Um, I never said any person has an absolute right to anything with his/her own body. And you know I also don’t blanketly support abortion up until birth either.
Yeah, yeah, I know. But don’t you think you’re picking nits a little, with regards to Brian’s post? His main point was that abortion affects someone else besides just the mother and her own body.
Dont you think you’re picking nits with my picking nits? 
Are you nit picking his picking nits in your nit picking?
Tibbs:
Then make it a constituntional right. Abortion is not in there.
It doesn’t have to be in the Constitution, because the 9th amendment is:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
ajfranke:
The alternative is to simply give all power to the federal government. I don’t think you want to go there.
There is a large grey area between “all state” & “all federal”.
vitus979:
What else then?
More pragmatic matters of human need and desire take precedent over simple moralism in law.
So somehow you don’t think your beliefs have any logical framework to them?
Not necessarily an objective one, no.
I have one, but mine is not the only one.
I am morally outraged by any abortion. However, in the first trimester (which is 85-% of all abortions), babies are very crudely formed and have not developed a great number of things we would consider essential to being a functional human. It’s about 3 inches long and while it is developing human morphology internally it is extremely primitive. Some are not morally outraged by destroying it at that stage while I am.
What logical argument do I have that cannot be logically countered? None, really.
It’s a human in development, but aside from the way it looks it’s not very different from the zygote formed at the instant of conception, which very very few would have a problem abortion (with, say, a “10 minutes after” pill).
When you get into the second and third trimesters there are more concrete reasons to support the idea of equating the developing fetus with an independent human; development of the central nervous system and brain development.
What logical argument do I have that cannot be logically countered? None, really.
It’s a human in development, but aside from the way it looks it’s not very different from the zygote formed at the instant of conception, which very very few would have a problem abortion (with, say, a “10 minutes after” pill).
Actually Catholics would have a problem with that…
Even though fertilization takes about 18-24h all told
More pragmatic matters of human need and desire take precedent over simple moralism in law.
More “pragmatic” matters of human need and “desire”? Simple “moralism”? I’m going to have to ask you to expound on this, please.
I am morally outraged by any abortion. What logical argument do I have that cannot be logically countered? None, really.
Such arguments exist, notwithstanding the fact that not every accepts those arguments.
Ah, the old chesnut–the unborn fetus is a person. Actually it is not–while some of the bacteria & viruses that our bodies generate can live on their own, outside of the body, a fetus cannot. If it is not able to sustain itself, it is not a person, it has no rights, and it is up to the woman to decide what she wants to do with as she will----not the courts, not the religious right, not the government. At 6-8 months, sure, it can be viable outside of the body with medical assistance & I don’t have a problem with restrictions there as long as it doesn’t endanger the mother’s help, but during the first 5 months–its like October 15 in Michigan: open hunting season.
I won’t argue with your conclusion, but your logic has a real problem. At some point, probably during our lifetimes, it will become possible to bring a baby to term much earlier in the pregnancy. If a baby can be brought to term after, say, three months, your logic supporting abortion fails.
It may be that you would then change your mind and say no abortions after three months. Changed facts lead to changed conclusions.
I guess I am asking if you would still favor abortion up to five months anyway?
Furthermore…
I find it extremely hypocritical and contradictory that there are laws that on one hand protect an unborn child and value its life but others that allow a mother to choose whether or not that life is worth continuing.
So in some cases the life is worthwhile and in others it’s not…
As I’ve said before…it’s not a mother’s body. It’s another “body”.
Well michael…based on alot of the sick stuff you post here there isn’t any expectation for you to have any regard for anyone’s life.
There’s no reason to think that you would have any different opinion about abortion.
vitus979:
More “pragmatic” matters of human need and “desire”? Simple “moralism”? I’m going to have to ask you to expound on this, please.
What’s to explain?
How many things that are against the accepted social moral code legal? I could go on for days.
Profanity, atheism, fornication, ■■■■■■■■■■■■
it will become possible to bring a baby to term much earlier in the pregnancy…guess I am asking if you would still favor abortion
Hypothetically, if the technology existed where you could just vacuum out the zygot/fetus/baby intact, and then have science bring it to term, without any undue strain or risk on the mother, then sure, outlaw abortions.
Of course who is then responsible for the child? I don’t think the bearer of the zygot/fetus should be–is the government going to pay for it? The religious right? Who is going to foot the bill for all these unwanted babies?
I don’t give a shit about the morality of abortion, I really don’t; I have a huge problem with any group/government dictating responsibility onto another. An unwanted child is a huge burden on unready mothers, and I don’t believe that they should be forced to accept what amounts to a lifetime of servitude due to a medical/personal mistake.
The religious right really pisses me off with their hypocrisy–spending all this $$ and time on fighting abortions, when millions are dying of disease & hunger in undeveloped nations.
Of course who is then responsible for the child? I don’t think the bearer of the zygot/fetus should be–is the government going to pay for it? The religious right? Who is going to foot the bill for all these unwanted babies?
So the mother and of course…father…shouldn’t take responsibility for their actions in creating the child in the first place?
I have a huge problem with any group/government dictating responsibility onto another.
Wait a minute…who’s dictating responsibility here? Why does this suddenly become someone elses problem? How about placing the responsibility on the parents and holding them accountable for their actions…I have a huge problem with people not taking responsibility for their own issues and following through with being grown ups.
**and I don’t believe that they should be forced to accept what amounts to a lifetime of servitude due to a medical/personal mistake. **
And I don’t believe that innocent unborn children should be aborted just because their parents don’t want be bothered with ramifications of their own actions.
So the mother and of course…father…shouldn’t take responsibility for their actions in creating the child in the first place?
Its not a child, its a zygot/fetus. Unlike you Brian286, everyday people go out to bars, they are attracted to members of the opposite sex, they go home, they fuck…sometimes the condom breaks, sometimes the pill doesn’t work, sometimes they are too drunk to care; are you suggesting that because you are morally opposed to pre-marital sex, that these people should pay for their romp in the hay for the rest of their lives?
Wait a minute…who’s dictating responsibility here? Why does this suddenly become someone elses problem? How about placing the responsibility on the parents and holding them accountable for their actions…I have a huge problem with people not taking responsibility for their own issues and following through with being grown ups.
See answer above. People have sex all the time for all sorts of reasons. You want to start punishing them for having sex by forcing them to raise a child? What a good model for the family unit! There are enough single mothers & weekend dads as is—why do I think that your amusing morality has more to do with the religious right’s hangups about sex more than what is good for society?
And I don’t believe that innocent unborn children should be aborted just because their parents don’t want be bothered with ramifications of their own actions.
Well thankfully pretty much every civilized & industrialized country in the world disagrees with your dark ages POV.
I actually hope that Roe v Wade gets overturned–I’ll start Abortion Airlines—basically a Southwest Airlines model where unwed mothers can hop a flight to Mexico/Canada/California/New York, land, get vacuumed, and then get a cocktail on the return flight. Abortion is a fact of life–no matter what you whack jobs on the right want to do to stop it, you’ll never succeed.
**that these people should pay for their romp in the hay for the rest of their lives? **
Romps in the hay have ramifications. Be it a case of herpes, HIV or a baby. You gotta pay to play. Spin the roulette wheel if you wish but don’t go crying if you lose.
You want to start punishing them for having sex by forcing them to raise a child?
A child if everything works properly is the byproduct of sex. The itch to have sex is the way it’s supposed to work. That’s how reproduction works. Do I have to go any further for you?
One think I don’t get is people attacking the morning after pill. It prevents fertilization in the first place. Oh wait god, I forgot.
I think the motive for outlawing abortion being vengeance for having sex is pretty healthy.
**How many things that are against the accepted social moral code legal? I could go on for days. **
I thinks you need to study up on your logical syllogisms, adam. (Hint: To argue that every aspect of morality is not legislated, does not mean that no aspect of morality is legislated.)
On what basis, other than morality, should the law deal with an abortion, and why?
Honestly could you rephrase that? I am pretty slow.