And the sanctity of her own life? there are millions of women who have medical conditions that make carrying ONE child problematic, for those women twins might be life threatening. Is it better to have one live birth, or two dead ones? And maybe a dead mother as well.
It may be a moral issue, but it isn't a moral issue that suggests you get to write a law against women - who may not share your views and may have information that the law just isn't equipped to deal with. The thing is, everybody would like there to be fewer abortions. The objection concerns using laws against women as the method.
Yes. It’s her choice. Why do you have such a hard time understanding that women have a right to control who can and cannot use their bodies?
Please explain to me how the woman's body is assaulted if 2 of them are aborted instead of 1. Will the effect on her body actually be that different? Taking away choice is not necessarily assault.
Without permission, aka against her will, aka against her choice. Unless the doctor had a proven medical necessity to go against her will, then yes, it would be assault.
So abortions are moral when God performs them? I don’t understand why Christians don’t support abortion. It guarantees that the child gets to go to Heaven with zero risk that they would go to Hell. Isn’t that the ideal scenario for people who supposedly believe in everlasting life in paradise?
Now you're arguing the woman has inherent choice over her fetus, rather than just her body. Where does that right come from?
A woman has an inherent choice over medical procedures performed on her body. Do you think an abortion occurs with zero effect on a woman’s body?
Not zero, but the effect on her body from reducing 3 to 1 isn't that physically different from reducing 3 to 2.
Ignoring the weasel-word “that”, thank you for admitting that performing an additional abortion would effect her body and therefore doing so against her will would be assault. By the way; where did you get your medical degree and where did you do your residency of obstetrics?
False. There isn't anyone in America who wouldn't like there to be fewer abortions. The opposition is opposed to the legal approach you push.
And yet the law only starts forcing the woman to have to provide her womb when the fetus supposedly doesn't need her anymore. Ironic, isn't it?
kazenatsu said: ↑ If the fetus is part of her body, she's part of the fetus's body. It works both ways.""" FoxHastings: but the woman doesn't need the fetus to survive No irony there just your embarrassment at being shown up again( see the blue above)...