Who has the right to life?

[WIP]

A fertus ia nor aware. A baby is not quiet fully aware..stupid people that are adults are not fully aware..people lied to by the medical and political professionals are not fully aware...acedemics so institutionalized in their thinking that they are not aware...OLD people get faded in the head and are not fully aware...so...I SAY LETS DO A PREMPTIVE ABORTIONAL STRIKE AND GET RID OF ALL OF THEM...

.what I also notice about abuse of the less aware is within the court system and social agencey system IF a person is of lower intelligence..then they are open season to abuse...Much like a dog that you can kick and you don't get in trouble because the dog can not talk and rat you out...so it seems that its NOT abuse if the abused can not articulate...it's a secret abuse...and if the person CAN articulate being abuse - well they are NOT abused.

Also if a womans womb was made out of glass..people would not consider abortion..abortion is animal husbandry and basically culling the herd..abortion providers are not your friend and are not out to make your life better or richer..abortion is not the answer..It is less than a primative approach to solving social and economic problems..Those that are sophisticated and AWARE...believe that abortion is for others but NOT for them - It is elitist in it's flavour...you don't want to breed then don't couple -PROBLEM SOLVED.

Okay! Sounds a little muddled and convoluted, but I get the point that you are an adamant foe of abortion. Problem #1 is that you cannot oppose abortion without stepping in and telling a woman that she has no right to make the decision of whether or not to have the baby, even though she is the one who goes through nine months of pregnancy and the ordeal of childbirth. The absolute prolife groups who say life begins at the imaginary point of conception also don't feel any reluctance to take control of the breeding process. But the churches who run the prolife advocacy groups are led by men -- whether they intend it or not, they add fuel to the feminist's argument that prolife is patriarchal authorities trying to take control of the procreation process.

The other problem I have with the all human life is sacred claptrap is that women have had abortions for centuries and many will continue to have abortions even if they are illegal and dangerous! When I was very young, an 18 year old girl in our neighbourhood died from complications of a botched abortion. I actually wasn't aware of the reason why she died at the time, my older brothers told me the gory details a few years later when I was old enough to understand. If the prolife cause could actually get their wish, like has happened in El Salvador, I wonder if they'll extend the same concern for the unfortunate girls dying from abortion that they feel for newly forming embryos that can't be seen without a microscope!

[maldon_road]

And of course the other reality - there are those who want the legislator to step in and pass laws on the issue - as in the UK. This results in compromise that doesn't satisfy anyone.

[jazzer]

...but it's not fair to someone like me who just got home from work, wants to discuss issues and doesn't feel like being insulted right about now just for disagreeing with someone.

Welcome to the Conservative Party method of discussion. Instant insult upon disagreement.

[maldon_road]

I wonder if they'll extend the same concern for the unfortunate girls dying from abortion that they feel for newly forming embryos that can't be seen without a microscope!

What are the views on child welfare of those opposed to abortion? If they are not willing to allow pregnant women to abort I presume they support social programs that would allow any unwanted children to be raised properly. One would be more efficient adoption procedures.

[WIP]

What are the views on child welfare of those opposed to abortion? If they are not willing to allow pregnant women to abort I presume they support social programs that would allow any unwanted children to be raised properly. One would be more efficient adoption procedures.

Well let's see how much money the prolife politicians are willing to put up to support adoption first! IF the Republican example in the U.S. is any indication, support will be for a brief, limited time after delivery. Someone came up with a great line about the prolife Republicans: "they support the sanctity of human life, until it comes out of the womb."

And there is still that matter of who should have the right to make the decision? The woman or the prolife state? I don't know your profile, but assuming that you're not a woman, you would not ever be in a situation of having to put up with a nine month pregnancy and then part with your newborn child immediately after delivery. Of course neither would I, since I am a man. Is this a decision that any man can fully understand or has the right to interfere with and make decisions about?

Abortion will still go underground and be practised, just like prostitution, gambling, drugs and everything else that the authorities want to ban! In El Salvador, there have been several cases where a young woman who has internal bleeding from things like a perforated uterus, is manacled to her hospital bed to await a court-ordered forensic examination to determine if she has had an illegal abortion.

The other ugly aspect of a total ban is that the abortions that are performed on the black market, are done at later stages of pregnancy where ethical issues of fetal development and fetal pain could be a factor. In societies with open abortion in the early stages, the vast majority are done early in pregnancy. Countries like the U.S. have more women seeking late term abortions than in Canada or Western Europe, because of restrictions like the unavailability of clinics in many states and the harassement from prolife demonstrators.

[bush_cheney2004]

.....Countries like the U.S. have more women seeking late term abortions than in Canada or Western Europe, because of restrictions like the unavailability of clinics in many states and the harassement from prolife demonstrators.

Interesting, since late term abortions in Quebec are turned away to...the United States.

[WIP]

Interesting, since late term abortions in Quebec are turned away to...the United States.

I don't know the Quebec abortion regulations, but if they are going overboard with restrictions on third trimester abortions, it's going to cause more trouble than its worth. Most women don't want to wait till the 11th hour to have an abortion if they have an opportunity to get it done earlier.

But the application of abortion laws in the U.S. are far more uneven than in Canada. Many states throw up roadblocks to try to make it difficult for women to have abortions at any stage. The states that have informed consent laws, mandatory waiting periods and parental notification laws lead to more third trimester abortions where the fetus is developing enough to start raising ethical concerns.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't know the Quebec abortion regulations, but if they are going overboard with restrictions on third trimester abortions, it's going to cause more trouble than its worth. Most women don't want to wait till the 11th hour to have an abortion if they have an opportunity to get it done earlier.

It's not complicated...the doctors won't perform third trimester abortions unless the mother's life is threatened. I just like to point out that women head for the USA instead when somebody gets high and mighty about US state restrictions.

But the application of abortion laws in the U.S. are far more uneven than in Canada. Many states throw up roadblocks to try to make it difficult for women to have abortions at any stage. The states that have informed consent laws, mandatory waiting periods and parental notification laws lead to more third trimester abortions where the fetus is developing enough to start raising ethical concerns.

Canada is no abortion paradise....check out funding for private/public clinics for various provinces just in this decade. Why are there ethical concerns? It's just killing a baby (non-person in Canada), right?

Edited May 25, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[the janitor]

It's not complicated...the doctors won't perform third trimester abortions unless the mother's life is threatened. I just like to point out that women head for the USA instead when somebody gets high and mighty about US state restrictions.

Canada is no abortion paradise....check out funding for private/public clinics for various provinces just in this decade. Why are their ethical concerns? It's just killing a baby (non-person in Canada), right?

Good Point

[scribblet]

I agree, BC chick, but my concern is about aborting based on genetic testing. Will we see the elimination of Down Syndrome in our society? Should we see this as a good thing? What happens to the occasional child born with Down Syndrome anyway - someone who slips through the genetic screening? And an even bigger concern is what happens next - how many other genetic conditions will we start testing for, in search of the "perfect" baby? In China, there is trend towards aborting female fetuses since people prefer to have a son, and they only get one child (although this law seems to be loosening somewhat).

I am in support of a parent's right to choose to continue a pregnancy or not, but this recommendation by Canadian OB/GYNs makes me really uncomfortable.

I don't have a problem with it, if we can eliminate Downs Syndrome why would it be a bad thing, it's a tough world out there, how can eliminating disease and illnesses be a bad thing. If If a child is born with it, then we love them and look after them. Women at risk, and older women have been able to have amniocentesis for years which detects a lot more than just Downs. It would be better if we could detect these problems prior to pregnancy, but I'll bet that many people would go ahead with a pregnancy anyway.

[WIP]

It's not complicated...the doctors won't perform third trimester abortions unless the mother's life is threatened. I just like to point out that women head for the USA instead when somebody gets high and mighty about US state restrictions.

Most of what you point out are meaningless flame attacks that do not deal with issues, but are just to look for ways to attack Canadians and Canada -- which I might add, does nothing to restore the international credibility that the U.S. has lost under your beloved George Bush's reign as president!

I already pointed out twice that ethical issues become more contentious in the later stages of pregnancy when abortion is performed; obviously that's why the Quebec government wants to seriously reduce the number of late abortions. Will it work? I don't know. But since, as you pointed out earlier, there are U.S. states willing to perform third trimester abortions, then their values are the ones that are questionable, since so many U.S. laws delay abortion and needlessly raise the number of third trimester abortions -- the point that you keep trying to dodge!

Canada is no abortion paradise....check out funding for private/public clinics for various provinces just in this decade. Why are there ethical concerns? It's just killing a baby (non-person in Canada), right?

"Abortion paradise!" What the hell is abortion paradise supposed to mean? And if you are a prolife advocate who believes that life begins at conception -- put up or shut up! At what stage does an abortion become "killing a baby?" Be a man dammit! Let's hear some of your arguments instead of the constant sniping from the sidelines!

[bush_cheney2004]

Most of what you point out are meaningless flame attacks that do not deal with issues, but are just to look for ways to attack Canadians and Canada -- which I might add, does nothing to restore the international credibility that the U.S. has lost under your beloved George Bush's reign as president!

Nonsense...when I turn the tables on such smug observations, Canuck panties get into a bundle, eh? Don't dish it if you can't take it.

I already pointed out twice that ethical issues become more contentious in the later stages of pregnancy when abortion is performed; obviously that's why the Quebec government wants to seriously reduce the number of late abortions. Will it work? I don't know. But since, as you pointed out earlier, there are U.S. states willing to perform third trimester abortions, then their values are the ones that are questionable, since so many U.S. laws delay abortion and needlessly raise the number of third trimester abortions -- the point that you keep trying to dodge!

I'm not dodging anything....you are. Holding up Canada as a universal abortion paradise for "choice" is spotty at best given actual federal and provincial funding for the procedures, even when facilities and doctors exist to do it. Pointing to American "Republicans" is par for the course even while you have your own restrictions in Canada.

"Abortion paradise!" What the hell is abortion paradise supposed to mean? And if you are a prolife advocate who believes that life begins at conception -- put up or shut up! At what stage does an abortion become "killing a baby?" Be a man dammit! Let's hear some of your arguments instead of the constant sniping from the sidelines!

Stop whining....killing babies is what we do, mostly for economic reasons. Being a "man dammit" is even funnier given the topic.

[eyeball]

I can get along -- so long as you do not force me to pay for somebody else's abortion. Can socialists accept a deal where people are not forced to pay for things they do not want?

I won't force you to pay for abortions if you won't force me to pay for things like weapon systems or military excersizes that intend to kill people. I can probably think of a few other things too. The war on drugs definitely comes to mind.

[WIP]

Nonsense...when I turn the tables on such smug observations, Canuck panties get into a bundle, eh? Don't dish it if you can't take it.

I'm not dodging anything....you are. Holding up Canada as a universal abortion paradise for "choice" is spotty at best given actual federal and provincial funding for the procedures, even when facilities and doctors exist to do it.

Who said anything about a paradise for choice, or whatever ridiculous term you want to concoct? You're still dodging the issue that "pro life" policies of the Republican Party and many state and local governments to try to restrict or impede all abortions has only succeeded in delaying the procedure, and raising the number of late term abortions.

Pointing to American "Republicans" is par for the course even while you have your own restrictions in Canada.

Stop whining....killing babies is what we do, mostly for economic reasons. Being a "man dammit" is even funnier given the topic.

I don't find anything funny about it! But just as I figured, you tossed out the "killing babies" slogan just to be offensive, and not because you actually believe that abortion is killing babies. Using a phrase like that just for rhetorical purposes, is an insult to all of the real pro life supporters who actually mean it when they say aborting fetuses and embryos is killing babies. It's the height of bad taste to use this sort of issue as a political football in the U.S. vs. Canada flame war!

[bush_cheney2004]

Who said anything about a paradise for choice, or whatever ridiculous term you want to concoct? You're still dodging the issue that "pro life" policies of the Republican Party and many state and local governments to try to restrict or impede all abortions has only succeeded in delaying the procedure, and raising the number of late term abortions.

Are you purposely ignoring the parallel roadblocks to "choice" in several provinces, having absolutely nothing to do with Americans or their Republican party? Late term abortions are perfectly legal in Canada, but personal and political restrictions still exist.

I don't find anything funny about it! But just as I figured, you tossed out the "killing babies" slogan just to be offensive, and not because you actually believe that abortion is killing babies. Using a phrase like that just for rhetorical purposes, is an insult to all of the real pro life supporters who actually mean it when they say aborting fetuses and embryos is killing babies. It's the height of bad taste to use this sort of issue as a political football in the U.S. vs. Canada flame war!

The hell I don't....killing fetuses is killing babies no matter how cute you want to be about which trimester in which it occurs. I didn't make it a political football...it is so by the very nature of the issue. Stop whining about Republicans in America until you can claim a politics and ethics free policy in Canada to slaughter unborn babies.

[Oleg Bach]

Are you purposely ignoring the parallel roadblocks to "choice" in several provinces, having absolutely nothing to do with Americans or their Republican party? Late term abortions are perfectly legal in Canada, but personal and political restrictions still exist.

The hell I don't....killing fetuses is killing babies no matter how cute you want to be about which trimester in which it occurs. I didn't make it a political football...it is so by the very nature of the issue. Stop whining about Republicans in America until you can claim a politics and ethics free policy in Canada to slaughter unborn babies.

Only stupid barbaric freaks that are so dumb that they practice race suicide through abortion....SHOULD Continue to abort themselves untill their gentics are gone from the earth...if you abort it means you have no survival instincts and if someone can convince to kill your own children then you are an idiot and so be it....dummies.

[WIP]

Are you purposely ignoring the parallel roadblocks to "choice" in several provinces, having absolutely nothing to do with Americans or their Republican party? Late term abortions are perfectly legal in Canada, but personal and political restrictions still exist.

And once again, the key word is "late" in your paragraph! Late term abortions are the ones that are the most controversial, because the fetus is more developed, it may be able to survive outside the womb, it's cortex may be developed sufficiently to sense pain, according to some medical researchers, and it is also the period in development when an abortion may be requested for arbitrary or capricious reasons such as the discovery of minor birth defects or that the child is not the desired sex.

The hell I don't....killing fetuses is killing babies no matter how cute you want to be about which trimester in which it occurs. I didn't make it a political football...it is so by the very nature of the issue. Stop whining about Republicans in America until you can claim a politics and ethics free policy in Canada to slaughter unborn babies.

Sounds like you're still more concerned about criticism of Republicans than you are about the fate of the unborn! I gave you a few reasons above, why people who view anti-abortion laws in general as an infringement on a woman's personal liberty, may still be in favour of restricting late term abortion; but why should the majority feel the same concern for a newly fertilized embryo that has attached itself to the wall of the uterus? Should it qualify for full rights as an individual person just because it has its own unique strand of DNA? It has no brain or central nervous system in the first few weeks, or any features to identify it as human -- so I'd like to hear your case that early termination is the moral equivalent of "slaughtering unborn babies!"

Here's an interesting little example of how similar fetal development looks to other vertebrate animals in the early stage: guess which one is the human embryo! http://www.exploratorium.edu/exhibits/embr...mbryoflash.html

[bush_cheney2004]

And once again, the key word is "late" in your paragraph! Late term abortions are the ones that are the most controversial, because the fetus is more developed....

Yea, it's tougher to kill those little buggers at that stage.....huh?

Sounds like you're still more concerned about criticism of Republicans than you are about the fate of the unborn!

No, I'm just playing the game, more than happy to volley back with the practical realities of restrictions in Canada for anyone assailing abortion policies in other countries. You know very well that abortion politics dare not consider a ban on "late term" abortions as it undermines the entire premise of fetuses as non-persons. They must be sacrificed to keep the status quo intact.

so I'd like to hear your case that early termination is the moral equivalent of "slaughtering unborn babies!"

Here's an interesting little example

I don't think you understand....at no time have I advocated restrictions on abortions, with the exception that it is not an "inalienable" right if dependent on another human being's actions. However, I am not going to arbitrarily define when human life begins for the convenience of aborting mere "unwanted tissue". Abortion is killing unborn babies....no matter when it happens...or for whatever reason.

If "we" still want to do that (and clearly "we" do), then be honest about it.

[WIP]

Yea, it's tougher to kill those little buggers at that stage.....huh?

Tougher! In what sense is it "tougher? Is it ethically more challenging......... a bigger mess to clean up.............. anything more specific than snide, trolling comments?

No, I'm just playing the game, more than happy to volley back with the practical realities of restrictions in Canada for anyone assailing abortion policies in other countries.

If you're concerns about abortion go beyond trolling, why couldn't you at least provide some updated information on Quebec's abortion policies, since the latest news article I could find on the dilemma of Quebec women going to the U.S. for third trimester abortions is four years old! This CTV article states that Quebec health officials were planning for at least one doctor to provide this service for the 30 or so, women who need this service each year. Do you have any new information? For all I know, it may not even be issue anymore!

Quebec health officials said they are hopeful a newly trained doctor will set up practice in the province next year, offering a service that even staunch pro-choice Canadian doctors like Henry Morgentaler refuse to provide for ethical reasons.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...55_7?hub=Canada

In other words, it's just another political football for you to try to score points with people who are also caught up in the "my country's better than your country" idiocy!

I've noticed that you haven't bothered getting into specifics and even took the trouble of deleting my comments where I stated reasons why I support efforts to limit late term abortions, so I'm not going to bother repeating myself. The majority of reasonable, rational people have consistently agreed with restricting third trimester abortions to situations where the mother is at risk or serious birth defects have been discovered. And the prolife, alarmist propaganda you read consistently fails to point out that late term abortions are still a small percentage of the total number. Because of the ethical issues and health risks, most women who plan to have an abortion are going to get it done as quickly as possible!

In Canada, according to numbers from 2003, 6.5% of induced abortions were performed between 13 to 16 weeks, 2.2% between 17 to 20 weeks, and 0.8% over 20 weeks.

and notice that the U.S. numbers after 16 weeks are double the equivalent Canadian stats, likely in large part because of the confused policy, which you support, that does not distinguish between early and late abortion...................................

In 2003, from data collected in those areas that sufficiently reported gestational age, it was found that 6.2% of abortions were conducted from 13 to 15 weeks, 4.2% from 16 to 20 weeks, and 1.4% at or after 21 weeks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortion

I mentioned these numbers not because of some twisted point-scoring motivation, like you continually exhibit, I put it out there because I believe that the policies of throwing roadblocks in front of early access to abortion (especially for teenage girls) pushes more abortions into the later weeks.

You know very well that abortion politics dare not consider a ban on "late term" abortions as it undermines the entire premise of fetuses as non-persons. They must be sacrificed to keep the status quo intact.

I don't think you understand....at no time have I advocated restrictions on abortions, with the exception that it is not an "inalienable" right if dependent on another human being's actions.

Which means what exactly? You believe it's "killing babies" but because it's dependent on the mother for survival, it's okay to kill them? I get the impression that you wanted to jump in and score points without having to actually think through a difficult ethical issue!

However, I am not going to arbitrarily define when human life begins for the convenience of aborting mere "unwanted tissue". Abortion is killing unborn babies....no matter when it happens...or for whatever reason.

If you believe abortion is killing unborn babies, then you are defining when human life begins!

If "we" still want to do that (and clearly "we" do), then be honest about it.

Hiding in muddled, equivocal language is being dishonest! Make your case by defining when human life begins and when it should be protected, like real prolife advocates do!

[bush_cheney2004]

Tougher! In what sense is it "tougher? Is it ethically more challenging......... a bigger mess to clean up.............. anything more specific than snide, trolling comments?

All of the above....it's a bitch to do and many doctors refuse. Ever wonder why? What is a trolling comment? One you don't like?

If you're concerns about abortion go beyond trolling, why couldn't you at least provide some updated information on Quebec's abortion policies, since the latest news article I could find on the dilemma of Quebec women going to the U.S. for third trimester abortions is four years old! This CTV article states that Quebec health officials were planning for at least one doctor to provide this service for the 30 or so, women who need this service each year. Do you have any new information? For all I know, it may not even be issue anymore!

Thank you for admitting that the original contention was true.

In other words, it's just another political football for you to try to score points with people who are also caught up in the "my country's better than your country" idiocy!

Excuse me, but you are the "troll" who referred to another country (e.g. Republicans)....neener neener!

I've noticed that you haven't bothered getting into specifics and even took the trouble of deleting my comments where I stated reasons why I support efforts to limit late term abortions, so I'm not going to bother repeating myself.

I don't give a crap about your equivoctions or rationalizations. "Reasonable people" are not necessarily on the pro-abortion (errrr "choice") side of the issue. Don't shine me on....any restictions on the "right to kill the unborn" is unacceptable to these folks.

and notice that the U.S. numbers after 16 weeks are double the equivalent Canadian stats, likely in large part because of the confused policy, which you support, that does not distinguish between early and late abortion.

Does that include the ones from Canada?

I mentioned these numbers not because of some twisted point-scoring motivation, like you continually exhibit, I put it out there because I believe that the policies of throwing roadblocks in front of early access to abortion (especially for teenage girls) pushes more abortions into the later weeks.

No, I think it is readily apparent you do it for some twisted point-scoring motivation. Go Leafs!

Which means what exactly? You believe it's "killing babies" but because it's dependent on the mother for survival, it's okay to kill them? I get the impression that you wanted to jump in and score points without having to actually think through a difficult ethical issue!

Now you are thoroughly confused...let's sort this out carefully. I say it is killing babies from conception, but you say it only gets dicey at the start of the third trimester, you know, like in hockey (third period). It's not difficult at all, ethically or otherwise. Human fetuses do not metamorphosize lke caterpillars.

If you believe abortion is killing unborn babies, then you are defining when human life begins!

Hiding in muddled, equivocal language is being dishonest! Make your case by defining when human life begins and when it should be protected, like real prolife advocates do!

I am not a "prolife advocate"...however, I know where dead babies come from. That's the thing that is confusing you. We kill unborn babies...and that's OK! Just be honest about it.

[WIP]

All of the above....it's a bitch to do and many doctors refuse. Ever wonder why? What is a trolling comment? One you don't like?

Being pointlessly argumentative!

Thank you for admitting that the original contention was true.

Excuse me, but you are the "troll" who referred to another country (e.g. Republicans)....neener neener!

Right! Any criticism of Republicans is trolling. So, why are you here?

I don't give a crap about your equivoctions or rationalizations. "Reasonable people" are not necessarily on the pro-abortion (errrr "choice") side of the issue. Don't shine me on....any restictions on the "right to kill the unborn" is unacceptable to these folks.

Does that include the ones from Canada?

No, I think it is readily apparent you do it for some twisted point-scoring motivation. Go Leafs!

Now you are thoroughly confused...let's sort this out carefully. I say it is killing babies from conception, but you say it only gets dicey at the start of the third trimester, you know, like in hockey (third period). It's not difficult at all, ethically or otherwise. Human fetuses do not metamorphosize lke caterpillars.

Okay, so you're vaguely using the argument for potential life to propose that all fertilized embryos be carried to term. I first heard of this when I was on an American conservative forum and abortion and stem cell research are just about the only ethical issues they care about (children dying in Sudan for example, wasn't America's concern).

Trying to be ironic: "Human fetuses do not metamorphosize lke caterpillars," doesn't address the problem that "potential" life means unfinished. It's the equivalent of having a set of blueprints and saying you have a house already to move in to! When that fetus is in the zygote stage, it is just a collection of cells with no sense of awareness in any manner that we can relate to -- there's no brain, no nervous system, no head, no arms and legs -- nothing to tell you what the blueprints are going to make.

The absolute prolife position crashes and burns when it is faced with rare ethical dilemmas such as 'what to do with annecephalic babies" - the so-called brainstem babies that are born with no cortex, top portion of the skull, and cannot live more than a few days or weeks if they are carried to term. Prolifers insist that they cannot be aborted, regardless of the cost and emotional hardship of bringing a baby that never becomes conscious into this world, and lives a brief existence on life support! There are similar ethical dilemmas on the other side of the coin, in the euthanasia debate, and they underline the weakness of setting up rigid, arbitrary ethical rules instead of developing a set of principles like medical ethicists are trying to do.

I am not a "prolife advocate"...

Why not? If you really believe it's about "killing dead babies!"

however, I know where dead babies come from. That's the thing that is confusing you. We kill unborn babies...and that's OK! Just be honest about it.

A fertilized egg is not a baby! That's the thing that's confusing you!

[bush_cheney2004]

Being pointlessly argumentative!

No, I am being "pointfully" argumentative.

Right! Any criticism of Republicans is trolling. So, why are you here?

If you say so....who's next for your international judgement...Ireland?

Okay, so you're vaguely using the argument for potential life to propose that all fertilized embryos be carried to term. I first heard of this when I was on an American conservative forum and abortion and stem cell research are just about the only ethical issues they care about (children dying in Sudan for example, wasn't America's concern).

Yes, that is the ethical concern, not the dead and dying who are already recognized as "humans". They already made it out alive!

Trying to be ironic: "Human fetuses do not metamorphosize lke caterpillars," doesn't address the problem that "potential" life means unfinished. It's the equivalent of having a set of blueprints and saying you have a house already to move in to! When that fetus is in the zygote stage, it is just a collection of cells with no sense of awareness in any manner that we can relate to -- there's no brain, no nervous system, no head, no arms and legs -- nothing to tell you what the blueprints are going to make.

All of those things exist a helluva lot sooner than gestation week #24. You want a guarantee? But a Mercedes-Benz instead.

The absolute prolife position crashes and burns when it is faced with rare ethical dilemmas such as 'what to do with annecephalic babies" - the so-called brainstem babies that are born with no cortex, top portion of the skull, and cannot live more than a few days or weeks if they are carried to term.

Very dramatic..and pointless. Fetal and infant deaths are not a new concept. I went to the circus in 1961, and there was this big pickle jar.....and...well..nevermind.

Prolifers insist that they cannot be aborted, regardless of the cost and emotional hardship of bringing a baby that never becomes conscious into this world, and lives a brief existence on life support! There are similar ethical dilemmas on the other side of the coin, in the euthanasia debate, and they underline the weakness of setting up rigid, arbitrary ethical rules instead of developing a set of principles like medical ethicists are trying to do.

Doesn't bother me either way...just admit to what you want to do instead of changing the definition for a clear conscience.

Why not? If you really believe it's about "killing dead babies!"

A fertilized egg is not a baby! That's the thing that's confusing you!

No fertilized egg...no baby. You want yours scrambled or fried? We can kill 'em and pretend they are not babies, or we can kill 'em and be up front about it. The answer is in that big pickle jar.

[Drea]

When you saw that pickle jar were you so horrified that your "equipment" took a trip north and never came back?

Did seeing the pickled fetus stop you from ever having sex? Well it should have!! Don't you know that sticking that thing inside a female could result in one of those fetuses!

Oh right, back in '61 they didn't teach sex ed (especially to a 40 year old virgin!) so you likely would not have even known what your equipment was for, let alone that it could help create one of those scary pickled things.

/kiddin'

Debating abortion is moot. A totally pointless excersise as it will always be legal. Neener neener I can kiiiiill a fetus if I want to and you caaan't cause you're a boy...neener neener neener.

[WIP]

When you saw that pickle jar were you so horrified that your "equipment" took a trip north and never came back?

Did seeing the pickled fetus stop you from ever having sex? Well it should have!! Don't you know that sticking that thing inside a female could result in one of those fetuses!

Oh right, back in '61 they didn't teach sex ed (especially to a 40 year old virgin!) so you likely would not have even known what your equipment was for, let alone that it could help create one of those scary pickled things.

/kiddin'

Debating abortion is moot. A totally pointless excersise as it will always be legal. Neener neener I can kiiiiill a fetus if I want to and you caaan't cause you're a boy...neener neener neener.

It would be nice if it prolife supporters could debate this issue honestly, instead of suffering cognitive dissonance and dodging ethical dilemmas their absolute standard leads to!

It's not like prolife is a new cause! When I was young, abortions were illegal, across the board - and some girls received the death penalty for undergoing a botched, blackmarket abortion -- of course, the world was a better place back then in the good old days...............well, not everything was if you look at the past honestly without the rose-coloured glasses!

[Black Dog]

No fertilized egg...no baby. You want yours scrambled or fried? We can kill 'em and pretend they are not babies, or we can kill 'em and be up front about it.

What difference does it make? Really. IMO, the whole baby versus fetus thing is a sideshow.