This is an incredibly good point that sums up my feelings. If a fetus can survive outside the womb, then it is a "life." As long as the fetus requires THAT woman's bodily processes to survive, it is still a part of the woman. The only time when it will be OK to outlaw abortion is when we have the technology to remove the fetus and incubate it outside the womb. Then, abortion would actually be a removal of the fetus, along with the woman's parental rights. Then, the government could bring the fetus to term and adopt it out.
Is it criminal to commit homicide? What about people who rely on insulin, dialysis machines, iron lungs (Big Lebowski reference), other people to take care of them and keep them alive? Does a dependence on something or someone else entail non-personhood? What is this fetus going to be? As has been stated before, a realist position enatils knowing that abortions are not going to stop out right. I'm not condoning them in any way shape or form. Making abortion illegal will surely make the number drop signifigantly. Like I've said before, its a moral act, and we must protect those who cannot protect themselves.
You are attempting to force your morality on other people, something which nobody, God included, gives you the right to do. This argument is thrown around a lot, but it holds no water. We force our morality on others all the time to create a functional society. We make murder illegal. We make rape illegal. That's forcing our morality on others. Or, if you say that's only because it impacts another live human beings, we also make animal cruelty illegal. That's certainly forcing our morality as a society on others. Even in your own drug plan, you want to regulate and restrict 12 years old from buying drugs. That certainly is forcing your morality on them. We do it all the time and it's legitimate. Whether it is in this case or not is debatable, but this sweeping brush of forcing morality on others isn't an argument that goes anywhere, any moreso than "abortion is against God's will" is an argument for pro-life. Lots of things against God's will are still legal, so that may support the argument that abortions are wrong, but not that they should be illegal.
And the number of incarcerated and dead women will rise. What about the underground spread of RU-486 The Abortion Pill? A law is not a magic wand. It would be just another messy "war" we will not "win". I just would not rather go down that road. Force is not an answer.
Wait a second, who mentioned anything about religious beliefs, I'm talking about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness here! andymoon, champion of the people. Once again I revisit the old argument we had, if you see someone killing another person on the street, can you say thats wrong? That leads us back to the point of contention, the personhood of the fetus. And that's where science and common sense prove you wrong.
Is it criminal to remove a growth or tumor? No, because you are not reliant on another person's bodily processes. AS long as the fetus is not able to survive outside the womb, it is analogous to a growth or tumor. I know you will find this cold and heartless, but that is the way it is. Just like prohibiting drugs has reduced drug use, huh?
... and I challenge your point! My point is that no one is being forced to pursue an uncertified medical procedure. Classic de-humanizing of the "enemy" is evident when you insist that the mass of cells with only-human DNA is not a Life.
Again, the examples you cite are of things that the overwhelming majority of us hold as moral truths. We are forcing our morality on the sick f***s that murder, rape, and molest children. Criminalizing women by outlawing abortion is very different. You would be forcing your moral beliefs on someone else in a matter having to do with their own body. This is wrong with drug use and it is wrong with abortion.
You can challenge it all you like, but those cells cannot survive outside the mother. If they could, then they would be a "life," but since the mother is completely supporting said growth, it is up to HER and her alone what to do with her body.
Killing children by legalized abortion is very different. You would be forcing your moral beliefs on someone else (the child) in a matter having to do with their own body. This is wrong with drug use and it is wrong with abortion.
The mere fact of men trying to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body cracks me up. If men could get pregnant, there would be a legal, clean, safe abortion clinic on every streetcorner in America.
What is it andy? Isn't a fetus a form of a person? Have you ever known a fetus to comeo out of a woman, as say, a bunny? Once again, have you ever known a person alive who didn't go through this process? It is part and parcel of being a human. The concieved embryo is an individual, living, human, being, by definition. Yes because abortions are so addictive, ummm yummy give me more murder!!!
Hey, I have three daughters. The issue is Life not Bodies, but I can see why you want to construe it as Bodies....
The issue is whether a woman has the right to control her own reproductive system. If the issue were life, why do you support the death penalty?
Hundreds of thousands of abortion rights supporters listened to speeches at the Mall in Washington. http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2004/04/25/national/26MARCH2ready.html Some 500,000 Rally for Abortion Rights By JENNIFER C. KERR Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON — Energized by a turnout of hundreds of thousands on the National Mall, abortion-rights activists are looking to the November presidential elections to reverse what they see as the gradual chipping away of women's reproductive rights. From across the nation and from nearly 60 countries, women marched Sunday with their daughters, mothers, husbands and others in support of the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that made abortion legal. That ruling, they say, is under attack by the Bush administration. So too, they worry is a broader scope of women's health issues, including equal access to birth control and sex education. The rally stretched from the base of the U.S. Capitol about a mile back to the Washington Monument. While authorities no longer give formal crowd estimates, various police sources informally gauged the throng at between 500,000 and 800,000 people. That would exceed the estimated 500,000 who converged on Washington for the last major abortion-rights rally in 1992. ............ http://www.statesman.com/news/content/shared-gen/ap/National/Womens_March.html
Again, the examples you cite are of things that the overwhelming majority of us hold as moral truths. We are forcing our morality on the sick f***s that murder, rape, and molest children. Except that's not always the case. We outlawed slavery when there was no overwhelming consensus either way. We did the same with civil rights. If you believe a fetus is a human being (and regardless of your beliefs, a decent chunk of Americans believe that), then this is no different than either of those other situations. A significant portion of the country believes what another significant portion of the country is doing should be forbidden. Criminalizing women by outlawing abortion is very different. You would be forcing your moral beliefs on someone else in a matter having to do with their own body. This is wrong with drug use and it is wrong with abortion. Except you want drug use to be legal but heavily regulated - that is restricting what people can or cannot do with their own bodies as well. Someone who thinks drugs should be completely freely available would argue that you're trying to force your morality of regulation onto them.
