Replies

If that heartbeat could continue on its own (that is without the mother...the host....I would.

"alive" to me is when that being can survive without a host.
Alive infers is releative and open to interpratation, hence the neverending arguemnts. I prefer "living" be the term of choice. And it can not be considered "living" when "living" is dependant upon a host.

Maybe this will help make my position clear, a being is not truly living until it can live independant of any other of life, until that time it is forming not living.

I would like to ask you this question. Lets see how you respond to this example.

A married man has four kids, say ages 6 to 12. Out of the blue,regardless of the precautions taken IE mom is on the pill and dad used a condom.... mom still comes up pregnant. Having this fifth child would put great strain on family finances thus making the other FOUR kids suffer. These two people planned very carefully for their family and tooh the precations you speak of but yet still is faced with this dilemma. In this example, denying the mother (and father) the right to choose hurts four kids and two parents..you in fact, thru your position, dictate that the youngest unborn has more rights, and is more important than the other SIX people combined.

When all precautions that can be taken, are taken and an unwanted harmful pregnancy happens, how can you feel justified in dictating their choice to them based on what YOU feel is right or wrong?

The majority of posts in this thread are about abortion. My point has been made, in that, this issue should not be the defining issue for presidential elections every four years when the arguments are the same over and over.

to the left: abortions on demand with no restraint or accountability is wrong and that is no longer the case....you get a time ( to be determined by the medical community as stated previously in this thread) and when it passes...TOUGH. no more late term unless it is a medical emergancy for baby or mom.

To the right: To remove ones choice to have an abortion within established timeframe is a direct violation of a persons free right to choose ones own way....you do not have the right to dictate your position to others.

To both..it is fine to speak your mind about what you beleive and what you think is right...but it is not OK to attempt to dictate that position to anyone else.

One persons rights stop where anothers begins....too many people tend to get caught up in their own rights and forget that other people have them too.

Freedom to choose ones own way thru life is the fundimental freedom that I hold dear. As many others do as well. This, of course has limits that need to be clear. I for one offer that it is time to adopt a comprimise in this issue to observe this for all people. And to avoid a snipe I pre emptively offer that people are defined as beings that can survive without a human host.

Why do so many think this is unatainable? I think the reason is this..they do not really want to face the fact that people think differantly and make differant decisions...that other people have that right just as they have the right to disagree and even speak out about it...problem is those people(on both sides) take it to far with the attempted imposition of THEIR beliefs on others.

That, in my oppinion, is the very opposite of what this country is supposed to be about. Time to face up people and accept that neither side will ever have its way totally, that they will never agree..and that is ok...not to agree....but to make that a reason for a lack of comprimise for advancement.......well, that just makes me feel like america is disintegrating and that rights of all people to choose their own way no longer matters.....back to basics please...and this can finnaly be done.the stalemate i mean.