So? When have humans ever shied away from doing and using things that weren't "natural"...and so what? Processes that may not be "natural" save lives....so why is one better than the other???
It is natural for humans to use their mind to figure out how to best live the life they themselves desire. Furthermore, it is also natural for hunans to come up with tools and technologies to enable this. Abortion is natural.
Sorry, you seem to have lost track of the context of conversation again. I wasn't specifically referring to abortion being natural or unnatural there.
That reminds me of a crime documentary I saw about a father in Austria who locked his teen daughter in the basement to continuously keep molesting her. What you say is not necessarily right.
You do realize how ironic it is that you're trying to use that as an argument here? Your position isn't about trying save lives here.
FoxHastings said: ↑ Processes that may not be "natural" save lives....so why is one better than the other??? LOL, your position is....wait, I didn't see one and I certainly didn't see an answer to my question AS USUAL
Do you really think Mr. Fritzl was using his mind and being a rational long-term thinker who loved life? I mean, really now? As I have said many times before; pro-lifers do not understand what a life is nor what it means to live it. Furthermore, just because it is natural for man to be rational, it does not necessarily mean everyone is always being that. Reason is not an instinct, it has to be learned and then chosen to be used.
You're clouding the issue. I thought your claim is that women get abortions because they want to enjoy life. Well, how is that different from Mr. Fritzl? He was obviously "enjoying" things, and focusing only on his own life. Do women who get abortions have some type of nobler ends?
OMG.....just OMG.... there is nothing wrong with having an abortion and , this may shock you, it is wrong to imprison and molest women.. He was committing a crime against another human even if you seem to think it was no big deal... WHY TF would women need a "nobler end???? They just want and end to their pregnancy...and as you have been shown several million times, they don't need a reason..
If you cannot see how having an abortion is different from locking your daughter in the basement and systematically abusing and raping her for years, you have some serious issues. I mean, really now? You cannot be serious. Somehow I am "cloduing the issue"? Lol. If Mr.Fritzl is your image of an ideal man who lived an enjoyable life to the fullest, you have lost all credibility and should never speak of morality ever again. Yes, they do -- They do not want to be mothers and the noble thing to do in such scenario is choosing abortion. She might be an ambitious student with big dreams, a hardworking and productive individual or just too poor to affotd a child. Regardless of her circumstances, she is being rational and choosing to live the life she wants if she is having an abortion when motherhood is not one of her values. Ever heard of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Aren''t Conservatives supposed to love the Founding Documents? Geez.
What if Mr Fritzl simply decided to kill and dismember his daughter? Claiming it is "his basement" and he should be able to do whatever he wants in there? That wouldn't be so different from a woman claiming "It's my body", "Mind your own business". And that would be true of abortion too, if abortion were allowed to be a crime. Why wouldn't they? And Mr Fritzl only wanted sexual gratification. What's the difference? Just because you want something doesn't make doing something okay. You think women have a greater right to not deal with a pregnancy than a man has to gratification of his sexual needs?
So you compare women with basements.....I expected that. You defend someone killing and dismembering someone because he owns the basement....it does NOT get more bizarre than that !! It isn't. Women need only ONE reason to get an abortion, because they want one. Fritz committed a crime against another human being.....just because it was "only" a woman you sure downplay it.... No, but abortion is legal so it's OK AGAIN you seem to avoid the point that the man was committing a crime against another....and downplay it because it was "only" a woman.
And you defend someone killing and dismembering another life because she owns the uterus. Your argument comes down to it is only right or wrong because of whether it is currently illegal or not. Whether it is currently legal or illegal has no bearing on the argument for whether it should be legal or illegal.
FoxHastings said: ↑ You defend someone killing and dismembering someone because he owns the basement....it does NOT get more bizarre than that !! YES, it's her uterus and her ZEF, her body part, and is not a separate BORN being..... your HERO molested a born , seperate legal human being.....he tortured her... A ZEF is aborted not tortured. No, it doesn't. Your argument comes down to if a woman has a right to her own body and can get an abortion then molesting and torturing women in a basement is OK. No, but it is and should be...
My only point was that claiming a woman can do it because it is inside her body is as ridiculous as a man doing it because it is inside his basement.
It's interesting that it has separate DNA, isn't it? And a separate beating heart, and a separate circulatory system, and a separate brain... Separate arms and legs, and it is only connected to the woman via an umbilical cord. We've been over this a thousand times, FoxHastings. It's not part of the woman's body just because it is inside her, and it's not part of her body just because it is connected to her. I could easily disprove either of those by giving examples that would require you to come to absurd conclusions. So what else do you have, FoxHastings? What other logical argument do you have that it is "hers"?
Look, in the case of conjoined twins, we all recognize they are sharing the same body. Couldn't we argue that the woman is also sharing her uterus with another entity during a pregnancy? You opened up the door by making the claim that the fetus could be part of the woman's body. Well, what's to prevent the reverse of that from being true? Why can't the woman's uterus be seen as part of the fetus's body, temporarily? It is after all at that point more of an essential organ to the fetus's body rather than the woman's body.
If the woman doesn't want her unborn child, she waves her magical wand, and suddenly it is not a human life any longer. That seems to be the only plausible explanation.
NONE of which it would have if it wasn't inside, and connected to, the woman. Not true and your "only" is a BIG "only".... And a thousand times I asked you , "If it isn't hers then whose is it?"" And, typically, I have never gotten an answer. Now, tell me how and when a ZEF is counted in a census, given a SSN, ??
NO, I did NOT....a fetus IS part of a woman's body....there is no "could be".....those are YOUR words... Yes, but it is IN the WOMAN'S body, the uterus IS the woman's........if the fetus doesn't need the woman's body then let it grow it's own uterus IN FACT IF you think the fetus is not part of the woman's body why can't it be taken out and grow on a shelf by itself ???
FoxHastings said: ↑ Answer: The Unborn Victims of Violence Act, the UVVA.... It is an act designed to give stiffer sentences for those who kill someone else's ZEF. IT DOES NOT GIVE A ZEF STATUS OF A LEGAL HUMAN BEING. If an assailant attacks a pregnant woman and TAKES AWAY HER CHOICE in gestation ( a criminal act for anyone IMO), they are charged with whatever charge the UVVA provides...(it may vary from state to state) A ZEF is NOT "merely" a part of a woman's body it IS part of her body , it is NOT a separate legal human being. I understand what you are trying to say but: Pregnant women aren't really in a "special class"...just the same "class" as all born humans who have the basic right of bodily autonomy. A human ZEF(zygote/embryo/fetus) is human ( adjective) it is NOT A human being (noun) as in legal human being, it has NO rights, it is a part of the woman it's in . The UVVA does NOT grant a ZEF rights! It can't. AND it expressly says so. NO, I don't...I never have called the death of a fetus "murder"... The UVVA may, I'd have to look it up....maybe you should..but it would NOT matter what they called it since using the word "murder" does NOT bestow rights. So WHO is doing that?
