I'm sorry, I thought Yoni asked what's for dinner. My bad.
behind every pro life woman is a strong man with a ed fist
Thanks for supporting 'Murrican workers!
Well, for people who believe an unborn child is a person, this is the same as saying you should let the mother answer whether or not she wants to kill her 1 year old child. We don't see the difference.
So? Should we base the rule of law on a majority vote?
The difference is the 1 year old is not living inside the mother.
You must think a miscarriage is murder too.
Intentionally induced. Yep.
So, you're with Barack Obama, and are okay with any prenatal abortion, right up to the point of delivery?
I don't know Obama's position but I feel it should be legal up until the point at which the baby can survive on its own outside the womb. Otherwise you have the law dictating that a person must harbor another person inside her body against her will.
Nice straw man, yoni.
If yoni or anyone who wants to control women gave anything resembling a about the children after they were born, I would consider them to actually be pro-life.
Well, for people who believe that it's absurd not to give a woman/victim a choice in this matter, this is the same as saying you want to punish rape victims for not "shutting that whole thing down" by making them birth someone else's rape trophy solely so that non victims like yourself can feel better about your idealogical purity. We don't see the difference.
the child's life is sacred until it breathes on its own
Well, Barack Obama's position is that he's in favor of allowing women to seek abortions, even in the third trimester; and, he voted against the ban on partial-birth abortions.
Is the point at which a baby can survive on its own, outside the womb, the same for every baby? Are there babies that cannot survive outside the womb, even after birth? Are there babies that can survive outside the womb at a point before which abortions are currently being allowed? Is that point subject to change due to medical advancement?
Once the child can breathe on it's own, it's a sinner, because we're all born sinners. But not before we breathe on our own.
Hmm. A biblical acknowledgement of the moment of birth representing a significant change in the human condition. That's interesting.
Link to his saying that.
Thanks in advance.
Here's the idealogical disconnect with conservatives I don't get...
They're against expanding welfare, to save money. Which is fine, except that means that all those mothers who have multiple children won't get as much support, meaning those children will suffer.
They're against increasing funding towards education (more money doesn't necessarily equate to better education, but there's obviously some link there).
Granted, I think Yoni does actually make some interesting points. As our ability to provide life-saving services for children born early increases, the moral question becomes, in my eyes, shadier. I'm against third-trimester abortions except in emergency cases, I'm unsure on 2nd-trimester, and I'm relatively ok with 1st.
Perhaps science and technology will open the door to, say, "fetus adoptions" or some such.
I would like to think that, in an advanced future society, we'll have the technology for those who want to abort to do something like the above. People already want adoptions pretty young, so fetuses (fetii?
I would suggest that maybe it could be a government program to protect these children, but that would sound like some sort of socialist health care program, and I doubt the conservatives care that much about the unborn.
"As our ability to provide life-saving services for children born early increases"
One of the huge indicators that America has ed up health is the huge drop in full-term babies.
One would think that something as essential to the species as birth would be most immune to environmental factors, since sensitive babies would have been selected out, survival of the fittest (for surviving adverse birth conditions). But even white women can hold them full term. some startling stats with 1990 as baseline
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db39.htm
Yoni loves sterile, legalistic, rabbinical debates and playing gotcha. But what is his solution for 400K abortions in USA annually?
I see them as two different problems on which the judgement of one should not inform the judgement of the other.
If I believe unborn children should not be killed, (just as I hope you believe post-natal children should not be killed) simply because of the cir stances of their living conditions, I don't see how you can conflate the two and pretend it matters into what cir stances a baby will be born when determining whether or not to kill it.
For those of us who believe unborn children should not be killed, this is the same as you saying a child living in abject poverty, with little hope of rising above it, should be euthanized.
SB 230 Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Senate approved bill 44-7, with five senators voting present, including Obama.
"Present," technically means "No." Senators will typically vote "Present" so that it won't be used against them in future elections.
SB 562 Parental Notice of Abortion Act. Bill passed Senate 39-7, with 11 present votes, including Obama.
SB 1093 Law to protect Liveborn children. Bill passed 34-6, with 12 present, including Obama.
SB 1094 Bill to protect children born as result of induced labor abortion. Bill passed 33-6, with 13 present, including Obama.
SB 1095 Bill defining "born alive" defines "born-alive infant" to include infant "born alive at any stage of development." Bill passed 34-5, with nine present, including Obama.
Fyi...
granted, these are cases where the women allegedly consumed harmful substances, but they still beg the question as to where life begins.In a growing number of US states, pregnant women who miscarry their babies are being criminalized, some charged with murder.
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/201...6/18683911.php
So he didn't say it.
Thanks.
lol technically
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
