towards the ground..... What is the difference between jumping off the top of the World Trade Tower to keep from burning to death and skydiving?

Almost as idiotic as yours, but not quite. Your question has an innocent stupid deer in the headlights feel that I just couldn't master.

Answer 6

The fetus has no choice whatsoever -- it is totally relying on your choice as to whether or not you will kill it.

Innocent Iraqi children and adults have an ability to locate to safer areas to avoid the violence. Remember -- MOST of the killing in Iraq has not been performed by our military, but instead by internal fighting going on inside that country by insiders.

You are overgeneralizing. "Killing is Killing" is a false generalization. You've been brainwashed by the media and misinformation and probably a bunch of people who have the same shallow thinking.

Answer 7

well some people have abortions, because they have quintuplets, quadruplets, etc. becuase it would give the others a better chance to survive, or because they were going to have deformed, disabled, or retarded children. Killing Iraqis is just killing, I know that this is a difficult subject and I may be considered to be making a bad jugement.

Answer 8

relatively, i do no longer think of maximum "professional lifers" might accept as true with you that all and sundry "killing is killing." i think of maximum might agree that regularly taking a life is justified and each so often it relatively is not. relatively maximum persons in the international have a considerable pork with "pointless" killing. however the strains start to blur whilst it comprises abortion, the dying penalty, conflict, and so on.. i assume it relatively is all the place you, in my opinion, draw the line. i'm professional-life simply by fact i think of relatively everyone merits a huge gamble to stay and be sure their very own destiny. regrettably, in the form of conflict, that may not conceivable. yet each so often in conflict (i'm no longer saying this is the case with this conflict, simply by fact i don't be attentive to that it relatively is) the shortcoming of a few harmless lives potential saving many extra harmless lives. it relatively is my information that our protection rigidity takes each precaution to keep away from killing civilians. yet with abortion, the relatively reason is to take the youngster's life. there's a large distinction between dying as a casualty of conflict and the planned, calculated dying of an harmless toddler.

Answer 9

The intention plain and simple. Abortion is intended, but killing innocent people in war is unintended, but rather a byproduct that is unavoidable. That is just the way it is

Answer 10

the difference is those screaming abortion is murder are advocates of killing living human beings whether in war or death penalty