fetus can't feel pain before 24 weeks

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I am also not sure how morality can be completely unattached to law, when many laws are influenced by a nation's or political groups' overall morality. Is it possible for law to be completely unrelated to a given morality?

Morality isn't unattached to law. There are moral and ethical arguments for the right to abortion, which I am sure you are aware of since these have been discussed at length on here time and time again in innumerable threads. You obviously disagree with those arguments - and clearly Sofiyya does since she apparently believes that it is moral relativism to point out that that "murder" is a fundamentally a legal distinction and not a moral one - but they are there nonetheless.

That said, once again, this has nothing to do with the topic of this particular thread.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Morality isn't unattached to law. There are moral and ethical arguments for the right to abortion, which I am sure you are aware of since these have been discussed at length on here time and time again in innumerable threads. You obviously disagree with those arguments - and clearly Sofiyya does since she apparently believes that it is moral relativism to point out that that "murder" is a fundamentally a legal distinction and not a moral one - but they are there nonetheless.

That said, once again, this has nothing to do with the topic of this particular thread.

let me translate: "blah blah blah. I have nothing to say"

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

let me translate: "blah blah blah. I have nothing to say"

Well it seems clear as day that YOU have nothing to say.

Next.

[Amby 490]

Amby, tsk tsk, you should have known better with this abortion thread. We both know they go on for pages and pages and pages and nothing good comes from them.

Stick with the ####### threads

I think I will

[GabiandVi 34]

Murder is a legal definition, not a moral one.

Wrong. Murder is a legal definition. Murder is also a moral definition. The latter existed before the former. The latter is the reason for the former. Have you utterly forgotten this, or did you never understand it?

Edited June 27, 2010 by GabiandVi

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And yet abortion is legal in the UK and many other countries. Which begs the question - so what?

[GabiandVi 34]

Aha. On your 7th pregnancy you find that your fetus stopped developing and is about to cause mis-carriage. If that happens, there is a good chance that you will bleed to death. Of course, you would not even consider abortion, despite the fact that there is no saving the fetus - it's fate determined, it will self-abort. But you would rather risk leaving your 6 children orphans.

I believe you that you would do as you promised (attempt to die just not to have an abortion). I just can't accept that it would be an intelligent decision.

Who taught you that a miscarriage results in a good chance you would bleed to death? The truth is, despite people liking to talk about "abortion for the health of the mother," there is no actual medical reason for a woman to have an abortion. Abortions carry risks and are just as likely as a delivery to lead to hemmoraging.

There are times during delivery when a woman's life is at risk and it is either her life or the child's (though with c-sections this almost never becomes the case) but it has almost always been the practice to save the mother, unless the father is someone like Caeser. There is, for all practical purposes, no time before delivery, before a child is viable outside the womb, where it is safer to abort the child. In fact, the opposite is true.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

All life is risk and there is a risk of complication in any medical procedure. So what?

[GabiandVi 34]

And yet abortion is legal in the UK and many other countries. Which begs the question - so what?

So stop using that stupid, completely incorrect argument.

It comes down to whether you believe there is a life involved or not, and if there is a life involved, when does the convenience of one person outweigh the life of another? If you believe there is a life but that life is not as significant as the right to choose, then say so. If you don't believe there is a life involved, then say that. But surely, anyone with an inkling of an open mind can understand and respect the compulsion of others who believe that abortion is the ending of a life to seek protection for that life. I never understand the contempt I see for people who are fighting for what seems to be the most basic issue in, well, in life.

And if abortion is the ending of a life, by definition, it is murder, just as, btw, the death penalty is.

All life is risk and there is a risk of complication in any medical procedure. So what?

So stop using the "abortion for the health of the mother" defense. It's stupid and completely incorrect. See above.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It isn't incorrect. Murder is a fundamentally legal definition and the legality of abortion takes into account moral arguments.

Morally, I believe the right of a woman to choose how to manage her own body and biological functions outweighs the rights of a fetus. I am not in any doubt of what abortion is, it is not murder.

Killing is not murder, otherwise we wouldn't have legal definitions such as manslaughter, self defence, accidental death etc. etc. etc.

You just want the issues to be simpler than they really are.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Abortion is murder because, no matter what the law says, an innocent human being is dead at the willful hand of another. Sounds like murder to me.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So stop using the "abortion for the health of the mother" defense. It's stupid and completely incorrect. See above.

I'm afraid I'm not inclined to take your word for that merely on your say-so. I'm no doctor and I'm guessing you aren't either - but there are conditions related to pregnancy that can endanger the mother's health and may make an abortion medically necessary from the point of view of doctors.

It is recommended in some instances of multiple pregnancies - but there are also conditions such as Ectopic pregnancy and Planental abruption. In point of fact - it would appear that you are wrong, at least from my point of view.

These situations might be rare, but they exist nonetheless.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Abortion is murder because, no matter what the law says, an innocent human being is dead at the willful hand of another. Sounds like murder to me.

Quite simply, your definition of murder is not what constitutes "murder" under the law. Otherwise we might argue a similar position for self-defence and the death penalty etc (or we could if you hadn't preceded it with a disclaimer about the victim being an "innocent human being"). Innocence has nothing to do with whether or not murder has been committed - because if that were true it would be impossible for a person with a criminal record to be a murder victim.

Clearly that is silly.

Once again, none of this has anything to do with the topic arising from the OP.

[Fandango 1,439]

If what we do is our business, then it's no one else's business to restrict it.

When did I once talk about abortion law or my desire to restrict it? It is a slippery slope, and I'm not the one to decide for the world.

The point being you were able to make your own choice.

Again, if we're talking about what the point was, mine was merely that I believe there's a chance they can feel before 24 weeks, nothing more. Never once did I claim to want to restrict others' choices.

[Fandango 1,439]

Then why is it when a pregnant woman is murdered it is considered a double homicide.

Very good point, I have wondered this myself.

Because the nature of a crime depends on the circumstances of that crime.

Accidentally running someone over with your car and killing them is not murder (at least not first degree). Deliberately running someone over and killing them obviously is. The person is still dead regardless of whether the death was accidental or deliberate.

I don't think that's what he was getting at....Scott Peterson was charged with a double murder when he killed his pregnant wife. If the fetus is not a person, then how can it be murder?

Again, everyone must understand that I am keeping my personal feelings towards abortion out of this question. It's not about proving a point, but it is a legitimate q of why a fetus is counted as a person in the eyes of the law in that regard.

Personally I'm glad you shared the pic with us and I got to say you showed great restraint by only saying STFU. Cleo was being very rude and her comment IMO was uncalled for

Thank you!

Indeed, how rude of me to wonder if posting ones own fetus pic to make a trivial point on a public message board was shortsighted and might focus the arguments in an unhealthy direction. I realize of course that that was entirely misplaced and indeed, I encourage everyone to use their personal fetus pics in abortion threads as often as possible, clearly that is what is needed to forward the debate because people who have abortions have absolutely no clue what a fetus looks like, nor that the abortion kills the fetus stone dead. If only they knew, no one would ever have one.

Thought you did it out of concern and 'sensitivity' towards me? LOL.

Again, many on the pro-choice side of this debate have misunderstood my rationale for posting that. But that's not surprising either.