To: fedupjohn
Dont get your hope up to high, some still have a hard time even calling it a baby.
"Feinstein said that by defining when life begins, the bill was "the first step in removing a woman's right to choice, particularly in the early months of a pregnancy before viability." She said it could also chill embryonic stem cell research. "
17 posted on
03/25/2004 4:37:22 PM PST by
boxerblues
(4 months and a couple of bandaid wounds do not make a hero)
To: boxerblues
"before viability"
Remember the early days of the abortion debate when viability was the key term? After all, who would EVER be so heartless as to abort a child if it ever had the LEAST chance of surviving on its own! It sure didn't take long to sidestep that little moral qualm, did it?
20 posted on
03/25/2004 4:45:40 PM PST by
Socratic
(Yes, there is method in the madness.)
To: boxerblues
Feinstein said that by defining when life begins, the bill was "the first step in removing a woman's right to choice, particularly in the early months of a pregnancy before viability." If there is one thing I cannot stand, its the viability argument. Christopher Reeve can't viably live unassisted ex-utero but I doubt I have the right to terminate him.
But, then, he's not my kid.
21 posted on
03/25/2004 4:46:21 PM PST by
grellis
(Che cosa ha mangiato?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson