The group of people that I simply cant understand

Assault is a crime. Generally abuse has been going on for some time before a murder happens. And it is generally a refusal to get an abortion that gets the woman beaten not the preganancy itself.

 

I do support abortion, or at least the choice.
I suppose personally, it has to do with I enjoy children. And I was against abortion for many many years. One doesn't flip on decades long ideologies over nite.

 

Generally. But people don't get put in jail for life for giving black eyes.
Hell, even restraining orders haven't stopped abusive men from killing their significant others.

Why would you want to force a woman in an abusive relationship that wants out to carry a pregnancy to full term and then be tied to that abusive person for at least the next 18 yrs?
When a secret abortion could get her out of the relationship.
And there's a chance the child may grow up to be just like the abusive dad.

 

Agreed but getting pregnant doesn't make the abuse better or worse. And if you think black eyes are the worst of it you are kidding yourself. By the third time the guy has put her in the hospital it should be clear to anyone with a functioning brain that the only way that woman will be alive five years from now is if that swine abusing her is dead or in jail.

 

At least Epstein will be able to have an interesting conversation or two with Muhammad.

 

I don't believe in freely made decisions that result in the death of another human being. But that is the sticking point isn't it? You can no more be convinced that a child is in the womb is a human being then a Nazi can be convinced that a Jew is a human being.

 

SAVE THE FETUS/SCREW THE CHILD

 

The only reason we keep going over and over and over and over this, is that the anti-abortion crowd refuses to acknowledge the pro-choice logic and reasoning. Instead, they pretend an argument has never been made for choice.

 

You perfect solution isn't. Sometimes making the right choice before the sex, fails, and pregnancy occurs. Then what?

 

What I can not understand is the group of people that think a single human cell is a baby.

Your post is a big fat fallacy "assumed premise" - you assume that a single human cell is a baby - as if you have some proof that this is defacto true .. but you do not.

So here is your big chance. A zygote is a single human cell. What is the difference between this cell, and other human cells (heart brain and so on) that makes the zygote "a baby" while the other cells are not babies ?

 

The problem with your post is that it assumes a single human cell is a Child/Baby. See post 61.

 

Sex does not always produce a baby - in fact, most times it does not.

Regardless - in the case of an accidental pregnancy the choice is to let the process continue towards the creation of a baby or to terminate that process - hopefully, in the early stages prior to the creation of a baby.

 

No more hypocritical/cognitively dissonant than claiming to be "pro-life" while being pro-execution. Listen to Jesus and deal with the beam in your own eye first...

 

Ohhhh, the conservationist of the human species, yeah, the deer and antelope get the same...

 

Well if you support abortion why not just say it instead of counching it behind "choice".

So you enjoy children but support an act that kills them. See I don't support an act that kills them by choice and not extreme necessity.

 

You are incapable of making the intellectual distinction between the will taking of an innocent live and the legal sanction of capital punishment for someone who violates one of our most sacred rights?

I don't think anyone should be confined by the government, I think you have a right against being confined by government, unless you violate the law. Do you think we should change that?

 

What a strawman. NO one wants to force her into a relationship with and abusive man, stop with the nonsense. If he is abusing he should be in jail, otherwise he pays his share to the mother to raise the children, failing to do so also lands him under legal sanction. Why would you try to keep them together if one of them is abusing the other? In the meantime the mother can try to find a father for the children and create a nuclear family for them. But of course how about NOT having a sexual relationship with an abusive person in the first place?

 

The problem is how you define life vs how others define it. Is something that is incapable of feeling pain or existing outside of a womb life? Something that is unable to have conscious though? Something that has fully developed synapses?

That’s the problem with discussion on abortion. No one agrees with the basic definition.

 

I define it as the living human at whatever particular stage of life every human being goes through at that point in their life. Purely objective, not subjective as some try to engage in to defend abortion.

 

Sigh. Terminating a pregnancy is a medical decision by a private party consistent with the rights we all normally enjoy when deciding what surgical procedures we should have. There is a doctor and a patient consultation resulting in that decision. Capital punishment is a decision our government makes after a verdict, that otherwise would be called an act of illegal murderous vengeance should a private party make that same call. Its not about some social value of the killers. Its about not compromising and marginalizing the moral authority of the government for some scumbag. Vengeance is not a 'family value'. Most industrialized and civilized nations seem to see this the same way.

 

It's not vengeance it is a forfeiture of their life for the life they illegally ended.

 

I struggle with the abortion topic, I have seen well rationed arguments on both sides of the fence but banning all abortion has been proven to cause more harm than is necessary. I do agree in banning abortion after the first trimester or 12 weeks.

I just don’t see the benifit of allowing or forcing a mother that is likely unfit and ill prepared to bring a child into the world that will most likely be neglected and put on a path to prison. I’m also an advocate of mandatory tubal ligation after the first abortion or for women and men that are on public support of any kind.

 

They have historically called that same concept vengeance. Face it, you'd like to 'forfeit' their eyes, testicles and each of their nails and watch them forteit their skin under the same notion. We have governments on this planet that call those cruel acts justice too. Who says governments can't be vengeful? The legal process, while not irrelevant , certainly is not cleansing.

 

You are again fabricating a ludicrous premise in order to support your extremely biased line of anti-liberal propaganda. Those who unequivocally oppose the death penalty, especially in a horrific situation such as this, are fanatics who are also inflexible in their pro-life stance, usually using religion to condemn others who disagree. . . . These are USUALLY those whose lives are TOTALLY unaffected by the individual facets of the arguments.

I challenge you to point out an exception, which would be a rarity, especially in liberal circles. Most pro-choice advocates do not think of abortion as a GOOD THING, but support a woman's right to choose, rather than have their choices arbitrarily dictated to them by uninvolved parties, as only they themselves fully understand the situations and likely repercussions.

Those who purposely take the life of a child will certainly face the wrath of their maker, but should be executed, as he is nothing but a potential danger to others.

 

You are reading the words of a fanatic atheist agnostic. Shall we count the nations across the globe full of such 'fanatics' at the helm of power? There are 105 nations that are governed by 'fanatics' with bans in legislative statutes or their constitutions.

Burkina Fascho, Mongolia, Philippines, Suriname, Germany, Rwanda, Britain, Congo, France, Togo, Spain, Portugal, Gabon, Belgium, Ireland, Ivory Coast, Luxemburg, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Argentina, Finland, Madagascar, Norway, Albania, Senegal, Austria, Andorra, Bulgaria, Mauritius, Czeck Republic, Cyprus, Greece, South Africa, Netherlands, Switzerland, Mozambique,Slovakia, Liechtenstein, Seychelles, Australia, Bolivia, Namibia, New Zealand, Fiji, Samoa, Guinea,Benin, Burundi, Cape Verde, Djibouti,

No member state of the European Union allows capital punishment. Total religious wackjob countries all over Europe, I know.

There are more.

To understand us, you need to stop focusing on the criminal and his crimes and start focusing on what it says about a government to tie and immobilize someone and then kill them. You can rightfully assert that someone does not deserve to live, but it does not therefore follow that someone or some government entity acquires the right to kill. They are separate questions.