That is your opinion based on your modern day religious beliefs. Why do you think your religious views should take precedence over law and over historical Christian beliefs? From Roe v Wade... These disciplines variously approached the question in terms of the point at which the embryo or fetus became "formed" or recognizably human, or in terms of when a "person" came into being, that is, infused with a "soul" or "animated." A loose consensus evolved in early English law that these events occurred at some point between conception and live birth. 22 This was "mediate animation." Although [410 U.S. 113, 134] Christian theology and the canon law came to fix the point of animation at 40 days for a male and 80 days for a female, a view that persisted until the 19th century, there was otherwise little agreement about the precise time of formation or animation. There was agreement, however, that prior to this point the fetus was to be regarded as part of the mother, and its destruction, therefore, was not homicide. Note especially the bolded part.
Why? Theocracies are generally against abortions. If America was a Christian Theocracy I'm sure abortion would be outlawed just as it is in many Muslim countries. So, I ask again, Would you prefer America to become a theocracy? Or do you want to impose just some of your religious views on all Americans?
You don't have to be religious to know what murder is. You don't have to have a secular lifestyle to know what murder is and isn't.
I'm about as Atheist as one comes, nonsensical liberals, exactly why democrats have the least amount of power since 1929.
Assumes factoids NOT in evidence. A fetus does not have a "will" because it is not a legal person. Only a legal person can be murdered. No amount of dissembling is going to alter the Law of the Land and the legal definition of a person. There is a process to change the constitution which you can avail yourself of in order to change the definition of a person but since that has always failed miserably states like Texas try to find dishonest ways to subvert the legal definition of a person. This too will fail because the courts are not stupid and can see through this attempt to subvert the separation of church and state once again.
Abortion does not fit the definition of murder because a fetus is NOT a person. However if you want to legally make a fetus a person then you will have to execute every woman who has an abortion because she would be guilty of 1st degree murder. Are you willing to execute 1,000,000 million women each and every year in America? Because that is what you are advocating and outlawing abortion doesn't stop it happening. You will have to catch, try, imprison and execute one million women, many of them mothers and Christians, every year. Explain exactly how killing 1,000,000 women each and every year upholds the "sanctity of life"? How are you going to explain to millions of small children that your "loving god" wanted you to kill their mommies?
Such an extremist point of view. You dont have to do that at all. The fact you believe thats the ONLY thing we can do...says alot about you.
The extremists are those who are trying to take away women's rights. That you believe that it is acceptable to deny women their rights says volumes.
So you are an advocate for charging any woman that aborts a detectable zygote with first degree murder. If you truly believe they are killing another human being they must be charged as such, we don't have lesser penalties for killing a toddler. That's when the argument falls apart.
life/death has nothing to do with religion and that is just a swerve on your behalf. It is binary. If there was no life, then there would be no need to abort now would there?
I know several people who had services for their miscarriages. Making it mandatory for abortions isnt cool, though.
For most of US history there were no laws against abortion. - - - Updated - - - Legal History of Abortion (1821 Present) http://law.studentsforlife.org/legalities-of-abortion/ http://law.studentsforlife.org/legalities-of-abortion/
Doesn't mean thier shouldn't be. - - - Updated - - - It's not thier right to murder - - - Updated - - - Once again, you are an extremist. There are plenty of other things we could do.
Fetus are living persons. And just like every other living person, they have no right to deprive another person of ownership of their body against that person's will, even if it is necessary for their survival.
By getting yourself pregnant it's your obligation to feed the fetus with your body. Your argument has been defeated long ago. - - - Updated - - - I'm willing to compromise due to the scary willingness to murder by people like you. In order to save as many lives as possible. Why are you so blood thirsty?
It's not a child really, also dead bodies mean nothing they are just sacks that a miserable pile of secrets used to live in.
That would be true if pregnancy was 100% voluntary (not even sex is that in many cases that lead to pregnancy) and occurred 100% of the times people have intercourse. So then you don't really believe its murder.
But it's murder, or is it actually some fuzzy grey area quasi-version of murder. Like I said, that's where the "it's murder" argument falls apart. It is either murder, which should carry the full weight of that charge, or it is not. Since you implied calling it murder is extremist, what do you think the penalties should be to the mother - I know y'all just want to shut all the clinics down but self-induced abortions were happening long before clinics came into the picture. If a woman doesn't want to carry a fetus she will get rid of it, Since all the clinics have shut down she has most likely injured herself. How should we deal with her?
And using that criteria for "murder" it would hold true that bad prenatal care is child abuse. With that in mind, will the USA be opening a new government agency that employs people to follow pregnant women around in order to monitor them and their care of their embryo or fetus? Will it be a fine or prison time if the woman skips her daily prescribed vitamin supplements?
