I agree with First Degree Murder. I'm just saying the sentencing for those convicted of such a crime don't always receive life in prison or the death penalty.

 

Gotcha. I appreciate your thoughts.

 

I don't think the country would stomach a mother going to prison much less going in under 1st Degree Murder.

 

I also do not believe that most who equate it with murder would support such sentencing.

If one truly believes that it's murder , as many do, then why water down the punishment?

 

Why are there so many more people that would have an issue with giving a life sentence to an 18 year old girl who had an abortion, than there are people who have an issue with giving a life sentence to a thug who killed a cop? Honestly, it's just an issue that goes beyond logic and reasoning. It's easy to point out all of the reasons that the two crimes should be punished the same, and anyone looking at the issue logically would agree. However, I would venture to say that, even given these facts, a majority of people would not feel the 18 year old girl is deserving of the life sentence. Why? No one knows. Like I said, it defies logic and reasoning. Taking the side you appear to be defending (I don't know if that's how you actually feel or not), you would probably win most debates on the issue because of technicalities. Doesn't necessarily make it the right answer.

Gotcha. I appreciate your thoughts.

 

I don't think the country would stomach a mother going to prison much less going in under 1st Degree Murder.

I also do not believe that most who equate it with murder would support such sentencing.

 

On the first bolded, you're probably right.

 

On the second bolded, you're probably right too. But it reveals, as you have pointed out, the tremendous inconsistency. If it's murder, it's murder & there's no way around that.

That's really as far as I go into it because that is suffecient enough for me, but I'll play along.

 

It's according to how you define life.

 

Also, how do you define it? Do you believe it is murder?

 

You still haven't answered the question. But that's ok.

 

I believe that up to a point it is the termination of a pregnancy. Hense the reason that so many countries allow a first trimester abortion. In my opinion a first trimester abortion would be legal. I don't like it, but I don't concider it murder or manslaughter at that point.

 

Aside from that, unless it was to save a mother's life it would be illegal.

 

A second trimester abortion would be manslaughter for the mother and the doctor, because at that point I definitely believe it is a human life, but could not live on it's own outside the womb.

 

A 3rd trimester abortion would be murder for both, because at this point it is definitely a human being, that would have a fighting chance of living outside the womb.

 

 

I cannot for the life of me understand how any rational human being could do or want a partial birth abortion.

Not according to my religious beliefs. If it's an artificial method, it's a no-no. NFP only, or abstinance.

 

NFP?

NFP?

 

Natural Family Planning

NFP?

 

Natural Family Planning

 

See my post here: LINK

You still haven't answered the question. But that's ok.

 

I believe that up to a point it is the termination of a pregnancy. Hense the reason that so many countries allow a first trimester abortion. In my opinion a first trimester abortion would be legal. I don't like it, but I don't concider it murder or manslaughter at that point.

 

Aside from that, unless it was to save a mother's life it would be illegal.

 

A second trimester abortion would be manslaughter for the mother and the doctor, because at that point I definitely believe it is a human life, but could not live on it's own outside the womb.

 

A 3rd trimester abortion would be murder for both, because at this point it is definitely a human being, that would have a fighting chance of living outside the womb.

 

 

I cannot for the life of me understand how any rational human being could do or want a partial birth abortion.

 

I must ask... what are the statistics of abortions by trimester? And further, what are the statistics of PP 2nd & 3rd trimester abortions, as a percentage of the whole?

I must ask... what are the statistics of abortions by trimester? And further, what are the statistics of PP 2nd & 3rd trimester abortions, as a percentage of the whole?

 

I really don't know. I would like to know that myself. I'll see if I can find something.

I believe that up to a point it is the termination of a pregnancy. Hense the reason that so many countries allow a first trimester abortion. In my opinion a first trimester abortion would be legal. I don't like it, but I don't concider it murder or manslaughter at that point.

 

I disagree.

 

When a baby is in the womb just twenty-one days, his backbone, spinal cord, and nervous system are already forming, and a small heart is present and beating.

 

And at just one month in the womb, his head is formed—complete with eyes, ears, a mouth, and a brain. His digestive system has begun forming, and he is only ¼ of an inch long—10,000 times larger than when he began.

 

At two months, the baby starts reacting to things, like tickling. He is starting to grasp at things, and is swimming and moving around in the amniotic fluid.

 

At three months, the baby is kicking his legs and turning his feet. He can curl his toes, make a fist, turn his head, open his mouth and swallow. And his fingernails are beginning to form at that time too.

 

As I stated earlier, you can read numerous testimonies from women who have had abortions--many of them in the first trimester. Listen to them as they describe the baby resisting the fluid that is choking him, suffocating her, poisoning him or her to the point of death. They kick and thrash about in the womb because life is being taken.

Found this. From PP. 89% are 1st trimester, 9.9% are 2nd trimester, and 1.1% are 3rd trimester. Not sure why they qualified "leagal abortions".

 

 

 

Between 1996 and 2005, the number of

abortions in the U.S. fell from 1.36 million to 1.21

million (Jones et al., 2008; Guttmacher Institute,

2008). The U.S. Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention (CDC) estimates that 62 percent

of legal abortions occur within the first eight

weeks of gestation, and 89 percent are

performed within the first 12 weeks. Only 1.1

percent occur after 20 weeks (CDC, 2009).

 

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/fact_abortion_1st_tri_2010-09.pdf

I disagree.

 

When a baby is in the womb just twenty-one days, his backbone, spinal cord, and nervous system are already forming, and a small heart is present and beating.

 

And at just one month in the womb, his head is formed—complete with eyes, ears, a mouth, and a brain. His digestive system has begun forming, and he is only ¼ of an inch long—10,000 times larger than when he began.

 

At two months, the baby starts reacting to things, like tickling. He is starting to grasp at things, and is swimming and moving around in the amniotic fluid.

 

At three months, the baby is kicking his legs and turning his feet. He can curl his toes, make a fist, turn his head, open his mouth and swallow. And his fingernails are beginning to form at that time too.

 

As I stated earlier, you can read numerous testimonies from women who have had abortions--many of them in the first trimester. Listen to them as they describe the baby resisting the fluid that is choking him, suffocating her, poisoning him or her to the point of death. They kick and thrash about in the womb because life is being taken.

 

And you have every right to disagree.

You still haven't answered the question. But that's ok.

 

I believe that up to a point it is the termination of a pregnancy. Hense the reason that so many countries allow a first trimester abortion. In my opinion a first trimester abortion would be legal. I don't like it, but I don't concider it murder or manslaughter at that point.

 

Aside from that, unless it was to save a mother's life it would be illegal.

 

A second trimester abortion would be manslaughter for the mother and the doctor, because at that point I definitely believe it is a human life, but could not live on it's own outside the womb.

 

A 3rd trimester abortion would be murder for both, because at this point it is definitely a human being, that would have a fighting chance of living outside the womb.

 

 

I cannot for the life of me understand how any rational human being could do or want a partial birth abortion.

I didn't answer the question because not one answer would suffice and not knowing how we were defining life I couldn't properly answer it.

 

For the record, I am against abortions (legally and morally) at a certain point in the pregnancy. Not having done enough research on the subject I can't intelligently say when that point is.

RM expresses her views well & I did take them seriously. I just strongly disagree with them. I also strongly disagree that abortion is a "complex issue." If there is innocent life inside that womb, then that's my primary concern. For me, I view those who participate in abortion in the same light as the woman who drowned her five kids in the bathtub, or the lady that locked her kids in the car & then backed the car into the pond (Susan Smith, I think was her name).

 

Why are we called upon to delve into the "roots of the issue." Do I really need to closely examine why it is that people think killing babies should be legal? Do I even want to do that? No, because as Colonel's statistics pointed out, the overwhelming vast majority of abortions occur because a woman is unwilling to shoulder responsibility for the sexual choices she made.

 

Having read and heard numerous accounts of women who have had abortions, and listening to them as they describe the child in the womb kicking and resisting and thrashing about as the life-ending drugs have been injected...no, I don't want to analyze the whys of this issue. It's the furthest thing from complex in my mind.

 

It isn't a complex issue for you, but it is for me. We don't have to agree. Both sides of this issue are looking at the same facts and coming to completely opposing views about what those facts mean. One takeaway from rockmom's post was that even though there is hostile disagreement over the issue there are underlying factors that we should all be able to agree upon to help prevent abortion in the first place. What is the process that leads a person to be in a position where abortion is the best option and how can that process be curtailed? I think that is extremely fair and going to accomplish a lot more than one side screaming that abortion is murder and the other side screaming that women's bodies are being subjugated because that is a rift that will not ever be bridged.

I didn't answer the question because not one answer would suffice and not knowing how we were defining life I couldn't properly answer it.

 

For the record, I am against abortions (legally and morally) at a certain point in the pregnancy. Not having done enough research on the subject I can't intelligently say when that point is.

 

Those of you who are better educated on this issue, how did the line get drawn at the first trimester? I assume that is what was decided by the Supreme Court in Roe vs. Wade. But why the first trimester? Is viability of the fetus part of their decision on drawing the line there? What is the youngest newborn to ever survive? Did that factor in?