“Then why are parents routinely tried, convicted and imprisoned when their children starve to death?”
Because the state does not understand what you understand, that God controls everything, and when children starve to death it is His will. The state is always interfering with God’s will.
Hank
The God given rights that I am talking about are the inalienable rights defined in the Constitution. They are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The government of the United States is here to help protect these rights. These rights are not to be taken away without due process. When a woman goes to an abortion doctor, she has deprived her child of the right to life. The child has deprived the woman of NO right by being in her womb.
A parent that starves their child to death has deprived that child of the right to life. The child did not deprive the parent of any right by needing to be fed.
In the first instance (abortion), the government has determined that the child didn’t have a right to life even though our Constitution states that we all have a right to life therefore the legalization of abortion is unconstitutional.
In the second instance (child neglect), the government has determined that the child had a right to life and that the parents deprived him of that right and that they should be punished.
The ONLY difference between the two scenarios is the action of the government. The government protected the rights of the child in one instance and did not protect the rights of the child in the other instance.
I am not sure what you are talking about with God’s will and such but God has given parents the responsibility of caring for their children. A child starved to death by his parents is not God’s will.
I have two questions for you. I have asked them already but you ignored.
1. What do you call a preborn human if not a baby?
2. What do you call the procedure leading up to the abortion (removal of the ‘preborn human’) that causes the ‘preborn human’s’ heart to stop beating?
From what you have written, I have concluded that you believe forcing a woman to carry a ‘preborn human’ to term is the same as slavery. She is forced to give this child life.
What we have here is not her refusing to “give” life to the child by carrying it to term but she is actively ENDING the child’s life.
If she does not want her body to provide life to this child why not just put her into labor? Why does the abortion doctor need to end the ‘preborn human’s’ life before the woman is required to deliver the ‘preborn human’?
Many of these babies would be viable if they hadn’t been ripped apart limb by limb or scalded to death in saline. Sometimes they are born alive even after attempts to end their lives. There are abortion survivors that lived and grew up that now speak out against abortion. Of course now, most of these survivors are left to die alone.