[atmowasia]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...ot-initiative/

Thanks goodness it got voted down.

[9wQlZkIj]

Wow, so rubbing one out would be illegal too huh - since I'm preventing all the little Joe Bonhams from finding an egg to attach themselves too, and they all die a painful death in a wad of TP?

No...that is the whole "at conception" thing. When you spank the lil guy or put on a rubber, you are PREVENTING conception which is apparently ok. The BCP however, prevents a fertilized egg from attaching which if you believe the whole at conception thing, means you are killing the satan spawn....

[TimEricsson]

No...that is the whole "at conception" thing. When you spank the lil guy or put on a rubber, you are PREVENTING conception which is apparently ok. The BCP however, prevents a fertilized egg from attaching which if you believe the whole at conception thing, means you are killing the satan spawn....

I've heard some really fundamental people think that even using a condom or birth control is preventing the "potential" for life and is therefore the same as abortion. Some people are retarded though.

[DiBellaBam]

And now we can eliminate Christian superstitions altogether and be truly free. Imagine - a society of personal choice, no fear or prejudice or ignorance.

This is a world I wish I could raise my daughter in. I have a dream...

[DP5Ups8o]

So I have a question: I really have no issue with abortion being legal. I can see many instances where I agree with the option. However, for those of you who support abortion rights and do not see this as a human life please help me understand (if there is a valid reason) why a person who kills/murders a pregnant woman is charged with TWO counts of murder? To me the laws don’t jive. If abortion is not murder because it is not considered a human life, than why is it considered a life in the other instance? Seems to me the Gov. is trying to have it both ways. Why is it murder, only becuase the mother decided not to kill the baby, or forming baby, cell, whatever you want to call it. Seems like it should only be one count of murder to me.

I tend to agree with you. It's either murder or it isn't.

Just like...some people who believe that abortion is murder...but that it is okay in cases of rape and incest.

Really? If you believe abortion is murder, how can it ever be okay? If the child is 3 years old before DNA test confirms it is the child of a rapist...is it still okay to kill it?

[FotoCihasWewb]

I tend to agree with you. It's either murder or it isn't.

Just like...some people who believe that abortion is murder...but that it is okay in cases of rape and incest.

Really? If you believe abortion is murder, how can it ever be okay? If the child is 3 years old before DNA test confirms it is the child of a rapist...is it still okay to kill it?

I tend to think along the same lines. I personally choose to see a rape that results in pregnancy as a crime with two victims, the mother and the fatherless child. Hence it's also the only crime I'm aware of where one victim feels justified in taking the life of the other. So IF the definition of life is at conception, then logically it would be a crime to commit an abortion even when the individual who commits it was another victim of another crime. Mitigating circumstances might be applied when the existence of one life literally threatens that of another, an abortion of "self-defense" if you will. The definition of life is of course the sticky point. Constitutionally we're essentially in an argument over when an individual is considered to have the rights of "personhood", thus it's fair to say when there's a law out there that defines it then for certain the rest should at least be consistent towards the matter. Of course "personhood" is also considered to be a "natural right" thus not a product of the Federal government which kind of obscures the issue even further. Where it really gets murky is discussing the concept of how it is to be "standardized" as some will say at the state and some at the federal level.

[Tarrccrys]

I tend to agree with you. It's either murder or it isn't.

Just like...some people who believe that abortion is murder...but that it is okay in cases of rape and incest.

Really? If you believe abortion is murder, how can it ever be okay? If the child is 3 years old before DNA test confirms it is the child of a rapist...is it still okay to kill it?

I think someone would know if they got pregnant as the result of a rape. Some women choose to still have the baby - others don't. True if they think it's murder they shouldn't agree with any and some people don't.

[DfrtYhyu]

Which prevents rape victims from aborting their predator's spawn. Its almost as if fundamentalists try to force through these laws just to piss people off.

Agreed. Now while i am against abortion in general (as a lot of women i see having it, it is more so they don't have to alter their lifestyle or so it seems), I DO agree for it in rape, incest, sexual assault, or if mother's life would be in jeopardy.

So I have a question: I really have no issue with abortion being legal. I can see many instances where I agree with the option. However, for those of you who support abortion rights and do not see this as a human life please help me understand (if there is a valid reason) why a person who kills/murders a pregnant woman is charged with TWO counts of murder? To me the laws don’t jive. If abortion is not murder because it is not considered a human life, than why is it considered a life in the other instance? Seems to me the Gov. is trying to have it both ways. Why is it murder, only becuase the mother decided not to kill the baby, or forming baby, cell, whatever you want to call it. Seems like it should only be one count of murder to me.

I wonder that myself. heck i wonder why many states adopted that as law/

[SNUfR8uI]

I think someone would know if they got pregnant as the result of a rape.

Not the point.

Some women choose to still have the baby - others don't. Okay. But, unless "some" of those people believe abortion should be illegal, because it is murder...EXCEPT in cases of rape and incest. Then, I have no argument with them.

True if they think it's murder they shouldn't agree with any and some people don't. Right...and if they don't, this point is not arguing with that.

[dolaBeetCeage]

I've heard some really fundamental people think that even using a condom or birth control is preventing the "potential" for life and is therefore the same as abortion. Some people are retarded though.

Contraception was (and may still be) banned by the Catholics (Roman). Of course as with most religious 'rules' many have argued that there is a non-religious reason for the ban on contraception. If you don't continue to make babies (in other words, new Catholics) then the church numbers decline. Can't have that. The so-called rhythm method was used by many Catholics and despite a claimed 75 to 87 percent effectivness rate is responsible for many 'surprises' in good Catholic familes.

[grofvuri]

This is a world I wish I could raise my daughter in. I have a dream...

If only religion were the only source of fear, prejudice, and ignorance.

[panholio]

Well, it certainly is one of the best funded and most "accepted" sources of tyranny, superstition, and ignorance.
Surely, you aren't arguing from a position of "all of these other things do bad things too, so you can't single out religion".

[egoldhyip]

Contraception was (and may still be) banned by the Catholics (Roman). Of course as with most religious 'rules' many have argued that there is a non-religious reason for the ban on contraception. If you don't continue to make babies (in other words, new Catholics) then the church numbers decline. Can't have that. The so-called rhythm method was used by many Catholics and despite a claimed 75 to 87 percent effectivness rate is responsible for many 'surprises' in good Catholic familes.

Q. What do you call people who use the rhythm method of birth control?

A. Parents.

[Zptmsemk]

So I have a question: I really have no issue with abortion being legal. I can see many instances where I agree with the option. However, for those of you who support abortion rights and do not see this as a human life please help me understand (if there is a valid reason) why a person who kills/murders a pregnant woman is charged with TWO counts of murder? To me the laws don’t jive. If abortion is not murder because it is not considered a human life, than why is it considered a life in the other instance? Seems to me the Gov. is trying to have it both ways. Why is it murder, only becuase the mother decided not to kill the baby, or forming baby, cell, whatever you want to call it. Seems like it should only be one count of murder to me.

This should come down to the intent. The intent was for the baby to be born and become a life. With abortions the intent is for life to never happen. I my mind its simple, the mother needs to decide if she wants life or not, the decision also needs to be made during the 1st trimester.

What I really dont get is that humans are over populated as it is. We cant feed everyone now let alone when we double in population. One would think the wise thing to do was to control the population as much as possible. China has the right idea in this area.

[Rwujnezq]

What does every person need to have to be recognized as an individual?
A birthday.

[KeestRast]

What does every person need to have to be recognized as an individual?
A birthday.

I was going to say "money", but okay I guess your answer works too.

[PeterPatrickJohn]

Well, it certainly is one of the best funded and most "accepted" sources of tyranny, superstition, and ignorance.
Surely, you aren't arguing from a position of "all of these other things do bad things too, so you can't single out religion".

Many would argue your definition of tyranny, superstition and ignorance. Why do people single out things where there are multiple factors involved? Seems to me that it sometimes calls into question their agenda.

[Assentesy]

Q. What do you call people who use the rhythm method of birth control?

A. Parents.

There was a term I used to hear for the rhythm method which invoked the Irish and I just can't remember it.

I was shocked when I read the claimed effective rate. Of course that was just one internet source (WebMD I think) so who knows.

[dabibibff]

What does every person need to have to be recognized as an individual?
A birthday.

Not the legal definition in many states but I get your point. Problem is that others have other points. Which is why abortion remains the hot political potato that it is.

EDIT: I just had a random thought as I hit the post button. If indeed the law recognizes that someone can be charged with murder of a fetus why aren't we legally nine months (or whatever) old when we are born?

[Atmotteenrift]

Not the legal definition in many states but I get your point. Problem is that others have other points. Which is why abortion remains the hot political potato that it is.

EDIT: I just had a random thought as I hit the post button. If indeed the law recognizes that someone can be charged with murder of a fetus why aren't we legally nine months (or whatever) old when we are born?

I was going to post something about that too, but it would have muddled my point.

Drinking age still 21? or 21.75?