Should the government force mothers to look at their children before aborting them?

[yongrel]

From the Free Turkey:
http://thefreeturkey.com/2008/11/12/texas-lawmaker-shame-and-scare-mothers-to-prevent-aboriton/

Everything’s bigger in Texas, including the melodrama. Two identical bills have been submitted to the Texas state legislatures that are essentially designed to scare and shame mothers who have decided to abort.

According to CBS Austin, doctors would by law have to “perform an ultrasound on the woman and display the image of her fetus to her, explaining the size of the embryo or fetus and outlining the presence of any internal organs. The doctor would also have to play the fetus’s heartbeat for the woman.”
Continue reading...

 

[Monolithic]

no.

there should be no restrictions on abortion rights

 

[Cowlesy]

Nice post, Yongrel.

I am one of those perpetually on the fence. I understand the basic "rights" issue with respect to the mother. In an ardently unpopular stance, I am for abortion in cases of life threatening danger to the mother.

At the same time, if you look at a sonogram [*sic] picture as shown in your post, I sit there and believe that it is a little person in the earliest stages of LIFE, and to kill/abort it just because it has not left the womb is wrong. With the long lines of those waiting to adopt children, it sets up a heartbreaking situation.

I guess where I part from the hardcore libertarians is that I look at that picture and see a little person, where they just see a cluster of cells.

As a rule, I never debate abortion on the board, but that is where I stand.

 

[The_Orlonater]

No.

 

[pcosmar]

no.

there should be no restrictions on abortion rights

Rights?

Can you point out this right, you speak of.
Killing a child is not in the Bill of Rights, as far as I can tell.

Life , Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Unless killing babies is how you find happiness ( and I hope not) then It is not there.

 

[Monolithic]

Rights?

Can you point out this right, you speak of.
Killing a child is not in the Bill of Rights, as far as I can tell.

Life , Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Unless killing babies is how you find happiness ( and I hope not) then It is not there.

it's not a child, it's a lump of undeveloped tissue and cells (i don't care how much it LOOKS like one, it isn't one)

 

[nate895]

it's not a child, it's a lump of undeveloped tissue and cells (i don't care how much it LOOKS like one, it isn't one)

You know, that is how they thought before the 1830s when the latest advance in microscopes led them to the conclusion that they were killing people. Abortion is an ancient, barbaric, practice that modern science helped to eliminate.

 

[pcosmar]

it's not a child, it's a lump of undeveloped tissue and cells (i don't care how much it LOOKS like one, it isn't one)

I'm sure saying that over and over again will make it easier. The fact is that it IS life, and allowed to continue will be a human child.
Making a decision to deny life is against the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution.
It is also an ultimate expression of selfishness.

 

[Monolithic]

You know, that is how they thought before the 1830s when the latest advance in microscopes led them to the conclusion that they were killing people. Abortion is an ancient, barbaric, practice that modern science helped to eliminate.

uh huh, sure

it's a practice that modern science has helped to perfect and make safer

 

[Monolithic]

I'm sure saying that over and over again will make it easier. The fact is that it IS life, and allowed to continue will be a human child.
Making a decision to deny life is against the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution.
It is also an ultimate expression of selfishness.

it doesn't matter if it's life or not

it matters if its human life or not

 

[UnReconstructed]

It is a life from the very beginning but government shouldn't even be imo. We should abort government not babies.

 

[nate895]

uh huh, sure

it's a practice that modern science has helped to perfect and make safer

It's the truth. Abortion went on from time immemorial, until science advanced and said "hang on, we are killing people here." You cannot deny that your thought that it isn't a human life is a regression to a more barbaric time.

 

[AutoDas]

My poop made a last gasp for breath when I flushed it down. I should have never gotten that laxative! Laxatives are murder!

 

[Monolithic]

it doesn't matter if it's life or not, it's not sentient, it's not like it knows what's going on

 

[nate895]

it doesn't matter if it's life or not, it's not sentient, it's not like it knows what's going on

It's not like that makes it right. If we went by whether it knows what is going on, we can start killing infants and small children, or even mentally slow adults. They wouldn't know what was going on if someone tried to give them a lethal injection.

 

[pcosmar]

it doesn't matter if it's life or not

it matters if its human life or not

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Charged+in+unborn+death&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&o
Interesting.
A 24-year-old man whose speeding vehicle crashed head-on with a car carrying two women, one of whom was pregnant, was charged in Grand Junction today
A local woman has been arrested after she was accused of killing her unborn child
South Sioux City, NE Man Charged In Unborn Baby's Death.
And on and on and on,

All these people should be released then.
No crimes have been committed?


Odd to me is that is seems to depend on who is doing the killing.
Same child(or fetus) in a clinic is not murder. Any where else it is murder.

 

[Cowlesy]

It's not like that makes it right. If we went by whether it knows what is going on, we can start killing infants and small children, or even mentally slow adults. They wouldn't know what was going on if someone tried to give them a lethal injection.

or like the millions of those who voted for one of the major party candidates who get all their news at 6:30 M-F.

More people who certainly do not know "what is going on".

 

[Monolithic]

It's not like that makes it right. If we went by whether it knows what is going on, we can start killing infants and small children, or even mentally slow adults. They wouldn't know what was going on if someone tried to give them a lethal injection.

well, technically we could, but there's no reason to kill them, unlike abortions where sometimes the mother can't afford a child, doesn't want a child and had it on accident, was raped, or giving the birth to the child would potentially cause her harm/be fatal to her

 

[nate895]

well, technically we could, but there's no reason to kill them, unlike abortions where sometimes the mother can't afford a child, doesn't want a child and had it on accident, was raped, or giving the birth to the child would potentially cause her harm/be fatal to her

"No reason to kill them." That is insane. I suppose that means if someone has a reason, it is perfectly fine and we shouldn't punish it.

If the mother's life is at risk, abortion is okay, the disease that causes that is 1/100,000 pregnancies anyway, it's not like they could all of the sudden claim everyone is going to die if they don't have their baby murdered.

As for any other case, there is another A-word: adoption. If you don't want it, adopt it out, there are plenty of people who will take it. If we enact our other policies that have to do with the economy, that would also help to fill the adoption roles.

 

[The_Orlonater]

uh huh, sure

it's a practice that modern science has helped to perfect and make safer

+1