I didn't need to read the article to know that because I have read the science. It's simple to find for anyone that is interested in doing something other than spewing disingenuous propaganda. This is more of a summary rather than getting into the neurological nuts and bolts ... but it is compelling. After talking about the pro life movements use of junk science it states this: http://scienceprogress.org/2013/04/navigating-the-junk-science-of-fetal-pain/ Suggesting that pain can be felt at 6 weeks is a colossal absurdity and is nonsense beyond nonsense.
Given the APA is very agenda-driven, with a strong political slant, I take anything coming from that group with a grain of salt. Women getting abortions are typically not the loving "Kool Aid Moms" with strong marriages and moral character. The average women getting an abortion is typically in unstable relationships. How any study can factor-out the myriad stressors of life and determine how one's mental health is based on having an abortion or having the child is beyond the limits of sound science.
Abortions on demand are not moral. Funding them against the will of the people is also not moral. If Libs like yourself were so fond of equal rights, then you would be demanding the those living in states with strong Constitutional gun laws would be able to keep and bear their firearms the same way in every US city and state, like New York City, Washington DC, California, and so on. Are we not "all Americans?" Well, America is being overrun with illegals. They are not Americans anymore than the 9-11 hijackers were. In summary, my sympathy for unborn children far exceeds yours. As you only derive the worth of unborn based upon what the mother or doctors think.
And she AND the father should bear full responsibility for their actions. Abortions should not be funded by taxpayers unless criminal acts were involved in rare cases. And each state should have the right not to participate in the abortion industry.
Most of the laws and ruling on abortions in US law have been legislated from the bench. If you gave one hoot about the USC, as I know you don't, then you would have the basic understanding the laws should be made in Congress, not in courts. If the unborn were not considered protected under the Constitution, then when, if ever did a single Founder ever say that unborn children were not protected? When did a single signer of the Dec of Independence or the USC ever say that a person killing an unborn child in the womb during a criminal attack was not guilty of a crime? Do tell? I think one's health is one's own responsibility, not the government's. Therefore I do not support entitlement programs that are now impossible to fund for every Tom, Dick and Harry flooding into the programs. Unsustainable.
Translation: "bear full responsibility"= punishment. A child should not be a punishment. Abortions are funded by federal funds if the pregnancy is a result of rape, incest, or threatening the life of the woman, and the woman must be a medicaid recipient to qualify for government funds. Abortion clinics are privately owned. And a woman has the same constitutional rights in one part of the nation as she does in another, therefore no state has the constitutional right to deny a woman access to safe abortion.
And what if the woman just says it was rape?? Why is taxpayer funding being utilized to incentive women to make false accusations? Many of these women are poor and would have no problem making false accusations against their own neighbor if it meant a free $500.
No need to worry about women working the system to their own advantage, the truth is just the opposite. Create enough barriers and women give up and just give birth instead. Some states require a police report, others only a doctor's statement. Only a small number of rapes are actually reported which eliminates many deserving women from the start. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/21/how-do-rape-exceptions-work/ How does the Hyde exemption work? Not as intended, for one thing. A recent study (pdf) from Ibis Reproductive Health found that over half of eligible abortions — that is, of pregnancies due to rape or incest or in cases where continuing the pregnancy would threaten the mother's life — conducted for Medicaid beneficiaries were not reimbursed by the program. By and large, hospitals and doctors who did not get Medicaid reimbursements said that the paperwork for getting the money was too onerous, and it was easier to fund the procedures from nonprofit groups that focus on assisting low-income women with abortion funding. Only 37 percent of women ended up getting eligible abortions funded by Medicaid. As a consequence, a quarter of women on Medicaid who planned on getting an abortion ended up giving birth instead, according to a study (pdf) by the Guttmacher Institute. Those who did get it funded — only 331 in 2009, according (pdf) to Guttmacher — often had to go through a grueling process to be reimbursed. Stephanie Poggi is the executive director of the National Network of Abortion Funds, which coordinates groups that subsidize abortions for low-income women. She tells me that many states require that women submit police reports. BTW, being poor does not automatically make someone a liar or a thief or a cheat. But those who do not trust women to make decisions about their own bodies apparently don't trust women at all.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could control everyone's lives with morality laws so that they behave exactly how we want?
Maybe, but it's a bad idea to create incentives for women to falsely accuse people. And even when they do suspect the woman is making false allegations, they rarely prosecute her for it because they do not want to do anything that might discourage other women who are true rape victims from coming forward. It's a difficult situation.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could get rid of the people we don't like to avoid them causing us inconvenience? That ex-wife of yours during a messy divorce might be planning to hurt you, better to off her before she can pose any potential danger to you.
Hmmm, getting rid of people who are inconvenient, killing people because they MIGHT pose a danger to our health...
A child should not treated as a tissue donor before it is born. If having sex outside a firm relationship means getting an unwanted pregnacy---then don't do it. Obama & Co. wants everyone on federally controlled healthcare. They also want absolute control of medicine. It's not about the doctor- patient relationship in the New World Order, it's about government- patient control. I'm just waiting for eventual collapse, thinking that the US government can fund unlimited medical care for the millions of entitlement seekers arriving each year. As if YOU were ever fond of the USC. I don't remember seeing an age limit on the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Your liberal heroes can imagine the USC and their Amendments can be stretched quite a bit---so why can't they imagine it covers unborn humans as well?
The primary "law" on abortion (Roe) did not create any new law, it merely enforced a constitutional right that already existed that Texas was violating. As you well know (and couldn't care less about) is that the USC's job is to ensure laws are constitutional .. including laws made in Congress, if they are not constitutional the the USC has the power to over rule them, which is exactly what they did in the case of Roe vs Wade. I could just as easily turn the question around and ask you when, if ever, did a single Founder ever say that the unborn WERE protected? When did a single signer of the DOI (Not a legal document BTW) ever say that a person killing an unborn child in the womb during a criminal attack was guilty of a crime? Do tell? If that is your stance then start looking at ways of reducing the cost of health care so that even the poorest can afford it, or is it more on point that you actually want a two or even three tier health system with those at the bottom dying through lack of help.
A child or a potential child is not treated as a tissue donor before death. "Just say no" doesn't have much effect on reality. Birth control fails and people make mistakes, so unwanted pregnancies are going to continue to happen. Plenty of other countries provide healthcare for citizens, it can be done here as well. The age limit is from birth to death, anything else is unworkable.
Not another pathetic attempt to propagate a known falsehood by repetition. Over and over again you have been asked to substantiate your claim that a "zygote" is a Person/Living Human/Baby/ Homo sapiens ... or quite making it. You can not prove your claim is true. Repeating it over and over again will not make your claim any less false.
I tend to heavily agree with your assessment on this. Here are some hard facts: https://rainn.org/statistics 44% of victims are under the age of 18. 80% are under the age of 30 68% of sexual assaults are not reported to the police. 98% of rapists will never spend a day in jail. As for the false reports of rapes, the numbers are smaller.....but widely vary when I place it on a Google search. Some sources state 1.5% of rapes are misreported or not true and some sites place the number at 10%. Even though those numbers feel low, I do not wish to provide a source because all the sources I saw stated numbers in and around those ranges.
