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

OK, I have a completely legal, 100% effective way of ending abortion. In Roe v Wade, it says, and I quote:

(c) For the stage subsequent to viability, the State in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.

OK, here's the deal. Right now, viability is about 22 weeks old. After that, most embryos can, with artificial aid, remain alive outside of the womb. Before that, their respiratory system is not developed enough to sustain them outside of the womb.

So, what can we do? Get help from Science! If we put enough resources into it (and it is important enough, so we can find the resources), we simply pay for scientific research into helping a younger fetus survive outside the womb!

And, since the rate of technology is increasing exponentially, if we start now I say in about 10 years we could have a 10 or 12 week old fetus surviving outside the womb. A few more years, a few more weeks. Any less than that, and by the time a woman realizes she is pregnant, it will be too late to have an abortion!

So, what do you think? Will it work? Can we scientifically end abortion?

2007-05-22 04:46:22 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

16 answers

I'm saddened that we live in an age of disposable children...
I would love for your idea to be at least tried out...we spend billions trying to figure out why a big mac will give your butt more dimples than a golf ball, How much are we willing to spend saving the little ones?

2007-05-22 15:07:20 · answer #1 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 1 1

even if situations and reason can result the ethical culpability of any given act, they are in a position to no longer make an evil act solid. a minimum of that's what the church teaches and that i concur. ethical relativists will attempt to cajole that the ends justify the potential yet while pressed could desire to settle for that there place particularly demands the admission that there's no purpose suited or incorrect (touching directly to morality) a place i think is way less rational given the very shown fact that maximum human beings (all IMO) while pressed will admit to their retention of a concept in an purpose ethical suited or incorrect extremely in the event that they think of they have been wronged. mendacity is mendacity and is objectively morally incorrect in spite of the mitigating situations surrounding it is tried justification. i've got style of winged this reaction that could desire to be in keeping with Catholic coaching,besides the shown fact that i'm consistently keen to be corrected if i've got misrepresented the magisterium in this or the different situation. Peace; Deardogma purely study most of the replies and clearly my reaction is inaplicable if easily abortion does not quit a beating heart in all circumstances. My reaction replaced into geared greater to the justifiable mendacity question than the abortion situation itself (sorry) As regards abortion the church teaches and that i concur that existence starts at concept no longer at a beating heart.

2016-12-11 17:07:57 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Scientists have already successfully gestated a lamb in an 'artificial womb,' so it's theoretically possible.

It'd be pretty darn expensive, though, and it's not like we're currently willing to put that much money into caring for unwanted children born conventionally, let alone those transplanted out of the wombs of women who don't want them.

2007-05-22 07:56:36 · answer #3 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 1 0

You would need to look at subsequent caselaw on this subject. Roe v. Wade was the beginning, but not the end.

Casey v. Doe, for example.

The key is over-turning these cases, which the Supreme Court has the ultimate power to do. And then send the issue back to the states, where it belonged in the first place.

2007-05-22 04:58:38 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 5 1

Nice try, not going to happen. Sadly, the world is becoming even less sensitive to the plight of unwanted babies. The only real solution is to push adoption, cut back the red tape. There are so many women that would love to be mothers but can not.

2007-05-22 05:04:21 · answer #5 · answered by T S 5 · 3 0

I sort of agree, but are you going to keep all these kids at your house?

Will you pay medical expenses for women who would still get the procedure done illegally, and unlicensed?

I'm against abortion after a certain stage, but that's my opinion, I'm not going to judge someone else because they think differently. I do draw the line after about 6 months, unless it's in the fallopian tube or a severe defect/harm to both/either the mother or child.

Abortion is an issue meant to divide our great country and it's people. Realize that, and you will start to understand more.

2007-05-22 04:51:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

If they succeed in eliminating abortion, the bible-thumpers will attack birth control, like they were doing before Roe v. Wade.

Those fundie people won't be happy until everyone is living in caves bashing females over the heads with clubs and dragging them home by the hair.

2007-05-22 05:08:12 · answer #7 · answered by latest_greatest 4 · 1 4

No, the best thing is to make abortion illegal.

Oh, and I doubt that will ever happen, latest g. because of abortion issue, but it might if the democrats have their way with the war on terror.!

2007-05-22 05:17:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

How about we find a way to get people to understand how conception happens in the first place.

2007-05-22 05:06:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

To pro-abortion proponets:

Does it not speak volumes to you what Roe a.k.a. Norma McCovey has to say on abortion?

http://www.leaderu.com/norma/

2007-05-22 06:56:56 · answer #10 · answered by Maria B 3 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers