Author Topic: Fetus protection laws  (Read 1107 times)

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Re: all in the eyes of the beholder...
« Reply #45 on: February 29, 2004, 12:33:37 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by VFJACKAL
Funny..that what I feel as though the gays are doing to us "Moral people";)



You're going to marry a gay person?
sand

Offline Tuomio

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 523
Fetus protection laws
« Reply #46 on: February 29, 2004, 06:24:13 AM »
You really cant force anybody to carry a child to this world. No matter how ugly it gets, the child is integrated in the womans body and she should be able to remove it.

If there was a way to transfer that unborn child in to somekind of artificial growing chamber, then it would be another issue. But as long as state doesent own our bodies, everything that is within is nobody elses business. Even if the child were fediddleing talking and singing in the stomach, it has no right to be there if the mother chooses. If it cannot survive outside the womb, its not the mothers problem really. As long as it is lawful to breed without restrictions or signing any papers, this is what you get.

This is where our marshmellow candybar fairytale western lifes meet natures reality, we have come far with our abilities, but still have to hatch the new human beings inside women and give birth in the way every other mammals do.

Actually there is no child until the woman gives a birth, before that there is only the mother with uncontrolled cellgrowth in her stomach. Yes, that could be also taught as a cancer, depending how you like to view it.

About the rape + miscarriage = murder, it is not relevant about this subject, you can argue it separately. That habit of ruling do not define the standpoint of abortion.



ps. Yes i am cynical ass**** and deserve to be shot, but try to argue my point.

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
Fetus protection laws
« Reply #47 on: February 29, 2004, 07:54:48 AM »
I beg to differ, it's precisely the point of the post. If there is going to be legislation that calls the death of a fetus murder in one case (one that occurs without the mother's consent), you darn well better believe it opens the debate up. It's fine if you want to be cynical and call a baby a parasite; it's another thing to play both sides of the coin. If I wanted to be harsh I could suggest we should only allow civil liability in the cases where an unborn child is intentionally or unintentionally killed. The offending person probably ought to be fined, but that's about it. That is unless we consider the unborn a child, that is, through some abitrary process like simply "saying" it was a child.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2004, 08:16:07 AM by Kieran »

Offline LePaul

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7988
Fetus protection laws
« Reply #48 on: February 29, 2004, 08:43:17 AM »
Everyday I drive past the women's clinic where abortions, amongst other gynecological services, are done.  Everyday, there are four religious protesters out there with graphics posters.  The protesters are always elderly gentlemen who have a history of marching their signs in front of churches where pro-choice canidates/officials attend mass with their children.

Most of the ardent pro-life supporters Ive seen here are so lost in their message, they seem fine scaring children with their displays.

What's interesting is I never see women out there protesting the rights of the fetus.  But I do see women aggressively campaigning the right of a woman to chose.

Perhaps, since men can't carry a child nor make choices about its health, they should back off and respect the mother's choices?

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Re: Re: all in the eyes of the beholder...
« Reply #49 on: February 29, 2004, 11:28:49 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
You're going to marry a gay person?


The gays getting married and the courts allowing it are flaunting the laws of the land.

What's going on is SF is a blantant disregard for the people of California, it's laws and the their votes.

If they want gay marriage, they can vote change the laws. But noooo, they need cricumvent the law to get what they want, just like a lot of Liberal judges have been doing in the federal courts.

What's to stop these Liberals from circumventing other laws? Maybe SF will decide it's okay to have 3 people or more in  a legal marriage because it's a "loving relationship"

Maybe they will decide for the state what's good for the people on other issues too.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2004, 11:31:14 AM by NUKE »

Offline Kieran

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4119
Fetus protection laws
« Reply #50 on: February 29, 2004, 12:29:58 PM »
Quote
Perhaps, since men can't carry a child nor make choices about its health, they should back off and respect the mother's choices?


That standpoint is never going to answer the hard question, "When is it a fetus, and when is it a baby" in the context of the discussion. That's a dodge. Pro-lifers cannot resolve they feel it's murder when someone else "decides" to abort the fetus, but it's a "choice" when the mother decides to do the exact same thing.

If I own a dog that is giving me fits, can I take it out back of my house and shoot it? Not in front of witnesses, unless I want to go to jail. It might be my "choice", but that won't matter for squat. In that respect a dog has more standing than a human fetus it appears. That's something to chew on, isn't it?

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Fetus protection laws
« Reply #51 on: February 29, 2004, 12:36:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Kieran
If I own a dog that is giving me fits, can I take it out back of my house and shoot it? Not in front of witnesses, unless I want to go to jail. It might be my "choice", but that won't matter for squat. In that respect a dog has more standing than a human fetus it appears. That's something to chew on, isn't it?


Exactly! That is what I was refering to when I asked "what would happen to you if you smashed some California Condor eggs that you found?"

Why is it illegal to destroy a Condors eggs? They are just bird fetuses after all, yet they have state protection, unlike human fetuses.

Your dog example is better though.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2004, 02:34:44 PM by NUKE »

Offline VFJACKAL

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 236
Re: Re: all in the eyes of the beholder...
« Reply #52 on: February 29, 2004, 03:22:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
You're going to marry a gay person?


Huh...NO !!!!!  See I'm one of the minorities in this country that thinks Men and Women being married is normal. It's acceptable in my belief system. MEN doing MEN or Women doing Women is not normal nor acceptable in my belief system.

One thing I'm gonna say is this..And it will probably draw a few flames I would think....

Gays in my belief system are TOLERATED. I dont believe they have "Rights" to marriage. Someone wants to come up with some socially tolerated thing that allows them some sort of "Rights" for benefits that "Normal" marriages (Men being married to Women) have then more power to them. Don't ask me to "have to Accept" anything but I can Tolerate many things.

Best I quit this right here I think.

Offline Frogm4n

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
Re: Re: Re: all in the eyes of the beholder...
« Reply #53 on: February 29, 2004, 03:30:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by VFJACKAL
Huh...NO !!!!!  See I'm one of the minorities in this country that thinks Men and Women being married is normal. It's acceptable in my belief system. MEN doing MEN or Women doing Women is not normal nor acceptable in my belief system.

One thing I'm gonna say is this..And it will probably draw a few flames I would think....

Gays in my belief system are TOLERATED. I dont believe they have "Rights" to marriage. Someone wants to come up with some socially tolerated thing that allows them some sort of "Rights" for benefits that "Normal" marriages (Men being married to Women) have then more power to them. Don't ask me to "have to Accept" anything but I can Tolerate many things.

Best I quit this right here I think.


Then you should support john kerry, who believes in state allows civil unions and letting the church figure out who it 'marrys'.

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Re: Re: Fetus protection laws
« Reply #54 on: February 29, 2004, 03:37:08 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Eagler
I think it is a step in the right direction, a direction towards a state of awareness of a life so easily suck/flushed from existence every hour of everyday, 365 days a year

21 weeks


Pretty much flawed example.
How can the mother be under anesthesia and not her foetus ?

Offline VFJACKAL

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 236
Re: Re: Re: Re: all in the eyes of the beholder...
« Reply #55 on: February 29, 2004, 04:37:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Frogm4n
Then you should support john kerry, who believes in state allows civil unions and letting the church figure out who it 'marrys'.


I feel I maybe hijacking a thread here...so I'll save my thinking on this for another place here......BUT

Kerry is not my choice...nor any other Democrat that is running for president.

Offline rookie_spitfire

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Fetus protection laws
« Reply #56 on: March 02, 2004, 04:04:34 PM »
That was an amazing article, i cannot believe the kid made it, my heart aches for people who try and try without hope of ever concieving a child and when they do get lucky something has to try to rip thier precious unborn child from them.
I'm pro-choice but also i believe that abortion is murder, but like everyone else is saying, if the mother was raped she should have the choice of aborting, b/c how could she live for the rest of her life looking at this 'tainted' child born outta rape. How could she explain to her child that she didn't know the father and how could that screw the child up.
I have a cousin who was born with ceberal palzy due to the gestational sac being torn during the pregnancy, they couldn't determine when the sac was torn but they concluded she breathed in the fluid and it messed her up.
She's now 11-12yrs old, a great kid with a great smile, but still she will never have a 'normal' life, due to this accident in the womb.
yes i am done my tyraid now...