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

with abortion, why should it be rare??? Additionally, if a pre-born baby is not a human life, why do so many states charge double murder against someone who takes the life of a pregnant woman and not against the mother and/or doctor who performs late term or partial birth abortions (especially)?
You cannot have it both ways.

2007-12-03 17:04:18 · 17 answers · asked by LastNerveLost 3 in Politics & Government Politics

avail,
so you're saying that only Mom has the right? Does that mean she has the right to starve them to death after birth? It's still murder according to the law. Your logic is flawed.

2007-12-03 17:15:15 · update #1

I do not defend, for one moment, a criminal who harms a pregnant woman and her pre-born child. Where did you get that from, avail? Good grief. Nice try at attempting to take the focus off the real issue, though.

2007-12-03 17:19:06 · update #2

Libdrivel,
As disturbing as your picture was, you nailed it. Maybe everyone needs to see how ugly this is. As for how I'll sleep tonight...that is on your conscience!

2007-12-03 17:21:09 · update #3

dog,
This has nothing to do with medical necessity. In the extremely rare event that the mother's life is in danger, or even for rape (if she bothered to report it to support the fact it was so upsetting to her) I will make no judgement against her and I think it should be an option. I'm talking CHOICE here. As in, "I messed around, got pregnant, I have no life threatening illness, and I am carrying a child that is only recognized as such if I am murdered by my boyfriend." Comprende?

2007-12-03 17:29:42 · update #4

avail,
You still didn't answer the question. Why am I not surprised?

2007-12-03 17:32:06 · update #5

Drew Blood,
It is rather unfathomable, isn't it? I'm so glad your baby girls are doing well! I often wonder how many of these pro-abortion folk have ever held their new-born child (especially a preemie) and thought, "Yeah, I could've flushed you. Lucky for you, you were a somewhat wanted mass of tissue."

2007-12-03 17:43:34 · update #6

Libdrivel,
I was assuming that you were using the extreme to illustrate how sick the reasoning of the pro-abortion side was. I guess my bad. Maybe you should seek help?

2007-12-03 17:49:51 · update #7

17 answers

The law is a sick double standard. As it stands now, it is a baby if the mother wants it , and some inconvenient "growth" if she doesn't. The sad truth is, it IS both ways right now. I agree with you 100%.

2007-12-04 00:40:31 · answer #1 · answered by hottiecj *~♥~*~♥~* 4 · 3 1

Why should it be rare? Because unwanted pregnancies become rare. Sex education, birth control, etc... It's something I never quite got, so many people who are against abortion are also against the things that can stop it from being necessary in the first place.

In terms of the double-murder charge, most of the laws put a time frame on the pregnancy, generally around the third trimester, before the crime qualifies as murder against the unborn child. And many places have the same limit on abortions - after that same point, it is legal only to save the life of the mother.

2007-12-03 21:47:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

I don't know if abortion is morally wrong for others...I just know that it is wrong for me. I learned long ago that I can't set standards for others, but if enough people decided it should be a law, one way or the other, as a citizen I am bound to obey the law. I have always thought life begins an inception and that begins the nine month evolution that produces a living, breathing human being. It starts instantly as a baby and ends as a baby, and I can think of no time that is right to kill it!

2007-12-03 17:19:39 · answer #3 · answered by ArRo 6 · 4 1

"Give out condoms"... To prevent abortion?

WTF (((((WTF!!!))))) is it with handouts for people without BRAINS?

Do they give out FREE parachutes for morons who jump off bridges?
Do they give out FREE bullet proof vests for morons who end up not shooting them self in the heart and instead hold the gun to their head?
If they supplied instructions and warning labels would THAT help?

If people are going to bump uglies and a woman ends up getting knocked-up... Is it only the man's fault? Or the woman's fault? Or BOTH? BOTH is a concept huh?

So she gets knocked-up... ? Pay the price and be responsible for your fleeting actions. OR... Wise up and be smart enough to be responsible.

To me... This is why God gives life. For people to LEARN.

I do however understand in some "rare" cases where abortion may have a purpose... From that standpoint unless it involves me personally... It is not my place to make decisions for others when they have to live with their decisions and it's none of my business.

People don't tell me what car to buy, where to live, what house to buy, what to eat, what clothes my kids need to wear and they cartainly aren't going to make decisions that involve MY life (not theirs) when it comes down to issues dealing with abortion.

Anyway... That's just my 2 cents worth.

2007-12-04 01:29:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

All I can tell you is that my gorgeous twin baby girls were born 9 weeks early at only 7 months. Thank God that today, both are doing amazing. But it's absolutely MONSTEROUS to me to think that in some states, a woman 7 months pregnant can have an abortion, murder her unborn baby, and actually think that it was a "choice".

2007-12-03 17:09:19 · answer #5 · answered by ? 5 · 5 4

"legal but rare" is the politically clean way to be pro choice.

A pregnant woman who desires the baby , and is killed looses two lives.
but the real test is if a woman is killed just before her scheduled abortion. one live or two. should be only one ( the woman, with an unwanted mass)

2007-12-03 17:15:02 · answer #6 · answered by tom 4 · 3 3

This is planned parenthood double talk. You should know planned parenthood makes money on abortions. Therefore, they used a new double talk.

2007-12-03 20:56:12 · answer #7 · answered by David_the_Great 7 · 4 1

.....well, what is next, you have a old mother who is "inconvenient" why not abort her, or perhaps you have a 5 year old who is a real hassle, why not KILL him too, ....this is the real debate...
...and I am not for Islam....but I am sure we are the biggest hypocrites they have ever seen!...and we claim to be the World Police for human rights.....?

2007-12-04 11:53:13 · answer #8 · answered by Rada S 5 · 2 1

I agree with you completely!
People shouldn't be charged for a double homicide for killing a woman who is pregnant!
Matter of fact, we shouldn't charge them at all!
Just let them run around without any repercussion at all slashing up any women they want, and dragging the nearly fully developed baby out of their cut open bellies and use it for fish bait like that sicko did a few months back!

uuuuh ok if you think I nailed that one on the head, I think I'll give avail a thumbs up.
oops sorry avail not level 2 yet.

2007-12-03 17:12:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 5

IF A WOMAN ISN'T GOING TO HAVE AN ABORTION, and is murdered, the criminal just took her rights to life, and her right to give life. HE MADE THAT CHOICE AND DIDN'T HAVE THE RIGHT!
Why do you people keep senslessly defending these criminals just because you think you are making some kind of point?
all you are doing is making yourselves look as if you have as little grasp on reality, as pro-choicers think you do.
WANT TO PREVENT AN ABORTION?? GIVE OUT CONDOMS!

2007-12-03 17:09:27 · answer #10 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 4 5

fedest.com, questions and answers