Um, okay???

 

The point is...IMO Drug laws dont work. Therefor what is wrong with allowing a person responsibility in choosing their own actions. When that person makes a wrong decision, let the law take care of it.

 

The government cant play babysitter to everyone.

The point is...IMO Drug laws dont work. Therefor what is wrong with allowing a person responsibility in choosing their own actions. When that person makes a wrong decision, let the law take care of it.

 

The government cant play babysitter to everyone.

 

This is for an entirely new thread...

I don't put a collection of cells that rely on a parasitic relationship with a host to survive, on the same level as a functioning human being. Once the fetus leaves the womb and is born, then It gets the rights.

 

Why not put a limit on abortions, so that some of the scenarios listed above could be avoided.

 

You've thrown out the "parasite" comparasin several times regarding babies, and while its not only disturbing, its completely wrong...

 

For one, the baby is an offspring of the woman, therefore was created by the woman, therefore the interspecies relationships are not used...

 

Also, the woman is not harmed in any way. There is nothing detrimental to the woman that happens. Therefor if the relationships are used, it would be commensal relationship, with one species benefitting and the other having neither a positive or negative effect...

You've thrown out the "parasite" comparasin several times regarding babies, and while its not only disturbing, its completely wrong...

 

For one, the baby is an offspring of the woman, therefore was created by the woman, therefore the interspecies relationships are not used...

 

Also, the woman is not harmed in any way. There is nothing detrimental to the woman that happens. Therefor if the relationships are used, it would be commensal relationship, with one species benefitting and the other having neither a positive or negative effect...

 

Sorry, I am a biology major, I should of known that...but its late.

IMO a fetus isnt a human life...its a fetus.

But see, once the law starts interfering with what may happen do we have a problem.

 

Besides its legal status. Do you see nothing wrong, with two or three people, who have no kids, nor will be driving; do you see a problem with them shooting heroin, or any other kind of drug.

 

In the privacy of their own home, with the proper safety taken.

 

Yes, I do. Because that leads to actions that do affect others.

The point is...IMO Drug laws dont work. Therefor what is wrong with allowing a person responsibility in choosing their own actions. When that person makes a wrong decision, let the law take care of it.

 

The government cant play babysitter to everyone.

 

We still have murders in this country, every single day.

I guess murder laws don't work either.

Sorry, I am a biology major, I should of known that...but its late.

IMO a fetus isnt a human life...its a fetus.

 

I purposely referred to the fetus as an unborn child.

 

Was I wrong? Is it not an unborn child?

Not everyone wants to live in the same Christian/Pro-life world that you live in LBBC. I like my world free, with women free to do with their body as they wish.

 

Sorry, you don't live in a free world and you are not free to do with your body whatever you choose.

 

This society has decided that there are many situations in which you are not free to do with your body whatever you choose.

 

Prostitution, drugs, speeding, freedom of speech, limitations on your use of public property, viewing child pornography are all examples of limits that this society has felt were needed on your fallacy of a free world.

Yes.

Homicide.

Jail time.

 

If you use the old she-was-socially-irresonsible-we-shouldn't-punish-her argument, then you should also not incarcerate drug addicts or DUI-homicides. The argument is the same.

 

I would add that the doctor loses their license and has jail time.

Great thread and post lbbc. This made some very good points. Also, as far as abortion, it is murder plain and simple. That mass of cells as some far left wacko liberals like to call it is a human being, that is fact and no matter how someone wants to spin it away they cannot, (they were once that mass of tissue that is not a human ).

Not everyone wants to live in the same Christian/Pro-life world that you live in LBBC. I like my world free, with women free to do with their body as they wish.

First of all, it is to be stated that Islam forbids abortion in all stages of pregnancy. When the pregnancy reaches 120 days old, abortion becomes totally forbidden and is deemed a form of murder that results in compensation becoming liable. If abortion is done prior to this period, no compensation is liable but one should ask forgiveness and promise never to commit it again. In addition, it is highly recommended to do much righteous deeds such as giving in charity, etc.

 

http://www.islamawareness.net/FamilyPlanning/Abortion/abo_fatwa002.html

I purposely referred to the fetus as an unborn child.

 

Was I wrong? Is it not an unborn child?

 

:thumb:You are correct in that description of a fetus and

No, you are absolutely correct and it is an unborn child.

 

No opinion, just fact.

I went off on a tangent that didn't help my case. What I am trying to say is that there will always be abortions. Unless the government plans on putting a monitor in every uterus, there is no way find out when every woman gets pregnant. If you criminalize abortion, then you run the risk of bringing back the age of the coat hanger, which is something no one wants.

 

LBBC, what is your opinion on the morning after pill, and other forms of emergency contraceptives? Accidents to happen...

I went off on a tangent that didn't help my case. What I am trying to say is that there will always be abortions. Unless the government plans on putting a monitor in every uterus, there is no way find out when every woman gets pregnant. If you criminalize abortion, then you run the risk of bringing back the age of the coat hanger, which is something no one wants.

 

LBBC, what is your opinion on the morning after pill, and other forms of emergency contraceptives? Accidents to happen...

The argument for the legalization of drugs has a more legitimate argument- you could say we should legalize drugs so there are less OD's from drug dealers lining their drugs with harmful chemicals.

 

Except there is a difference- Pro-Lifers don't want to control a woman's body. They want to protect the life of an innocent child. No one wants the coat hanger, but I'd rather a woman break the law and harm herself then to see all of these babies being murdered. You have to understand that Pro-Lifers view the unborn baby as life. It is not a control issue, it is a protection issue.

 

And, I'm sure you don't care, but I am against the morning-after abortion pill and other emergency contraceptives. If you meant to say "Accidents do happen", they don't happen if you take precaution. Like not having sex before your ready to have a child.

 

Your position that "Accidents do happen" is similar to this- Someone who plays Russian Roulette is not stupid because "Accidents Do Happen". Playing with a revolver, pointing the muzzle towards yourself and pulling the trigger is high-risk behavior and consequences (death) come from it- just like having sex has consequences (new life). Just because you didn't want the consequence (similar to how the Russian roulette player doesn't want to die) doesn't mean that you are excused from dealing from the consequences.

Do you believe society will support that thinking? Since we're talking about judges that are essentially once-removed from being elected, we have to take that into account.

 

Justices are not supposed to think about what thinking society supports at any given time.