The voters have decided that freespeechfreelancer is right!
Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.
Related Posts
Also about unborn child
+292You are against parents using sexual selection to choose the gender of their unborn child, amirite?
Also by freespeechfreelancer
+10A woman can love and marry a man without him being the "love of her life" or "soul mate." Amirite? Also about court system
-126There is alot of jumping to conclusions... We have the court system to protect people from the mindless quick to act mob, amirite?
I can see what you are saying, but Ariel still violated her right to her body. A woman can legally get an abortion in the same way that a person can legally dispose of their own property. A person can not abort someone's baby without their consent in the same way that you can not steal someone else's property.
I can break my stuff all I want, but someone else would get punished for breaking my stuff. Does that mean the value of my stuff has changed? No, it's just okay for ME to make the choice, not the other person.
Thank you very much. That IS and WAS the point I was trying to make. My focus of the post was on the fetus itself. The argument by the pro choice and legal community has always been that a fetus is NOT a human being. This case clearly demonstrates that whenever THEY want to call it a person they can and will. It suits their purposes to go after this guy and make an example of him.
See newest comment I just posted.
I am NOT saying in this post that I am for what Ariel Castro did, because I am not. But neither am I for abortion. In both cases here, fetuses were aborted. The woman who goes to a doctor gets a professional abortion, while Michele Knight got Ariel's street version of an abortion. My point is, you can not call the fetus a human only when you choose to do so, OR when you wish to call it murder.
It is ENTIRELY up to the woman. If she wants an abortion, she can have one. No person has the right to take her fetus by force. If the doctor strapped her down and aborted against her will that would be murder.
You are correct that I cannot call a fetus a human only when I want too. You are incorrect that a pregnant women cannot, she can - it is HER decision. Period. If she wants to try to carry her fetus to human-hood, she can, and if you take it away that's murder. If she does not want to carry her fetus to human-hood and seeks help in aborting it, it is not murder. Sorry, but neither you nor I get a say in it. Period.
I see your point clearly, but my point is focusing on the fetus itself. The hard core pro choice folks actually claim that until a fetus is BORN, it is not human life. The whole crux of their argument is that until it can sustain itself, it is not a viable human being. Therefore, in killing it (aborting), a murder has not occurred. All I am trying to point out is that a fetus is a fetus is a fetus. If causing a miscarriage by force is chargeable by murder, then that is admission that a fetus is HUMAN and an actual person. It can not be human in one instance but a blob or cell tissue in another.
I agree that the court system is broken.
I will remain steadfastly pro-choice, however.
And who is allowing the baby's choice?
The fetus doesn't get a choice.
So the fetus is screwed no matter how you look at it!
No the woman is screwed, that how the fetus got in there.
I did not know that! I am learning something. Sex ed on the fly.
Baby's got no choice until about age 3 or 4.
The first example is an example of intended abortion. And while the unborn fetus has rights, it doesn't have more rights than the woman carrying it. The second example is just what you said, a forced miscarriage. Maybe not intentional, but it left the willing mother without a child. When a woman gets an abortion willingly, however,the woman never had the heart of a mother in the first place, and even if she did, she wasn't willing to be a mother. Which is okay. People are allowed to have their own feelings.
So instead of killing the unborn baby, why aren't more of these women allowing the baby to be born and then allowing it to be adopted by a family who would love to have one?
I'm not saying I don't get what you're saying about how we need to decide whether a fetus is a human or not, but I don't think abortion itself is wrong. I wouldn't get one myself, but I feel like outlawing abortion would be treading on the rights of women.
And I understand that. I just have never understood why innocent babies have to be killed because a mother does not want the child. It is a child, and all throughout her pregnancy it is called a child. But somehow when she decides to "abort" it is no longer a child and becomes something else. I do think abortion itself is wrong and view it as murder. That was the purpose of my OP.
Sometimes the physical strain of pregnancy is enough to kill a person. There might also be something wrong with the mother that could transmit to the baby or something wrong with the baby itself. Both of those things would make giving birth difficult and even fatal.
And I would have no trouble with exceptional circumstances being reasons for abortion. Necessity is one thing, but the majority of abortions are NOT for those reasons. You can check the statistics on that yourself.
Then how would you keep girls from lying about having a special circumstance? From saying they were raped? From removing the baby themselves with a coathanger in their bedroom? From going to a back alley to a "doctor"?
Here is just one link to get you started on research. Note the age group of the highest percentage of abortions occurring, and the reason they are having them.
http://www.abort73.com/abortion...on_statistics/
I don't care about statistics. People aren't numbers. I care about the ethics of the thing. And minorities still count for something.
I guess that works if that is what you are all about.
I am aware of all those things. But again, those instances are the extreme minority of all abortions performed. The majority of abortions are not because the mother's life is threatened or because the pregnancy is a result of rape.
Ok so the argument is should the charge be "murder" or some other violation?
I have to go back to my original argument. It is her choice. If she wants it to be a blob, its a blob, if she wants it to be a human, it's a human. No other way to see it under current law.
An artist is working on a painting, she decides when if it is "pigment and canvas" or "art."
And there you go, "under current law." A law I do not favor or agree with as it is set up.
I do. And I like my analogy to the artist.
Totally her choice, and I don't even want to know about it. Could not care less what a mother does with her fetus any more than I care what she does with her used rags as long as she doesn't clog my plumbing with them.
LOL! OK, but you DO care, because you are arguing FOR her choice. I am trying to argue FOR the fetus.
See above
http://amirite.com/761840-our-c...egally/1924544
Why would you call her a mother if you call it a Fetus? Wouldn't you have to have a child to be a mother?