Posted on 11/08/2002 3:06:20 PM PST by Jean S
What does that prove? Would you admire any conservative woman just because she had fewer flaws than a liberal woman? My criticism of Ann is not that she has more flaws than any liberal women but that she has more obvious flaws than she should have if she wants to help the conservative/Republican cause.
Suppose some young, intelligent woman who is more or less apolitical or moderate reads this column. Will it cause her to gravitate toward Republicans? Highly doubtful.
No, I'm a responsible libertarian (hopefully not an overly zealous one) who acknowledges the well established fact of life that children are the product of their parents (as well as God/the elements), not a pawn of the government.
Only in your megawarped dictionary.
jwalsh07 was indeed asserting that DNA alone defines human life. That's why he stated "You've got to be kidding. Here's a proof for you. Examine the DNA..." in response to my assertion that anti-abortion people could not prove that abortion is the taking of a "human" life.
Then you must also believe that any man and woman who choose not to have sex with each other should be required to prove that by making that choice they are not terminating the life of an individual human. And you must also believe that any woman who has a miscarriage must have to prove that she did not do anything to cause the death of an individual human. And you must also believe that anyone preparing to do anything at all must have to prove that they will not thereby set off a chain of events which may result in the death of another individual human. Otherwise you are being inconsistent.
Why is it that the abortionist is not required to prove the 'thing' he/she is about to assault is NOT ALIVE?.
If an abortionist (or anyone else) is charged with assault/murder, they would only be required to prove that there is a reasonable doubt as to whether that fetus was (a) a human being, (b) harmed/killed unlawfully, or (c) harmed/killed intentionally, in order to be acquitted. Even in the absence of Roe v. Wade, all reasonable jurors would have a reasonable doubt as to whether a recently formed fetus was a human being. That is why an early term abortion is only prosecutable as a practical matter if abortion is specifically criminalized.
You seem intent on forcing people to prove their innocence of wrongdoing rather than requiring prosecutors to prove their guilt. For obvious reasons, your approach is very popular with totalitarian governments.
Fetuses can't be proven to have human essence (aka "souls" or "spirits").
why should we err on the side of killing the little being before it can decide that for itself?
I'm not proposing that anyone should err on any side, I'm just suggesting that you cannot prove that an abortion is an error, whereas the initiation of force against a human being without justification is always a provable error.
Then you must believe that all women who don't try to get pregnant as often as possible cause irrational death to their egg cells.
Neither can you. Guess that means I can stick a pair of scissors in the back of your head and suck your brains out with a vacuum cleaner. If I choose to, that is.
Explain to me how the individual rights of the baby are protected in abortion. Explain to me how the decision in Roe v. Wade was NOT government control of the individual baby, i.e., finding that a human child in the womb has no rights and therefore government finds no reason why said baby can not be murdered at the whim of the mother.
If you were really so much in favor of Individual Human Rights you would be doing everything in your power to protect and defend the rights of the baby who can not speak out to protect and defend its own.
What you ought to say, if you had any honesty, is that you are for YOUR Individual Human Rights, and so long as you have YOURS everyone else can get f@cked.
You, ravinson, ought to take a look, however, then come back and tell me that abortion is not the "initiation of force against a human being."
If life begins not at conception, when does life begin?
Looks human to me.
The average length of a human pregnancy is 266 days or 38 weeks. Obstetricians normally use a figure of 40 weeks, but this is actually the time between the first day of the last menstrual period and childbirth. On average, the first day of the last menstrual period occurs 2 weeks before fertilization.
Following are facts about human development. They are organized according to the number of weeks since fertilization. Weeks after the first day of the last menstrual period (LMP) are shown in parentheses.
3 Weeks after Fertilization (5 weeks after LMP)
The eyes and spinal cord are visible and the developing brain has two lobes.
At this stage, according to the Supreme Court rulings in "Roe vs. Wade" and "Planned Parenthood vs. Casey," a pregnant woman can abort at will.
4 Weeks after Fertilization (6 weeks after LMP)
The heart is beating. The portion of the brain associated with consciousness (the cerebrum) and internal organs such as the lungs are beginning to develop and can be identified.
7 Weeks after Fertilization (9 weeks after LMP)
Muscles and nerves begin working together. When the upper lip is tickled, the arms move backwards. The portion of the brain associated with consciousness (the cerebrum) has divided into hemispheres.
9 Weeks after Fertilization (11 weeks after LMP)
More than 90% of the body structures found in a full-grown human are present. The medical classification changes from an embryo to a fetus. This dividing line was chosen by embryologists because from this point forward, most development involves growth in existing body structures instead of the formation of new ones. The preborn human moves body parts without any outside stimulation.
10 Weeks after Fertilization (12 weeks after LMP)
All parts of the brain and spinal cord are formed. The heart pumps blood to every part of the body. The whole body is sensitive to touch except for portions of the head. The preborn human makes facial expressions.
At this stage, according to the Supreme Court rulings in "Roe vs. Wade" and "Planned Parenthood vs. Casey," a pregnant woman can abort at will.
11 Weeks after Fertilization (13 weeks after LMP):
12 Weeks after Fertilization (14 weeks after LMP)
Electrical signals from the nervous system are measurable. After an abortion, efforts to suckle will sometimes be observed.
14 Weeks after Fertilization (16 weeks after LMP)
The premature human makes coordinated movements of the arms and legs.
18 Weeks after Fertilization (20 weeks after LMP)
The portion of the brain responsible for functions such as reasoning and memory (the cerebral cortex), has the same number of nerve cells as a full-grown adult.
At this stage, according to the Supreme Court rulings in "Roe vs. Wade" and "Planned Parenthood vs. Casey," a pregnant woman can abort at will.
24 Weeks after Fertilization (26 weeks after LMP)
Taste buds are functional. The preborn human will swallow more amniotic fluid if a sweetener is added to it. The grip is strong enough to hold onto an object that is moving up and down. If born and given specialized care, the survival rate is more than 80%.
At this stage, according to the Supreme Court's rulings in "Roe vs. Wade" and "Doe vs. Bolton," a pregnant woman can abort to preserve her health. One example from Roe vs. Wade of what may be considered harmful to a mother's health is the "stigma of unwed motherhood."
28 Weeks after Fertilization (30 weeks after LMP)
If born and given specialized care, the survival rate is more than 95%.
Premature infants born at this time are more sensitive to pain than infants who are born at 38 weeks, and infants who are born at 38 weeks are more sensitive to pain than older infants (3 -12 months old.)
32 Weeks after Fertilization (34 weeks after LMP):
(Premature infant 3 days after birth)
38 Weeks after Fertilization (40 weeks after LMP)
Average point in time when humans are born. At birth, the medical classification changes from a fetus to a neonate. At any point prior to birth, according to the Supreme Court's rulings in "Roe vs. Wade" and "Doe vs. Bolton," a pregnant woman can abort to preserve her health. One example from Roe vs. Wade of what may be considered harmful to a mother's health is the work of caring for a child.
Abortion is the act of killing a baby. Deal with it it.
Your "point" is specious and irrelevent to the subject.
I guess the people who lived in the town of Dachau would be considered "pro-concentration camp" because it was none of their business.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.