ABORTION.......

Barticus wrote:

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

No, I don't think that it should be murder. If someone causes a woman to miscarry on account of an assault, it should be an assault, possibly with special circumstances. I think that calling it murder is teetering on a slippery slope.

0 Replies

Phoenix,

I can agree with your analogy up to a point. If you exchange the painting for a fetus/child in your analogy, then I would say that pretty much equates to slavery, since that's one person owning the life another.

Your other post just popped up. Now, Frank, that is a sensible answer! At least Phoenix can see the context of which I was speaking.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Phoenix,

I can agree with your analogy up to a point. If you exchange the painting for a fetus/child in your analogy, then I would say that pretty much equates to slavery, since that's one person owning the life another.

That's just silly. Slavery? So if you just removed the fetus and gave it it's freedom that'd be OK with you?

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

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

No, I don't think that it should be murder. If someone causes a woman to miscarry on account of an assault, it should be an assault, possibly with special circumstances. I think that calling it murder is teetering on a slippery slope.

Thank you for an honest answer Phoenix....

I disagree and see a slippery slope of a different kind.

Thank's again.

0 Replies

Questioner,

Not silly really. In Phoenix's analogy the fetus is equated to a possession, is it not?

Hre next post popped up before I submitted my answer to her.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Questioner,

Not silly really. In Phoenix's analogy the fetus is equated to a possession, is it not?

Hre next post popped up before I submitted my answer to her.

It's silly in that a fetus is a posession much like an appendix is a possession, or a kidney is a possession. I understand what you're attempting to say, I just think it's a rather bogus analogy.

0 Replies

Phoenix thinks the charge of murder should not apply to any unborn child under any circumstance because she sees a slippery slope that could endanger.......

The woman's right to abortion.

Did I get that right Phoenix?

0 Replies

Questioner,

It wasn't MY analogy. And, actually, I think it brought up a pretty good point. Well, since people do sell their organs sometimes, I don't think it's bogus at all. Are their organs their possessions or not?

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

Phoenix thinks the charge of murder should not apply to any unborn child under any circumstance because she sees a slippery slope that could endanger.......

The woman's right to abortion.

Did I get that right Phoenix?

Yes. We can't have it both ways.

0 Replies

Bartikus,

You have to give Phoenix credit. She understands our argument about this. She may not agree with us about the abortion issue but she does see that charging someone with murder of a "fetus/child" (other than the woman choosing abortion) should not be the case.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
Phoenix thinks the charge of murder should not apply to any unborn child under any circumstance because she sees a slippery slope that could endanger.......

The woman's right to abortion.

Did I get that right Phoenix?

Yes. We can't have it both ways.

Does this mean you value the right of a woman to get an abortion over the right for a woman to conceive? Does protecting a woman's right to abortion....trump protecting a woman's right to conceive?

I mean no disrespect but interestingly....this is exactly the same thinking and priorities as the founder of Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger

Interestingly....Margaret's mother did not share her views. Margaret...so fortunate.

read here:

http://www.abortionfacts.com/learn/sanger_and_planned_parenthood.asp

You realize that the term 'Pro Choice' would then become........empty?

Where do we go now?

0 Replies

Frank,

Let me ask you something. This is a law in Louisiana:

Quote:

It is illegal to gargle in public places.

If you gargle in a public place, you are guilty of breaking the law. But, is it right?

I know that's a pretty simplistic thing but it's just an example of a law that probably most people think is wrong.

0 Replies

Barticus wrote:

Does this mean you value the right of a woman to get an abortion over the right for a woman to conceive? Does protecting a woman's right to abortion....trump protecting a woman's right to conceive?

Maybe I have been asleep at my keyboard, but how in the world did you come to that conclusion? What does the right to an abortion have to do with the right to conceive?

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Barticus wrote:
Does this mean you value the right of a woman to get an abortion over the right for a woman to conceive? Does protecting a woman's right to abortion....trump protecting a woman's right to conceive?

Maybe I have been asleep at my keyboard, but how in the world did you come to that conclusion? What does the right to an abortion have to do with the right to conceive?

It's called by some.....Pro Choice! But....if the pro choice folks seek to protect one choice at the cost of another......

It's becomes another.......contradiction of terms.

Do you see....No foundation whatsoever.

0 Replies

Quote:

It's called by some.....Pro Choice! But....if the pro choice folks seek to protect one choice at the cost of another......

It's becomes another.......contradiction of terms.

Barticus- Would you explain to me s-l-o-w-l-y, what you are talking about? I have no idea to what you are referring.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Quote:
It's called by some.....Pro Choice! But....if the pro choice folks seek to protect one choice at the cost of another......

It's becomes another.......contradiction of terms.

Barticus- Would you explain to me s-l-o-w-l-y, what you are talking about? I have no idea to what you are referring.

How can women have a choice to have a child when the government removes the laws that protect that right....just to avoid the possible undoing of the other right to abortion?

Do you believe in a woman's right to have a child as much as her right to abort a pregnancy?

Do you have a bias....one way or another?No you say?

Then why would you reduce the charge of murder of the unborn....just to spare the one choice of abortion?

If you would do so.....your not anymore pro choice than the pro lifers really. Right?

Can't have it both ways....right?

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

How can women have a choice to have a child when the government removes the laws that protect that right....just to avoid the possible undoing of the other right to abortion?

Did someone mention the government removing the rights of a woman to have a child? I guess I missed whatever it is you're referring to bart.

0 Replies

Questioner wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
How can women have a choice to have a child when the government removes the laws that protect that right....just to avoid the possible undoing of the other right to abortion?

Did someone mention the government removing the rights of a woman to have a child? I guess I missed whatever it is you're referring to bart.

No...this is what was said:

Bartikus wrote:
Phoenix thinks the charge of murder should not apply to any unborn child under any circumstance because she sees a slippery slope that could endanger.......

The woman's right to abortion.

Did I get that right Phoenix?

Phoenix32890 wrote:
Yes. We can't have it both ways
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's about protecting a woman's right to have children and protecting a woman's right to abort and not have children.

That's supposedly the pro choice stand.

If one set of protections are curtailed or removed for the sake of the other....

That's bias. The 'pro choice' slogan would be empty and be revealed for what they really are.

This is the exact position the founder of Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger has and in this link....it is revealed.

http://www.abortionfacts.com/learn/sanger_and_planned_parenthood.asp

0 Replies

Questioner wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
How can women have a choice to have a child when the government removes the laws that protect that right....just to avoid the possible undoing of the other right to abortion?

Did someone mention the government removing the rights of a woman to have a child? I guess I missed whatever it is you're referring to bart.

The right of a woman to give birth would be greatly diminished if the life of the unborn person were not sufficiently protected by law.

0 Replies

echi wrote:

Questioner wrote:
Bartikus wrote:
How can women have a choice to have a child when the government removes the laws that protect that right....just to avoid the possible undoing of the other right to abortion?

Did someone mention the government removing the rights of a woman to have a child? I guess I missed whatever it is you're referring to bart.

The right of a woman to give birth would be greatly diminished if the life of the unborn person were not sufficiently protected by law.

Yes...and it would be diminished for the strengthening of a woman's....other choice.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know