I am antiabortion because I am an atheist

[rlrose328]

1) A third trimester abortion is not a "cluster of cells that can flush out of a vagina unnoticed".

Again, you continue to dwell on late-term abortions when those are in the vast minority of abortions done in this country.  Studies done in 2003 show that late term abortions account for only 1.4% of abortions done.  (Don't get me wrong... it's horrible that that figure exists at all.)  You know perfectly well that the OP was referring to early-term abortions and yet again, you deliberately twisted it around.

[rlrose328]

Can you demonstrate that really it is different to kill a nine month fetus and to kill a seven month premature baby? Is not the first really older that the second?

Why is it that you are focusing SOLELY on late-term abortions done with healthy, rich women?  Why does the fetus deserve more rights than the mother?  Why did you come here to argue with atheists about this issue?

No, I can't demonstrate it's different and you know that.  But my demonstration is irrelevant.  If a woman chooses to abort her fetus, that's her business, not mine and not yours.  Period.  I would be more than happy to take the child when it's born if she doesn't want it.  But I can't force her to carry a child if she doesn't want to.  What about all of the thousands of spontaneous abortions that take place every day all over the world?  How will you stop those from happening?  And how will you prosecute those women who, for some unknown reason, lose a child involuntarily?  I mean, that life is lost.

I just typed a medical transcription sample (with no identifying information whatsoever) that detailed a sonogram in which the fetus was found deceased at 13 weeks.  Should THAT mother be prosecuted as well?  She must have done SOMETHING to cause the death, right?

We can all twist each others' arguments around... but I'd rather discuss this rationally.  Is that possible with you?

[cyberateos]

1) A third trimester abortion is not a "cluster of cells that can flush out of a vagina unnoticed".

Again, you continue to dwell on late-term abortions when those are in the vast minority of abortions done in this country.  Studies done in 2003 show that late term abortions account for only 1.4% of abortions done.  (Don't get me wrong... it's horrible that that figure exists at all.)  You know perfectly well that the OP was referring to early-term abortions and yet again, you deliberately twisted it around.

rose:

I repeat: we are talking about a concrete case: a 31 years old healthy woman who has killed her healthy 8 month fetal baby because it had a cleft palate.

Do you believe that she shoul receive a legal lethal injection?

[rlrose328]

1) A third trimester abortion is not a "cluster of cells that can flush out of a vagina unnoticed".

Again, you continue to dwell on late-term abortions when those are in the vast minority of abortions done in this country.  Studies done in 2003 show that late term abortions account for only 1.4% of abortions done.  (Don't get me wrong... it's horrible that that figure exists at all.)  You know perfectly well that the OP was referring to early-term abortions and yet again, you deliberately twisted it around.

rose:

I repeat: we are talking about a concrete case: a 31 years old healthy woman who has killed her healthy 8 month fetal baby because it had a cleft palate.

Do you believe that she shoul receive a legal lethal injection?

Your "concrete case" is an example you've come up with to try to back any one of us into a corner so we'd HAVE to admit she should be able to kill her 8mo fetus.  It is NOT a "concrete case."

That 31yo woman has the right to do what she needs to do for her life.  Neither you nor I nor the government has a say in what she does with her body.  Period.  Yes, if it were outside of her body, it would be murder.  But it's NOT outside her body.  These are two distinct scenarios and you cannot compare them as if they were the same.

I'll ask YOU again... why is it that the fetus should have more rights than the mother?  What if just carrying that baby puts such a strain on the mother that her life is in danger?  Would she have the right to abort then?  Or the case of the 8yo girl who got pregnant by her father... her mother allowed an abortion because the girl was pregnant with twins and carrying them even PARTIALLY to term would have killed the girl.  What about THAT case?

You cannot paint this issue with one brush.  It is a picture with MANY shades of grey.

And no, I do not think the woman should face a lethal injection.  That is the most ludicrous thing I've heard you say yet... and you've said MANY ludicrous things thus far.

[Nulono]

Well, that doesn't exactly follow, now does it?  First off, no one is pro-abortion, it'd be great if they never had to happen, but when the life of the mother is at significant risk, or when the child is hopelessly deformed (no skull, for example, or whose legs are growing into their heart), I think it needs to be there as an option.

http://maverickphilosopher.powerblogs.com/posts/1219281537.shtml

Next, you clearly think the brain is equal to a soul, which I understand.  But do you think a few neurons are equal to a human brain?  Is 1/100 of your brain comparable to a brain, to you?  What about before there is any neuronal tissue at all?  It is true that a baby's brain the day before birth is almost exactly like a baby's brain after birth, but we don't abort babies in the last trimester unless the mother is at grave risk, anyway.

Doe v. Bolton defined "health" so gravely as to include pretty much anything, allowing abortion until birth.

Finally, you want to redefine murder to be from the moment of conception on, correct?  25% of all pregnancies end in miscarriages, so is that manslaughter?  And what should be the sentence for a woman who self-aborts?  How long do you want to imprison them?

1: Spontaneous abortions are just that: spontaneous. We would not prosecute women who miscarry just as we do not prosecute parents of SIDS syndrome.
2: Considering the typical circumstances and lack of malice aforethought, abortion would be voluntary manslaughter.

[cyberateos]

rlrose:

I just typed a medical transcription sample (with no identifying information whatsoever) that detailed a sonogram in which the fetus was found deceased at 13 weeks. Should THAT mother be prosecuted as well? She must have done SOMETHING to cause the death, right?

Fetal persons should have a Death Certification, exactly as adult have. If the physician findes suspicious signs, a fetal necropsy would be done. If injuries produced by curettage or scissors are found, the mother would be arrested.

That 31yo woman has the right to do what she needs to do for her life. Neither you nor I nor the government has a say in what she does with her body. Period. Yes, if it were outside of her body, it would be murder. But it's NOT outside her body. These are two distinct scenarios and you cannot compare them as if they were the same.

You are, in fact, accepting that a baby may be legally raped, straining its anus.

If you believe that because the mother is the owner of her body she has the right to suck the brain of ther healthy full term fetus (in a partial birth abortion), you are giving a rapiest a license to use his penis to rape a baby.

You cannot paint this issue with one brush. It is a picture with MANY shades of grey.

All murders have that shades of grey but we are talking about AN EXACT SHADE of grey.

And no, I do not think the woman should face a lethal injection. That is the most ludicrous thing I've heard you say yet... and you've said MANY ludicrous things thus far.

What punishment would you believe should be applied to a man who kidnaps babies to rape them and leave the corpse in the forest?

[Whitney]

I think this would put the line at about 23 weeks (24 to 26 seems to be when they think higher brain function begins to form) or right at the beginning of the third trimester.  I believe a lot of places are already using the third trimester as the line.  I also think this is the least arbitrary line next to drawing it at conception.

Are you saying that a born 22 weeks baby could be legally ripped with an ax while resting into its artifitial incubator?

What 22 week babies are in artificial incubators?  They'd be vegetables.

Edit...btw...admin break:

Cyberateos.  Please take a few moments to familiarize yourself with the forum rules.  Your debate tactics are not civil.  There is no reason to assume that other members want to rape or murder babies.  Using such debate tactics is not only uncivil but a poor means of making a strong case for yourself.  Argue the issues, not the emotions.  If you continue, I'll start handing out warnings.

[cyberateos]

Whitney:

The world record to survive out of womb is the 21th week.

You don`t want that topics such as infanticide and pederasty be menctioned, but all laws should have a general application.

Then, I consider that it is unavoidable to correlate that topics to an abortion law.

But if you don`t like my debating tactics, I could almost leave this discussion, permitting other members (such as Nulono) to continue.

I would participate only scarcely, because I would have my hands tied.

[Whitney]

Whitney:

The world record to survive out of womb is the 21th week.

You don`t want that topics such as infanticide and pederasty be menctioned, but all laws should have a general application.

Then, I consider that it is unavoidable to correlate that topics to an abortion law.

But if you don`t like my debating tactics, I could almost leave this discussion, permitting other members (such as Nulono) to continue.

I would participate only scarcely, because I would have my hands tied.

I wouldn't have a problem putting the line at 21 weeks then....I doubt that baby was very healthy though.  I don't really feel like researching it right now.

If you can't be civil this is not the place for you...your choice.

[cyberateos]

Whitney:

I wouldn't have a problem putting the line at 21 weeks then....I doubt that baby was very healthy though. I don't really feel like researching it right now.

That limit (21 week) surely will become increasingly lower as technology evolves.

Right now, the abortion limit of UK has exceeded the viability boundary. Then, forecefully, a unpleasant comparison of abortion and infanticide is present.

If you can't be civil this is not the place for you...your choice.

Strawman fallacy.

Making inavoidable correlations is not uncivil.

Really, what is not civil is to pretend that a member has his/her hands tied.

But I repeat: if you and me have different point of view regarding civility, let`s consider that this debate has finished. No problem.

[Whitney]

In that case, as far as I'm concerned it's done.  There is no need to imply people want to allow baby rape in order to discuss abortion.

[cyberateos]

In that case, as far as I'm concerned it's done.  There is no need to imply people want to allow baby rape in order to discuss abortion.

I am concerned for all the rights of babies, regardless if that babies are intrauterine or extrauterine:

Right to health, right to a civil registration, right to be protected, etc.

That protection is not only against murderers, but also against rapiests and other attackers.

If all you consider that my stance is not confortable to this group, my participation in this line has finished, and I will see other discussions.

[rlrose328]

You are, in fact, accepting that a baby may be legally raped, straining its anus.

If you believe that because the mother is the owner of her body she has the right to suck the brain of ther healthy full term fetus (in a partial birth abortion), you are giving a rapiest a license to use his penis to rape a baby.

So we must answer your questions, the "concrete" situation you posed, but if we ask you questions, we're not being intellectually honest?  Bull.  Answer my questions as I have answered yours.

And no, I do not think the woman should face a lethal injection. That is the most ludicrous thing I've heard you say yet... and you've said MANY ludicrous things thus far.

What punishment would you believe should be applied to a man who kidnaps babies to rape them and leave the corpse in the forest?

Again with the ludicrous and unrelated scenario.  What I would sentence a man who kidnaps and rapes "babies" is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.  Please stick to the topic.

[Whitney]

.

If all you consider that my stance is not confortable to this group, my participation in this line has finished, and I will see other discussions.

The problem is not with "comfort" the problem is you approaching debate like a jerk.

Anyway, I'm done.  I'm not going to bother trying to discuss civility and proper debate technique with you.  You know the rules, you can google what civil, debate, and strawmen mean.

[cyberateos]

Rose:

So we must answer your questions, the "concrete" situation you posed, but if we ask you questions, we're not being intellectually honest? Bull. Answer my questions as I have answered yours.

This is your question:

What if just carrying that baby puts such a strain on the mother that her life is in danger? Would she have the right to abort then?

But a 8 month baby could be delivered. I may be removed with a C section. There is not need to kill it. :hmm:

A 8 month ago conceived baby is a 8 month ago conceived baby; is it not important if that baby rests into a womb or into an incubator.

Really, religion is what has confounded the minds even of supposedly "atheists", who have not be able to understand that DELIVERY should NOT mean BIRTH anymore.