Perhaps Roe vs Wade decision should be amended to allow abortion until the 75th trimester(18 years) It's only fair,what if she feels her life is not fulfilling because of having to raise her child?
2007-06-07 11:56:02 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Is all about breathing air. Once that baby takes it's first breath then it's a human being and deserves rights. But if the baby is viable but hasn't had that first breath...then you can kill it. Amazing how a woman can immediately give birth and drown her baby and it's murder. That same woman could have legally killed her baby the day before and it would have been fine. Oh and when I say kill...I mean the doctor will chop it into pieces and take it out limb by limb
2007-06-07 12:02:53 · answer #1 · answered by Jasmine 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I'm not a liberal, but I do favor the concept of post-natal abortion, at least in theory. I'm a strong believer in the rights of parents. Parental rights should trump the interest of the state - as to the interests of the child, it is the parents' duty to determine what those interests are. If a couple wants to raise thier kids a certain way - even if that means putting the children at some increased risk of death, for instance - the state shouldn't be interfering.
Carried to it's logical extreme, that position would include allowing parents to end the lives of thier children at will. I think that's an extreme that would never be reached, though.
2007-06-07 12:02:45 · answer #2 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
That's not a logical conclusion. It's simply a question of when the fetus becomes a "child" with rights. Pro-lifers would argue it's at conception. Pro-choicers often argue it's when the child could live on its own outside the womb, or when it appears to have "consciousness". These events happen around the start of the 3rd trimester. That's why it's the logical choice to make abortion legal/illegal before/after the 3rd trimester.
I could say the logical conclusion of the pro-lifer argument is that sperm has a right to life too, so each time you jerk off you're killing a potential life. It makes as much sense as your "logical conclusion".
2007-06-07 12:02:09 · answer #3 · answered by Dana1981 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
At 75th trimester, "it" is considered an adult, not a fetus. And, it is no longer needing of bodily support by it's host, the woman. Your argument is not a logical conclusion to anything. It lacks logic and it lacks any conclusive connection to the issue of abortion itself.
2007-06-07 12:02:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
My oldest daughter was born at 23 wks. My son was born at 26 wks.
All this because I had an abortion and it damaged my womb.
All life is precious no matter in the womb or outside.
2007-06-07 12:02:10 · answer #5 · answered by egg_sammash 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It's about personal responsibility, something that I thought conservatives understood. Should an individual choose to have a child, then they assume the responsibilities associated with raising him or her.
But you also raise a question that Catholics dealt with in the Middle Ages. The penance for a parent exposing a child was less severe than for murder. Perhaps you should direct your question towards them...
Cheers.
2007-06-07 12:03:13 · answer #6 · answered by blueevent47 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I wish people would stop labeling people who believe in abortion as liberals. There are allot of conservatives who believe in abortion. Why don't you call them pro choice, that is what they are. But back to the question, you have the right to give your baby up for adoption if you want. People complain about killing a baby before it is born, but what about those who kill them after they are born? I think it should be easier to give your baby up after it is born.Maybe if someone would help these mothers who get pregnant to survive financially until the baby is born it would stop allot of abortions.
2007-06-07 12:07:02 · answer #7 · answered by oldhag 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
For the same reason they call it "Right to Choose" instead of "Right to kill innocent children in their own mothers' wombs at a government funded hospital because it would keep mommy from being able to run her life the way SHE wants to!"
2007-06-07 12:04:03 · answer #8 · answered by tkpartida 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Good point! When are brain-dead libs going to realize that a woman's choice is made when she decides to go to bed with someone. Anything that happens after that is the RESULT of that choice. If she comes down with some disease, does she get to choose whether or not to have it? NO! Pregnancy is not a disease and it shouldn't have a cure.
2007-06-07 12:01:34 · answer #9 · answered by gunrrobot 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Right on. Oh, and Ginger, learn math. Fetus does equal human life. To some of us anyway.
2007-06-07 12:04:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋