[donh]

Then why can't a 5 year old exercise his religeous freedom and attend the Church of Satan? Or leave home and become a prostitute in Holland? You are right. I completely don't understand how people can make arguments for fetal rights with a straight face. What makes a person a citizen is his or her ability to exercise moral judgement competently. And his rights improve as his ability to do so improves. This is obviously true by simple observation, in every other rhelm of the law, just as it obviously should be, and nobody raises a fuss about it, except in this venue, where some people want to substitute different criteria about what's "natural" or "biological" or "sacred". This is plainly a bad idea, and it continuously astonishes me that it has modern adherents.

[Hajman]

Then why can't a 5 year old exercise his religeous freedom and attend the Church of Satan? Or leave home and become a prostitute in Holland? You are right. I completely don't understand how people can make arguments for fetal rights with a straight face.

You wouldn't understand it in that context, since the questions you ask don't pertain to the fetus' right to life. Apples and oranges.

-The Hajman-

[A Navy Vet]

"What makes a person a citizen is his or her ability to exercise moral judgement competently."

Ya know, maybe if you actually knew the definitions of the words you're choosing to use, you might understand why some of us are rolling our eyes at your posts:

[citizen n. 1. A person oweing loyalty to and entitled by birth or naturalization to the protection of a given country] Seems citizenry has nothing to do with morality.

[parasite n. 1. An often harmful organism that lives on or in a different organism]

[Brad’s Gramma]

What makes a person a citizen is his or her ability to exercise moral judgement competently.

Huh?