verslagen1 wrote on 05/16/19 at 14:44:51:


If the woman doesn't know she's pregnant, does that count?  How can she even know at the early stages?

That'd be - at best - a case by case consideration.

justin_o_guy2 wrote on 05/16/19 at 15:24:07:


More hypocrisy.... you don't want to "deny the value of the unborn", yet after the kid is born, "fukc 'em - they're on their own."

What kid of rationale is that??

If you take away a woman's right to choose, then you must accept the burden of every single child that's born.  Meaning - if that woman wants to give up that baby, there is zero consequence.  No matter how many times she gets pregnant and dumps a kid, we have to pay for it.  Pay for the cost of the prenatal care, the birth, the postnatal care, the feeding, the clothing, the care until its adopted and on and on...

T And T Garage wrote on 05/16/19 at 15:29:43:

 No matter how many times
we have to pay for it.

OMG, that sounds,
(GASP)   Conservative   !!!!!

 Everyone is just re-hashing their view on the human life definition and saying other definitions are wrong.

 The argument is about current law, not opinion.

 This is like arguing over seat-belt laws.

 People debate forever about the effectiveness of seat-belts instead of addressing the real issue of if its acceptable for law to tell you what you can and can't do for your personal safety inside an automobile.

Pay for the cost of the prenatal care, the birth, the postnatal care, the feeding, the clothing, the care until its adopted and on and on...

Huh.....  

I thought that was Bernie's plan anyway, for everybody?

WebsterMark wrote on 05/16/19 at 18:41:01:


No, that's incorrect.  As I stated, I don't condone late term abortions.  A fetus that has become viable outside the womb can only then be considered a "baby".

So your "in the nick of time" reference is flawed.  Nice try.

T And T Garage wrote on 05/16/19 at 15:23:52:

So a woman, has missed her period.
She ’thinks’ she may be pregnant.
She is driving to the Doctors office.

She is hit head on and killed.
The other person is charged with one count of ‘Vechiel Manslaughter’.

A Autopsy is performed, and it is discovered she was pregnant, by one week.
Now, the other person is charged with TWO counts of  ‘Vechiel Manslaughter’.
And is sentenced to, Two, Consecutive terms.

So, where is your, ‘outrage’ ?
You believe, ‘But it’s not a person’, ‘ A fetus is NOT a living animal.’, ‘a fetus is not a human being’, ‘It’s not a person’, ‘a fetus is not a baby’, ‘A heartbeat is not a baby’, ‘A zygote is not a baby’.
So clearly you believe that person should NOT be charged, because that second, ‘person’, was NOT a ‘person’.

Please explain why, the same people, (for the very most part) have decided a ‘baby’ is NOT a ‘baby’ until it is born, and can be willy-nilly, ‘aborted’, up to that point.
YET, suddenly, that, ‘unborn nothing’, is now a person ?
If the Tragic accident happened as above.