The problem with abortion is that it's an act that concerns both what someone is doing with their own body and what they are doing to the body of another.
it requires the mother to do so, a mother who does not want it and knows that they will have to put it into a broken foster system, so they should be forced to do so by the government?
Except for the whole part where they kill someone for dumping unconscious cells out of their uterus.I think that for most 'pro-lifers' it's more a case of not sentencing the innocent to death.
That's a non-sequitor. You're making an argument that has nothing to do with abortion or fetal personhood now.Yeah, no. You could make the same analogy with a baby and an elderly person, which is why it's a terrible analogy. Is the elderly person not "technically alive", because everyone would choose to save the baby in that situation? All it comes down to is the value of the life. Not whether or not it's actually life.
I think it is, b/c it's not murder not by any legal definition at leastIt’s not that simple when you see abortion as murder.
“Don’t like murder? Don’t kill anyone.”
It doesn’t work quite as well.
Then why is it such a "difficult decision?"Except for the whole part where they kill someone for dumping unconscious cells out of their uterus.
You realize that argument works perfectly in reverse too?What does any of that matter? You don't get to define what is and is not valuable life. Someone could make that very same argument for killing newborns. What does it matter, right? It's not like the newborn was contributing to society or anything, or was all that aware of it's existence, so what kind of value does it really have? Meh, not murder.
Some contraceptives work by preventing fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus. Would you send those people to the gulag as well?I believe human life starts at conception. You’ve got a developing human being at that point. Everything else, in my opinion, is an arbitrary cutoff.
I honestly believe the number of cases you are describing if honestly investigated would be extraordinarily small. I also believe in a fallen world where every human at one time or another is victim to the sins of others. And I believe that two wrongs don't make a right. We each have a moral choice despite the hand we're dealt. Giving birth and then putting up the baby for adoption is the moral option in this case, unless the woman does want to keep the child and be the mother to it.
If you think a woman who is raped should have to carry her artist's child, why did you even bring up contraception?
Absolutely. These are the same people that have come to the conclusion that the best way to punish an irresponsible person is to force them raise a child.Seriously, I'm sure the hypocrisy escapes them.
Tough love...unless you're addicted to opioids.Absolutely. These are the same people that have come to the conclusion that the best way to punish an irresponsible person is to force them raise a child.
It points out the noncentral fallacy.What the hell does that have to do with abortion, or murder?
I had to think what you were asking me for a bit. I think cases of actual rape that leads to pregnancy aren't super common. So in the strict definition of rape, yes, a woman wouldn't have contraception for that.