ABORTION.......

And that is exactly why I don't see any difference, Bartikus.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

If I could honestly see the difference, I would tell you that I could. But, no, I see no difference. If a woman chooses abortion IMO she is killing the child.

If a woman decides abortion, she would decide to kill a fetus, not a child. See the difference?

Momma Angel wrote:

If someone else causes her child in the womb to die, they are killing the child.

That "someone else" is killing a fetus.a fetus is in the process of becoming a child.

Momma Angel wrote:

The only difference to me is who makes the choice that the child dies.

The woman should make the choice, since she has the right to do whatever she wants with her body.

If a woman is forced to keep her pregnancy against her will, do you think she would still have the right to do whatever she wants with her body? How can this be? Logically, this doesn't make any sense.

0 Replies

Jason,

It's obvious we cannot agree on this issue whatsoever because it seems you feel it is just a fetus where I feel it is a child. The two cannot be equated IMO.

Sure, if it's not a human being then it's not killing a child. I get that. But, can you get that to me (and many, many others) it is a human being? I can see it from your perspective. Can you see it from mine at all?

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

I can see differences but let's be clear on two points.

If an unborn child is killed by the hands of another man or woman with the intent to kill the unborn (punching a clearly pregnant woman in the stomache) is murder because the unborn child is a HUMAN BEING.

Yes, the death of the fetus would be unlawful if it is against the mother's will; it should constitute to murder.

Bartikus wrote:

If a mother and doctor decide to abort/kill the unborn child....you may call it legal...you may call it whatever you like.

I call it legal.

Bartikus wrote:

It remains the killing of a HUMAN BEING.......period.

It is the killing of a fetus in the process of becoming a child; it's a human fetus.

0 Replies

It's a fetus when the unborn are not wanted by the mother.

It's a human being when the unborn are wanted by it's mother.

The qualifier is:

Wanted or unwanted by the mother.

Many of us here were born into this world before Roe v. Wade decision.

Were you truly....wanted?

Maybe that does'nt even matter after all.......your here.

0 Replies

Jason,

So it IS just the fact that it is the woman not getting to make the choice that would constitute murder?

I'm sorry Jason, but that is not right. Why does a woman get to decide she can kill a human being and someone else can't? If someone else can be tried for murder in this case then you have to equate the "fetus" to that of a human being. I don't see how you can get around that.

0 Replies

Jason Proudmoore wrote:

Bartikus wrote:

I can see differences but let's be clear on two points.

If an unborn child is killed by the hands of another man or woman with the intent to kill the unborn (punching a clearly pregnant woman in the stomache) is murder because the unborn child is a HUMAN BEING.

Yes, the death of the fetus would be unlawful if it is against the mother's will; it should constitute to murder.

Bartikus wrote:

If a mother and doctor decide to abort/kill the unborn child....you may call it legal...you may call it whatever you like.

I call it legal.

Bartikus wrote:

It remains the killing of a HUMAN BEING.......period.

It is the killing of a fetus in the process of becoming a child; it's a human fetus.

Murder is not defined as the killing of a human fetus Jason.

Murder is defined as the killing of a human being or person.

All victims of murder must meet the qualifier of......being a human being or person.

Are you having a hard time in understanding this or are you guys just dancing around this issue?

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

Jason Proudmoore wrote:
Momma Angel wrote:
Like I said, if the woman's choice is taken away, such as in the case of her being murdered, or her child being murdered by someone other than who she chooses (abortion) it's ok?

Can't you see the difference between those two, Momma?

I can see differences but let's be clear on two points.

If an unborn child is killed by the hands of another man or woman with the intent to kill the unborn (punching a clearly pregnant woman in the stomache) is murder because the unborn child is a HUMAN BEING.

If a mother and doctor decide to abort/kill the unborn child....you may call it legal...you may call it whatever you like.

It remains the killing of a HUMAN BEING.......period.

No it doesn't...and the fact that you are continuing to assert that it is...doesn't make it so.

The fetus is no more a human being than an acorn is an oak tree.

But you are stubbornly refusing to see that.

And, because of this weird presumption...you are willing to take away rights from a woman that you have no right to take away.

0 Replies

Good morning, Frank. Been waiting for you. Perhaps then you can explain why someone could be tried for murder for killing a "fetus" and the woman who decides to have an abortion can't? And, you're going to have to do better than because it's legal. Laughing

0 Replies

mur·der ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrdr)
n.
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Slang. Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.

v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders
v. tr.
To kill (another human) unlawfully.
To kill brutally or inhumanly.
To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances.
To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language.
Slang. To defeat decisively; trounce.

source: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=murder

0 Replies

Jason,

Please see my post above yours to Frank. It may be legal, but what makes it right?

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

Murder is not defined as the killing of a human fetus Jason.

Murder is defined as the killing of a human being or person.

All victims of murder must meet the qualifier of......being a human being or person.

Are you having a hard time in understanding this or are you guys just dancing around this issue?

Actually...murder is defined as the illegal killing of a human being...but, once again, why quibble.

Using your line of reasoning, Bart....why do you think, since you are so certain a fetus is a human being by law...

...why do you think you would end up in jail if you claimed it on your income tax as an exemption before its birth???

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Good morning, Frank. Been waiting for you. Perhaps then you can explain why someone could be tried for murder for killing a "fetus" and the woman who decides to have an abortion can't? And, you're going to have to do better than because it's legal.

Really!

I have to do better??????

One is against the law...and one isn't.

That is the reason.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
Jason Proudmoore wrote:
Momma Angel wrote:
Like I said, if the woman's choice is taken away, such as in the case of her being murdered, or her child being murdered by someone other than who she chooses (abortion) it's ok?

Can't you see the difference between those two, Momma?

I can see differences but let's be clear on two points.

If an unborn child is killed by the hands of another man or woman with the intent to kill the unborn (punching a clearly pregnant woman in the stomache) is murder because the unborn child is a HUMAN BEING.

If a mother and doctor decide to abort/kill the unborn child....you may call it legal...you may call it whatever you like.

It remains the killing of a HUMAN BEING.......period.

No it doesn't...and the fact that you are continuing to assert that it is...doesn't make it so.

The fetus is no more a human being than an acorn is an oak tree.

But you are stubbornly refusing to see that.

And, because of this weird presumption...you are willing to take away rights from a woman that you have no right to take away.

So killing what you call the fetus is not a human being or person?

0 Replies

Now Frank, just because it is legal it does not make it right.

So, just because it is legal that's the extent of your argument?

It's perfectly ok with you that a woman can kill a "fetus" and that's ok, but if someone else kills the "fetus" without her consent, they can be tried for murder? Shocked

0 Replies

I don't know if it is a great analogy, but here it is: I own a Rembrandt, I decide to slash it, and throw it in the garbage. It may be a stupid act, but it belongs to me, and I am entitled to do with it what I want.

If my neighbor comes into my house, slashes my Rembrandt, and throws it in the garbage, I can call the police, and have him arrested.

I know that someone is going to scream that a painting is not a fetus, but the concept is exactly the same.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Now Frank, just because it is legal it does not make it right.

Right???

You asked:

Quote:

Good morning, Frank. Been waiting for you. Perhaps then you can explain why someone could be tried for murder for killing a "fetus" and the woman who decides to have an abortion can't?

The answer to that question is that one is legal...and one is illegal.

Right or wrong is not at issue, because right and wrong for you might now be right and wrong for someone else.

Killing another human being is, in my opinion, wrong. Having an abortion, in my opinion, is not killing another human being.

Quote:

So, just because it is legal that's the extent of your argument?

Is the exent of your argument that you have arbitrarily decided that an 8 cell zygote is a living human being...and therefore the woman hosting the zygote loses all rights over her body at that point??????

It's perfectly ok with you that a woman can kill a "fetus" and that's ok, but if someone else kills the "fetus" without her consent, they can be tried for murder? Shocked

[/color][/quote]

0 Replies

[/quote]It's perfectly ok with you that a woman can kill a "fetus" and that's ok, but if someone else kills the "fetus" without her consent, they can be tried for murder? [/quote]

Not only is it perfectly ok with me that a woman be able to make a choice to abort a pregnancy if she chooses...and someone else can be subject to penalty for doing so without her consent...

...it is perfectly okay with the United States judicial system also.

What is your problem?

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

I don't know if it is a great analogy, but here it is: I own a Rembrandt, I decide to slash it, and throw it in the garbage. It may be a stupid act, but it belongs to me, and I am entitled to do with it what I want.

If my neighbor comes into my house, slashes my Rembrandt, and throws it in the garbage, I can call the police, and have him arrested.

I know that someone is going to scream that a painting is not a fetus, but the concept is exactly the same.

Your neighbor would not be facing anything near murder charges.

My question is not whether an unlawful/unwanted abortion should be considered a crime but....what crime? Murder?

How since the crime murder can only occur to a human being or person?

Simple question.

0 Replies

Frank,

What's my problem? My problem is that it seems to be ok for a woman to kill a fetus/child because that's what SHE wants to do, but if someone else does it, then they are tried for murder.

The decision being made here seems to be that some can consider it a child and therefore murder and some can consider it a fetus and therefore not murder.

Surely, you can see a double standard here? Just because a woman makes the decision it's ok? Legal? Perhaps. Right? Not a chance! Not as long as someone else can be tried for murder for doing the same thing she does if she opts for abortion.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know