Replies

Thanks for the information. I'll check it out.

I think what some people are missing is that the knowledge of how a human develops in the womb has expanded greatly since the days of Roe v. Wade.

I begin to think that the die-hard abortion supporters are afraid that the argument of when life begins is going farther and farther back towards conception. They know that beyond that is the territory of BIRTH CONTROL. They fear the loss of that.

They needn't worry. Humans don't have the restraint to really act (as a group) on moral grounds alone. They will always take advantage of whatever science is out there, to achieve whatever result they desire.

That baby could easily have lived outside the womb. That should be enough for anyone to consider him a human being. Some of us would consider him a human being even if he couldn't have lived outside the womb yet.

And yes, I do think the prosecuting of the killing of a fetus as "murder" is (among other things) a means of undermining legal abortions. And I think it's GREAT.

And yes, I do think the prosecuting of the killing of a fetus as "murder" is (among other things) a means of undermining legal abortions. And I think it's GREAT.

Me too!! Which is why I wanted to scue their results!!

I know you and runningbear and others have been deeply checking into all aspects of the case, but I wanted to mention this in case you haven't seen it. It may not be anything at all, but I do recall seeing posts asking about Kristin Smart.

At the Son of Susan website, there is a page for 'Did Scott Peterson know Paul Flores???

It's kind of an interesting read.

Also, you hit it right! The choice IS over which form of contracetive to use... NOT a choice over whether to kill a human being or not.

One of my cousins, back in the late 70's gave birth a baby that was just over a pound. That baby grew into a lovely woman. NOW doesn't have a leg to stand on, and I think it is slowly dawning on them!! And they are grasping at anything.