English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The Supreme Court upheld the ban on Partial Birth Abortions. Is this the begining of the end of slaughter of the unborn?

2007-04-18 03:59:48 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

21 answers

It makes one think. Ban our Constitutional right to bear arms but keep abortion (murder) legal.

2007-04-18 04:07:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

i doubt it there is a huge difference between abortion and partial birth abortion if you were to educate your self with the facts maybe you'd understand that quite frankly i can't stand when men who have no idea what it takes to be pregnant and birth a baby spout there opinions on this issue if men could get preggers than abortion would be covered on insurance and would be deemed a medical procedure not a murder , and quite frankly (i was a social worker for 11 years) some people should never ever have kids and it would have been better if they had not been born so unless your planning on adopting a older child that has been abused and neglected beyond anything you've ever seen and has been living in foster care for years i'd keep your opinion to yourself or go out and meet some of these kids that were beaten so bad they have brain damage and become a mentor or just a volunteer big brother or something

2007-04-18 04:15:39 · answer #2 · answered by auntie s 4 · 2 0

to each action there is an equivalent and opposite reaction---to each regulation or judgement, there is an equivalent and opposite way of examining it.... A partial delivery abortion could basically be used at circumstances whilst there's a extreme possibility to the mum's existence or well-being... not basically with the objective to discard an undesirable baby----i'm professional ABORTION, yet to not the factor the place they wait 22 or 20 WEEKS to verify they don't pick a toddler..... This female who has had 4 partial delivery abortions could have her VIGINA SOWN close or superglued at the same time completely----i don't basically like the assumption of females wearing very nearly to complete term and then identifying "heck i don't pick it" and getting rid of it...i don't think of that grew to become into the unique motive of Roe V. Wade the two...yet regrettably some human beings available'll interpret something to the extreme and others are a sprint greater logical and life like........If partial delivery abortions are nonetheless criminal then i assume that's a female's determination yet i could desire to by no potential understand why somebody might wait 22 weeks with a superbly sturdy fetus and then abort... My theory may well be that if a fetus could desire to proceed to exist outdoors the womb (and it could desire to at 22 weeks), then till there's a extreme possibility to the mum, the toddler could be carried to term--taken straight away far off from a female like your so spoke of as "pal".... human beings like that don't need to have the surprising to even CONCEIVE a baby...

2016-10-22 12:30:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No not at all. Partial birth abortions are one of the evilest forms of ripping a living soul out of the womb.

2007-04-18 04:04:56 · answer #4 · answered by Devdude 5 · 1 0

Absolutely not! changing laws will never stop abortions, they have happened for centuries even before it was legal.
My girlfriend had her baby die inside of her. Because of Ohio's law they could not remove the baby. So she laid in the hospital for 3 days trying to give birth to a dead baby because of pro-life laws. Nobody thinks of the mother's when they make abortion laws.
Get off your christian high horse and really think about the lives of others, not just your own glorification. Don't speak until you have walked in others shoes!
PRO LIFE + PRO WAR= HYPOCRITE

2007-04-18 09:20:30 · answer #5 · answered by rikki l 2 · 1 0

Partial birth, is that some sick $hit or what? Let wait for the last given moment then let inject the child. But capital punishment. No we can't put down a convicted murderer. Stupid left.

2007-04-18 04:09:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Tom do you think there were NO abortions prior to Roe V Wade? If so you really don't know what you're talking about, abortion is almost as old as mankind, it will never be eradicated

2007-04-18 04:07:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

"banning abortions will mean only outlaws have abortions".

Funny how you are for banning a procedure that has saved countless lives, but think arming kids with handguns so they can feel safe at college is the best way to deal with gun violence.

2007-04-18 04:04:22 · answer #8 · answered by truthspeaker10 4 · 3 1

Nope, and I doubt they'll ever fully get rid of abortion either.

Who are any of you to tell another person what she should do with her body? Tell me this, who do any of you that think the gov't should make it illegal think you are?

Concerned for lives? Please. If you are that concerned about lives, you'd have adopted kids out our adoption system.

How many people want to make abortion illegal, yet support the death penalty?

2007-04-18 04:27:31 · answer #9 · answered by Humanist 4 · 1 0

Cons will never ban abortions, that and gay marriage is the only way they bait fundies into voting for them. Carrot on a stick. They sell hate to the hypocritically moral. Sad.

2007-04-18 04:05:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers