So then, you agree with me that saying that abortion is okay because it's only the woman's business, is a ridiculous argument? Why is how they function in Society relevant? If they accuse you of what?
@CCitizen, I see that you 'liked' this post, and another post of mine too. I'm confused, because it seemed that you were on the left and pro-choice.
This is very much an argument that a religious person would make! Religious people believe that the God of their religion has given people a moral code written in their hearts. Of course, this is obviously not the same as what we understand as "laws" today. Nice try though. You might say that this 'old style' of law pre-existed the 'new style' of law. I can agree with that. If a law was introduced which violated what you consider to be moral, you would use the 'old style' of law to argue against the law.
You haven't been able to distinguish the moral difference between an abortionist who kills unborn kids at the mother's request and abortionist who kills born kids at the mother's request. And I doubt that you will EVER be able to!
The difference is that, as I've stated NUMEROUS times, there is no basis for calling a fetus a, "kid," a child, or even a full- fledged human being before roughly the third trimester of pregnancy. That is the case you have failed or even attempted to make. But the mere fact that this is the law, puts the onus on you to show its flaws. Your simply saying that it is flawed, is not the same as proving your point, using logic & facts. That's how debate works; it seems that you fail, also, to understand this.
So what is your understanding of the distinction between a pre-third trimester life and a post-third trimester life?
Uh, it's in English : FoxHastings said: ↑ Why would an abortionist kill born children?""" Read it again, it's a question that refers back to your : . chris155au said: ↑ You haven't been able to distinguish the moral difference between an abortionist who kills unborn kids at the mother's request and abortionist who kills born kids at the mother's request. And I doubt that you will EVER be able to!""""" The question: Why would an abortionist kill born children?""" ..is not properly answered with """"If they willingly break the law""""" That does not answer : WHY would an abortionist kill born children.....can you possibly see the difference?? ..
Really, you don't remember? After all the times I explained this to you, then re-quoted myself to answer your redundant asking of this very same question? Do you know how insulting it is of you to have the gaul to ask me, yet again? TRANSLATION of what you are saying to me: I ask you stuff, then totally ignore everything in your response, especially the main points that you've taken the trouble to embolden for me, only interested in any line I might take out of context to throw back at you. Tell you what. You go back and look at my replies TO YOU. I think you should have the answer to your question in under 2 minutes. But, if not, keep reading. At the very least, you should be able to ask me that question w/ a reasonable possibility of what you think might be my answer, based on what I've written. If you, by some circumstance, get it wrong-- recognizing, at that point, the pathetic nature of your attempts at comprehension-- I will answer you one more time. That is, if you really want an answer. Fair?
I am neither pro-choice nor pro-life. I believe abortion is morally wrong. I believe it should not be regulated by the law. Adultery is morally wrong, but not illegal. I am Jewish -- my timeline indicates that I do not post on Sabbath. Yet it would be unthinkable to enforce Sabbath by State Laws.
Sorry, but all you've done is cite Roe v Wade's viability standard. I want to know what you're understanding of the SCIENCE of that is. As in, your understanding of what makes it all of a sudden viable after a certain point in the term. My suspicion is that you really don't know.
Some murder is illegal -- like killing a born child in USA. Some murder is legal. In my opinion abortion is morally as sinful as murder. Some murder is rewarded. Many American soldiers who committed war crimes in Korea/Vietnam/Iraq were rewarded.
Anyone may notice an interesting feature in my timeline -- I do not type Friday sunset -- Saturday 1 hour after sunset. 52 days per year plus holidays. Violating Sabbath is a sin, but it can not be made a crime.
Viability is the correct answer. What makes it viable is that it has progressed in its development. Do you understand that it doesn't just, "get bigger," during gestation? If its vital organs aren't sufficiently formed to operate normally, or close to normally, they aren't going to continue developing once the fetus is REMOVED FROM THE WOMB. Hence, it will not survive. A half-sized brain, will not sustain it, in the world. One criterion of personhood, is being alive. While there is life in a fetus, it is utterly dependent on the mother for that life, for the better part of its embryonic journey. Hence it is inseparable from her, in its personhood. That is, until it can exist independently, the fetus is PART OF THE MOTHER. Now YOU tell me. When do you think a fetus becomes a human being, and WHY?
And the amazing thing is, what Kermit did wasn't all that different from LEGAL abortion. They just caught him on a little technicality. According to several reports, what shocked the jurors the most in the court was not hearing what Gosnell did, but was legal for him to have done. That is, most of the horrors they heard he couldn't be prosecuted for.
Wow. This is a simply EXTRAORDINARY position to hold! A VERY rare position I would suggest. So does this mean you think that abortion is a legal type of murder?
Each Nation has its own Laws. For instance, many actions by US Army and Air Force in Korea and Southeast Asia were murder, but they were not illegal by American Law. In fact they were rewarded. General Curtis LeMay was guilty for many civilian deaths, but he was rewarded: Abortion is seen by many people of different religions as murder. I also see it as a moral equivalent of murder. But it is not illegal. Religion and Morality can not be legislated. For instance, Sabbath can not be made into law.
In some Muslim Nations, alcohol and disagreement with Islam is illegal. In USA, most Ethical and Religious Laws are not enforced by the State.
Those are not fair comparisons. In your examples, you are talking about a "sin against the self" or a "sin against God". In the case of abortion, we are talking about a wrong committed against another human entity.
When you say that some murder is legal, do you mean in any given country? Or do you mean murder in one country isn't murder in another?
