Akin Refuse to Drop Out Of Senate Race

Fox2Now ^ | 9/25/2012 | Betsey Bruce

[Diamond]

Seriously, even in case of a pregnancy from violent rape, I do not condone abortion after the first trimester. That is because after that the fetus is beginning to look like a human being and is capable of feeling pain.

How about 1 minute after the "first trimester"? What part of the word, 'inalienable' don't you understand? Since when did your inalienable right to life depend on how old you are or what you look like?

I have a factual question for you. When did your life begin? Can you answer that question?

It is to medical science a part of mother’s body.

That assertion has in the past been aptly called, "backwoods biology".

I would abhor a society which would force a woman victim of violent rape to be forced to bear a VIOLENTLY FORCED pregnancy to full term.

So your 'solution' to an unspeakable act of violence; namely, a rape is to permit the commission of a second act of unspeakable violence by the deliberate killing of an innocent human being?

"Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent."

Cordially,

[entropy12]

The answer to your question is..answered by a question...
what do you propose to do with a woman who has suffered the despicable act of violent rape and decides to terminate the violently forced pregnancy? What in your opinion should happen to her? A long prison sentence? If you answer that question, I can answer your question.

[Diamond]

If you answer that question, I can answer your question.

You can't answer a factual question without asking a legal question?

what do you propose to do with a woman who has suffered the despicable act of violent rape and decides to terminate the violently forced pregnancy?

There you go again. You also terminated your mother's pregnancy, so to speak. So what exactly do you mean by "decides to terminate the violently forced pregnancy"?

Legal questions about cases cannot be be answered in the absence of specific facts. Consequently, your euphemisms, designed as they are to obscure the ontological fact of one of the human beings at issue, preclude any rational basis for your legal question, much less any specific answer to it.

Cordially,