7 Dead Babies Found in Home, Any different than Abortion really?

LOL

ba·by (bā′b&#275
n.
A very young child; an infant.
The American Heritage® Medical Dictionary

--------

baby
Etymology: ME, babe
1 an infant or young child, especially one who is not yet able to walk or talk.
2 to treat gently or with special care.
Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition.

-------

ba·by (bā'b&#275,
An infant; a newborn child.
Farlex Partner Medical Dictionary

------

ba·by (bā'b&#275
1. An infant; a newborn child.
2. Colloquially, in some usages, the younger child.
Medical Dictionary for the Health Professions and Nursing

-------

baby
Type: Term
Pronunciation: bā′bē

Definitions:
1. An infant; a newborn child. - http://www.medilexicon.com/medicaldictionary.php?t=9072

-------

Who was incorrect again .. oh yes that would be you.

It is also a slang term - agreed - but in the context of abortion, which is a medical procedure the correct terminology should be used. ... baby is not he correct terminology to use for a zygote / embryo / fetus.

Yes it is also applied to non living things as well such as a car, so are we now to assume that when you say 'baby' you mean the Ford parked outside, because if you want to play this type of game I can to.

 

Really care to show me where I am saying that what Roe says is correct and right? (hint - I don't) and of you actually bothered to follow the comments correctly you would see that my response was to correct and error of Whaler's.

Roe does not actually admit anything of a sort .. so again I ask you to point out where I am quoting the law to justify the law .. in other words put up or shut up.

 

nope, just agreeing with your statement that age doesn't matter (even though it is obvious it does) .. it's called sarcasm BTW. Oh and how good of you to try and twist my comment to suit, I would ask you to show where I actually say what you have put but that would be a waste of time, and we both know it.

 

Now he'll ask you what "put up or shut up " means....

 

here's where u quoted the law to justify the law.

 

maybe not, makes a big difference to the law though .. although it makes more of a difference than you probably think, given that while in the womb the fetus is basically anesthetized and feels nothing, while at birth it is very much awake and feels a whole lot more, so yeah I'd say it makes quite a difference.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes its good to have these laws that protect a woman's choice concerning her pregnancy against third party offenders, shame that pro-lifers have highjacked them in order to serve their agenda.

 

Just where the (*)(*)(*)(*) do I say that this is the law and it is right because that law says so .. FFS, do you not understand that my comment was in response to a incorrect statement CONCERNING law made by Whaler, Sam go away you have no idea or comprehension of what you are talking about.

 

So you agree it is a homicide? A human fetus is not a human being? See, you just don't make sense.

- - - Updated - - -

Roe, as it has been implemented in the states sets a threshold prior to birth. Do you claim that is false?

- - - Updated - - -

WOW, your frustration is showing. You should obtain a logical argument, then you can shed that frustration.

- - - Updated - - -

So in YOUR mind, how much pain you feel determines how much of a human being you are? See, you just don't make sense.
- - - Updated - - -

Only it doesn't protect a choice, it protects a person.

 

Are you purposely playing ignorant? I admitted to nothing of the fact. What the mother chooses is everything to do with the pregnancy. The fetus is not a legal human being with rights unless the mother chooses it to be.
Now we'll see if you're playing or actual.

 

Nope. . . prior to being born, they are called zygote, embryon and fetus, then late term fetus. The only "baby" mention is by parents and families who WANT that fetus to live through the 9 months and become a baby then a toddler through birth.

It would have been MUCH BETTER for this woman to have an early term abortions than to wait until after the birth. Prior to the birth, terminating a pregnancy is LEGAL through at least week 16, and later if there is a danger to the mother. Killing a baby who has gone through the birth canal and has given his first breath is infanticide and is obviously illegal.

 

would see much more of this if Abortion was outlawed, this is what pro-lifers want, they do not care about babies born into this world

Bush and Texas
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,151448,00.html

 

This is once again incorrect. The UVVA makes NO provision that the law can only be enforced if he woman expresses a desire that she wants the child. You are simply WRONG....AGAIN!

- - - Updated - - -

NOPE! After being born they are called a newborn, an infant, a toddler, etc..... but this in no way precludes them from also being called a baby. You ONCE AGAIN FAIL!

 

No, it would be a lie to say I ever claimed anyone has a choice to murder babies. I never said that.

Legal abortion is not murder. People can whine and moan and LIE and try to make abortion murder but it isn't.

 

If the mother chooses to not carry out the pregnancy and has it terminated, then there should be a case for you to prove me wrong. Otherwise you're still posting ignorance. So the provision must be there.

 

Legality and your logic do not mix.....

 

You have no logic so I'm still way ahead.....

 

According to those two Australian "ethicists," this would just be "post-birth abortion." Let's just postpone the official starting point of personhood as long as we can in order to justify doing whatever the hell we want. That's all we're really doing anyway. We're just trying to see how long we can get away with killing somebody before it actually counts as killing them. That's the wonderful world of abortion in a nutshell.

 

And the official starting point of personhood is when?

 

still waiting for you to point out where the law says the mother's wishes have anything to do with application of the law.

 

and I'm still waiting for you to point out where it doesn't.

Please detail any person (including the pregnant woman) that has been charged and convicted under UVVA type laws where there has been a termination of the pregnancy with the females consent.

 

You are just being childish now. I'll take that as an admission on your part that it does not say what you claim. Bubye now.

BTW, which female?

And another thing, I already explained that there is a prosecution exception built into the law that prevents prosecution of the offender committing the homicide if she happens to be the carrying mother.

You have no point.

Here is where I prove you dead wrong, A woman carrying a baby inside is murdered and the child in utero dies as a result. The woman is pregnant but doesn't even know she is yet. Is there anything in that law that states that two counts of homicide are prohibited because the mother had not yet expressed whether she wanted to keep the child or not? SHOW ME!!!!

 

and I'll take that as your admission that you cannot prove it doesn't .. Ad Hominem noted and reported BTW.

The only one the law applies to

Actually you didn't, you specified abortion as an act that cannot lead to a prosecution of a woman.

and you never do.

 

There isn't only one the law applies to. A women who is not the mother could be the perp who commits the double homicide.


See how out of touch you are here?

 

Ah yes the usual Whaler twist and misrepresent.

Good to see some things and people never change.

 

As you added this in after I had already replied. i'll answer it separately.

Firstly you would be required to show where this has happened, in order to set a precedence, can you do that?

Secondly the assumption made by law is that even if the woman didn't know she was pregnant she would have wanted to maintain it (this I personally believe is a wrong assumption to make, but it is based on the historical assumption that ALL pregnancies are good which in itself is a fallacy)

Thirdly if this hypothetical woman had left a signed contract stating that if she were to become pregnant she would have an abortion, how would that effect any ruling?

You see I can pull hypothetical situations out of the air just as easily as you can