"Roe" wants abortion case reversed

When the woman decides that she does not want to use her body to nurture a fetus, she has the ability to have a medical procedure to fulfill that decision.

She chose to participate in the act, but in our world and our society, she DOES have the choice to continue the pregnancy or end it. She has that choice whether YOU or the government acknowledge that fact. Because women WILL make the choice for themselves, the only responsible thing for the government to do is to make sure that abortions are carried out in a responsible, sterile environment that minimizes the impact that the choice has on society.

 

andymoon

You didn't answer the following. I am curious as to your response:

"So you are against the laws that are currently on the books that allow some states to charge a person with manslaughter when an unborn child is killed due to their "negligent or knowing action"? In other words, if the mother was killed as well, there should only be one count of manslaughter (the mother's)?

Taking this further, if it was your unborn child at 9 months that was the victim of this accident (heaven forbid) you would be satisfied (for lack of a better word) if the drunk driver was not directly punished for the death of the unborn child?"

 

I did answer it. See above.

 

Same thing as before. I don't think that MY children (potential or living) should have any more value or rights than anyone elses.

 

bobrek,MadMax, etc.
I must commend you guys on your arguments in this thread. I am a little busy now to take the time to post a decent argument, but I appreciate your work. I really love how andy said you have no facts to back your argument and you are the only ones that are posting facts in this thread...well, it's just making my day. Thanks!

 

I just find it hard to believe that you (or anyone) would not be in favor of a law that would punish a wrongdoer for killing an unborn baby (even at 9 months!) against the mother's wishes either through negligence or intent.

After reading all of the posts in this thread, I think I understand you to believe the following (in your opinion):

1. A mother has the right to choose abortion up to the point that the baby could live outside the womb.

2. A mother should NOT be allowed to choose an abortion IF the baby is viable outside the womb (e.g. at 8-9 months).

3. A wrongdoer that intentionally or accidentally causes an unborn child to die, even as late as 9 months into the pregnancy, should NOT be punished for the crime against the unborn. You do believe he should be punished for potential injury to the mother.

4. The Bible justifies abortion through the quote you acknowledged from 1 Corinthians.

5. Folks who commemorate/remember the loss of an unborn child over the course of their lives are unreasonable.

6. The government should have the right to protect the fertilized egg of a condor (or similar endangered species) but should not have the right to protect the fertilized egg of a woman.

7. God justifies abortion because He gave us the intelligence to know how to perform the procedure with relative ease.

8. The same God will punish women who have abortions.

Is that about it? Perhaps the word 'punish' in #8 is a misunderstanding on my part. You have said that she will have to answer to God. If 'punish' is the wrong word, in your opinion, what will God do?

 

Lets go through a recap of the facts stated by those guys...
...
...
...
...
...
...
None of you has any idea about what a responsible government has to do. You are so driven by your idyllic view of the world that it makes me wonder how any of you are over 21.

Let me say it again. Our constitution guarantees the citizens certain rights that cannot be trumped by the minority view of what constitutes a "life." Our government would be recklessly irresponsible for letting criminals perform all of the abortions done in this country, which is what would happen based on history.

He who does not learn from history is doomed to repeat it.

 

You're the one saying they have no science or spiritual facts behind them, and they made you look like a fool.

 

Do you read? I specifically said (and then quoted for you) that I would support a law that would punish a person if they, purposfully or through their negligence, caused a miscarriage. This punishment would be due to the fact that they caused harm to the mother (the loss of her potential child).

Yep.

Yes, and this is already banned, rightly so. If she wants an abortion, the decision needs to be made very early in the pregnancy, barring medical reasons.

See above.

The bible justifies free will and choice throughout the text, but the example you brought up is one instance.

I personally think it is a little over the top to have an organized family remembrance every year to commemorate a miscarriage. I have nothing but empathy for people who have experienced miscarriage, but I was able to move on from the loss of a brother that I knew for 16 years so grieving for a miscarried child year after year seems a bit outrageous to me.

Yes, because you are not impacting the rights of the condor by protecting its egg, you are impacting the rights of the poachers who would steal such an egg.

God did not choose to make it known in any of the books chronicling his teachings that abortion was prohibited in any way. Whether you study the Bible, the Koran, the writings of Buddha, the Talmud, or even the Book of Mormon, "unborn children" are not mentioned in any way.

If there is karmic debt to be paid as a result of an abortion, that debt is between the woman and God.

I personally don't see it as "punishment" so much as paying back karmic debt. For example, if you kill someone, I believe that one way you pay back the karmic debt is to live the lives of your victim as well as the lives of every person impacted by that death. In our limited view, this could be seen as a punishment, but the word punish has a measure of vengeance to it and I do not believe that God is vengeful, I believe that He loves us all equally.

 

Only to someone with the same agenda. Y'all are still the ones who come across as puritanical fascists.

 

Y'all really do just twist everything that is said until it doesn't even resemble reality.

For anyone who wants to see what I wrote, it is in a previous post.

 

I do read, but pardon my ignorance to your superior intellect, I am confused as to your response. You keep referring to the harm to the mother, but what about the harm to the unborn child?

For argument's sake, assume the women is in her 9th month and from all indications will soon give birth to a healthy child. She is robbed at gunpoint and shot in the abdomen. Both she and the soon to be born, completely viable outside the mother's womb, child are killed. Should the perpetrator be charged with one or two murders? If not 2 murders, why not?

Since God is not a vengeful God in your opinion, I am still curious as to what will happen to the woman who has an abortion when she meets her maker. You have said that the choice to have an abortion is between the mother and God. In your opinion what will God do to the woman OR what will be her karmic experience? Is it something good or bad?

 

You are a RepubliNazi (I used the term puritanical fascist). It is idyllic to have the government cede control of a medical procedure to criminals because a vocal minority calls the procedure "murder."

No, I link the intent of the framers to freedom from unreasonable government interference. I believe that when they put this country together, it was mainly in response to a government that unreasonably restricted their ability to pursue happiness. If someone's hapiness depends on them NOT having a child, then the government's responsibility is to make sure that the course of action they take is as free from danger as we can reasonably make it.

Roe does not have any say in the matter. It is a legal case, not a person's opinion.

 

Here's what I wrote: "My brother and his wife lost a child that was well-along. They celebrate the remembrance of a lost life in their family."

Here's the first line of your reply: "OK, but most people are reasonable."

<b>Can I hear an Amen or at least a Case Closed!!!</b>

 

He didn't say that they "mark the day," he said that they have a "family remembrance" to commemorate the day the miscarriage (he didn't say stillborn, he said miscarried) occurred. I responded:

"I personally think it is a little over the top to have an organized family remembrance every year to commemorate a miscarriage. I have nothing but empathy for people who have experienced miscarriage, but I was able to move on from the loss of a brother that I knew for 16 years so grieving for a miscarried child year after year seems a bit outrageous to me."

True, because the woman would pay her karmic debt and the debt is between her and God.

The real point is that you can't prove it and in the absence of proof, the government must take the position of overseeing every medical procedure performed in this country.