Very good but Im not saying it intentionally killed criminals but that it happened, Im neutral on this because I believe that if a woman's life is on the line or she was raped and doesnt want it than it should be legal but I also dont believe in the murder of children. Crime can only be stopped by ending the cause but thats an entirely other subject but Im glad you know youre Marx.

__________________
“Capitalism cannot reform itself; it is doomed to self-destruction. No universal selfishness can bring social good to all.” —Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois

Yeah, advocating killing off people you consider genetically unworthy doesnt seem unbalanced at all. Have you written your congressman?

The two are mutually exclusive. Does a child of rape forfeit it's right to exist? Does it cease being a person because the of manner of it's conception?

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

I am pro-life to the extent that if extra-uterine life is possible, one must act towards it. As long as medicine can enable life for a premature baby outside of the womb, abortion is murder. I am case-by-case with respect to the mother dying, but I put the child first because even if the mother dies during labor, and the child lives, the child can still go to an orphanage or elsewhere to be adopted.

The problem with this poll is that there is no nuance to the answers. One must be either completely for it or completely against it.

Because the whole point of being anti-abortion is because you are arguing that the fetus is a person.

Either it is a person or it is not. There is no inbetween. Therefore, nuance answers are irrelevant.

I like polls like this because they do not allow people to sit on fences.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

But I have just proven that nuance is useful and necessary to this debate. The fetus is more human late in pregnancy than early in pregnancy. Also, the purpose of polls is to gauge reactions and collect opinions, not to force one side or the other. If people are on the fence, this poll will not show it.

How did you determine that?

It's DNA is identical to what it was when it was a zygote. The DNA does not change between conception and birth. It is equally human in all phases of development.

Since when do opinions and reactions have to include nuanced responses? I am not sure where you got that idea.

No one is truely on the fence on this issue IMO. If you are on the fence is just means you have not considered the issue carefully enough.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

Identical DNA does not equal identical ability to survive outside of the womb, at least not at this juncture of medical expertise. It is the extra-uterine survivability factor that is at the crux of the debate. A fetus at 15 weeks has a zero chance of surviving outside of the womb, but a 32 week fetus has remarkably good chances of surviving extra-uterally. Therefore, at 15 weeks, abortion leans towards pro-choice of the mother (and father, if present, in my opinion), but at 32 weeks, the fetus must be considered a baby just like an already delivered baby. At 32 weeks, pro-life of the baby must hold and abortion must be considered murder.

Nuanced responses should be considered when they arise and exist in most cases. I do believe that in my case, I should have been able to choose an "It depends" response, instead of having to choose between solid "yes" and solid "no." By the way, I chose "yes" for the purposes of this poll, but I shouldn't have to be pigeon-holed.

I was just using that as an example of a response that would not be reflected by this poll.

Maybe. But that isnt what you said. What you said was "The fetus is more human late in pregnancy than early in pregnancy". That statement is false.

um...says who?

The fact that it cannot survive without the mother does not necessarily mean it is not a person. Want an example?

Two adult conjoined twins. One (the stronger one) wants surgical separation, but such a separation would result in the death of the weaker one. The weak twin cant survive without the strong one attached. Does the stronger one still have the right to force a surgical separation?

I draw an analogy to abortion; the mother cannot kill the fetus simply because the fetus cannot survive without her.

Viability is not the determining factor where the value of the fetus is concerned. A person still have value, even if they rely on another person to exist.

Says who? Who exactly made that rule?

Nuanced responses are not always relevant to an argument. This one being a perfect example.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

It's neither true nor false. It depends on your definition of what's human. I've seen a human. I've seen pictures of 8 week old zygotes. They don't have much in common.

__________________
Do us all a favor and just kill yourself.

Genetically, it is human.

Exactly at what point does the Zygote become human then? And what are your criteria for determining that?

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page