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

[americana]

Oh I'm sorry. Do we not believe in unalienable rights endowed by our creator? Using your logic please prove the rights for a new born...

 

[AutoDas]

Exactly, we are privileged to grace this earth. I'm not entitled to anything I haven't earned.

 

[americana]

Exactly, we are privileged to grace this earth. I'm not entitled to anything I haven't earned.

Who gave us the privilege? Certainly not the mother. If that was the case then my mom could come kill me right now no problem, no charges.

I still don't know where you stand. When the child is in the birth canal it is ok to kill, but once it is out it is not?? What is it?

A new born has not earned anything, nor has a toddler etc. So they can be killed without punishment as well???

 

[AutoDas]

Who gave us the privilege? Certainly not the mother. If that was the case then my mom could come kill me right now no problem, no charges.

I still don't know where you stand. When the child is in the birth canal it is ok to kill, but once it is out it is not?? What is it?

A new born has not earned anything, nor has a toddler etc. So they can be killed without punishment as well???

Your mother could have killed you, she didn't. That's a privilege granted by your creator.

There's always going to be a punishment for your action but it should be me asking you what the punishment should be since you are the one for outlawing abortions. Should the woman be jailed for life or be executed, publicly humiliated? A fetus that has had no impact on anyone is suddenly having the biggest impact on a woman's life.

 

[youngbuck]

Who gave us the privilege? Certainly not the mother. If that was the case then my mom could come kill me right now no problem, no charges.

I still don't know where you stand. When the child is in the birth canal it is ok to kill, but once it is out it is not?? What is it?

A new born has not earned anything, nor has a toddler etc. So they can be killed without punishment as well???

Of course those arguing in favor of abortion are "true liberals," and "classic liberals." I could almost even call myself a classic liberal, but I just find the whole thing ironic.

So the baby must be completely born to possess any inherent, natural rights? This is one of the worst arguments I've ever heard.

Americana at least can think rationally and logically, instead of being brainwashed by the eugenics-propagandized "left" (even though I'll admit the left/right paradigm is a huge hoax).

 

[AutoDas]

Of course those arguing in favor of abortion are "true liberals," and "classic liberals." I could almost even call myself a classic liberal, but I just find the whole thing ironic.

umm what? could you clarify

So the baby must be completely born to possess any inherent, natural rights? This is one of the worst arguments I've ever heard.

I didn't say that.

 

[LibertyEagle]

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

it matters if its human life or not

What is it, a giraffe?

 

[LibertyEagle]

My point is that simply outlawing abortion doesn't solve any problems and creates a lot more.

If abortions were outlawed tomorrow, abortions would still take place, likely with near the same frequency as today. The difference? They'd be less safe, more women would die, and valuable doctors would be treated as criminals. Look at what happened with Portugal back when they outlawed abortion. It's not a good situation.

Well, I guess we could apply that same logic to murder cases. I mean, why outlaw murder? People are still going to do it anyway.

Instead of using the government to back up your position with force, try educating people. Did you read what I wrote in the original post on my website? The responsibility of the pro-life movement is to truly be pro-life, and not just an angry bunch of people praising the deaths of mothers seeking an abortion.

It's a state issue. But, I agree with you that education is key and also giving options to those women who carry their unwanted baby to term.

 

[Theocrat]

Video Convictions

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)

Click on the image in my signature, and watch the video on the homepage of the link. If you still believe an unborn child is not a human, then you are a sick individual, and I can't even fathom how you would be a supporter of Congressman Paul.

 

[kojirodensetsu]

I'm fairly anti-abortion, although admittedly I have not come to a solid stance yet.

I mean under normal circumstances I believe that people should be held responsible for having unprotected sex. They decided to do that and now they have to face the consequences. But then what about rape? I mean killing is killing no matter how you look at it. Wouldn't that unborn baby have rights too? But then the woman never intended to have the baby. So should she be forced to carry around a baby for 9 months? And then what about issues where a couple does have protected sex but by some odd chance the girl gets pregnant anyways?

I just.. don't know how something like this should be legislated.

 

[DamianTV]

I think most people missed the entire point. Which part of the Govt are we talking about, State, or Fed?

If we are talking about the Fed, then absolutely hell fucking no. Go back and read the constitution. The fed doesnt just run around and blackmail states into doing what it tells them to do, it intervenes what happens between states. The federal government should have very little real power.

If its a STATE issue, then it is something to be determined by each individual and soverign State. From there its the mob rule of democracy and not the functions of a Republic (we are NOT a democracy, we are a Republic, but um, well not very well represented...). Then it just depends on which particular bunch of people have the bigger bug up their asses to get what they want, abortion, or no abortion.

---

But I'll answer the original question: "Should the government force mothers to look at their children before aborting them?" No. Thats about as stupid as passing a law that requires murderers to look at the face of their victims before murdering them. (being the killer and victim are both adults, not newborn or unborn). But again, so you or your wife / girlfriend has a Tubal Pregnancy. The baby will NEVER come to term and it WILL kill the mother. Lets make sure you feel extra guilty with a sprinkle of facism on top.

 

[angelatc]

. Abortion is an ancient, barbaric, practice that modern science helped to eliminate.

Not sure that's true. Abortion has never been eliminated anywhere.

 

[Crash Martinez]

"Should the government force mothers to look at their children before aborting them?" No. Thats about as stupid as passing a law that requires murderers to look at the face of their victims before murdering them.

+1

 

[angelatc]

I think, sadly, that we should stay pro-choice, at least on a state level. Abortion won't be stopped by making it illegal, and women shouldn't die as a result of having one.

I have no objection to a state that requires mothers to view anything to discourage the procedure. (Maybe we should require young boys to view graphic war wound pictures before embarking on military careers too.)


I hate Snopes.com. They lean left.

But this picture is of a 21 week old fetus, who reached out during in-utero surgery. The phptographer who took the picture says that he turned from pro-choice to pro-life at this very moment.

http://graphics2.snopes.com/photos/medical/graphics/armas1.jpg

 

[yokna7]

Let's make the great compromise and let the states decide. The abortion argument will never end.................................of course increasing federal funding for abortions that obama is gonna bring is f#@king ridiculous!

 

[torchbearer]

I think people forget its two lives involved, which makes it a different matter than simple murder.
People don't like the comparison, but if you can't sustain your own life, do you have the right to leech off of someone else?
Well, you don't if you are an adult.

Then, you get the christians... who supposedly believe in an afterlife of bliss in heaven, who think its horrible for a child to skip the shitty party and go striaght to heaven.. as if, this life is all there is...
Is there not a better life beyond?

I would think athiest would be more pro-life... as in, this is it. And you just robbed someone of their one chance at life.

People make no sense. What-so-ever.
And personally, I'm against abortion, but as a politician, I can't make a one size, fits all... decision for every person on this issue.
The choice is not mine to make.

 

[americana]

I think people forget its two lives involved, which makes it a different matter than simple murder.
People don't like the comparison, but if you can't sustain your own life, do you have the right to leech off of someone else?
Well, you don't if you are an adult.

Then, you get the christians... who supposedly believe in an afterlife of bliss in heaven, who think its horrible for a child to skip the shitty party and go striaght to heaven.. as if, this life is all there is...
Is there not a better life beyond?

I would think athiest would be more pro-life... as in, this is it. And you just robbed someone of their one chance at life.

People make no sense. What-so-ever.
And personally, I'm against abortion, but as a politician, I can't make a one size, fits all... decision for every person on this issue.
The choice is not mine to make.

you can not be serious. a new born cant sustain his own life either. neither can infants, toddlers, etc. the child didnt decide to "leech" off his mother, SHE DID. all this talk about children being parasites and leechers is honestly making me want to vomit. sick stuff guys, really.

as far as the original question, no, its a dumb law to try to pass.

 

[torchbearer]

you can not be serious. a new born cant sustain his own life either. neither can infants, toddlers, etc. the child didnt decide to "leech" off his mother, SHE DID. all this talk about children being parasites and leechers is honestly making me want to vomit. sick stuff guys, really.

as far as the original question, no, its a dumb law to try to pass.

Its a discussion about rights, which stems from property.
I even stated, I'm against abortion.
But some people would rather this be an emotional issue.
That works well for the collectivist too.

 

[Pepsi]

no.

there should be no restrictions on abortion rights

There should be no restrictions on people having children.

 

[RonPaulMania]

Stop being so melodramatic. Get a dictionary and look it up. Better yet, I'll save the trouble of book-learnin.

noun
"an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment."

Your pathetic application to definition also applies to babies up to 7 years old and the incapacitated.