What is your opinion of the various iterations of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act which essentially guarantee full protection of the law to fetuses that survived an abortion procedure? While some versions of the law were criticized for including language that would prohibit abortions in general, revised bills added a neutrality clause adding that that this wouldn’t affect fetuses outside of the womb. Despite these clauses, some politicians including future President Barack Obama opposed and voted against the bill although by 2008 he had “evolved” on this position.
Is there any good reason to oppose this bill with the neutrality clause and if so what are they?
A while back I read an article commenting on how “The Abortion Rights Community Has Become the NRA of the Left” and I think that is a pretty apt comparison. Just like there are extremist gun advocates who will defend the right of a mentally unstable loner to buy an AK-47 on demand, there is an extremist element of the abortion industry who will defend killing viable, born infants because they think any kind of regulation of abortion means you hate women.
What happens if the ejected fetus is not viable, which is at least not unlikely, given that the process is not designed to be supportive of it. Wouldn’t this simply prompt the VERY FEW late term abortion procedures to include an early step involving chemical or physical intervention to prevent viability? In turn, doesn’t this entail complicating the procedure without full medical necessity?
But, okay, fine: stick a needle through it first. What’s the damn difference?
I don’t understand what you are talking about. Does it mean fetuses that somehow were extracted alive and viable during an abortion procedure? If yes, how does that happen? Do you have a link?
How is this so if the bill explicitly provides for a neutrality clause not affecting fetuses inside the womb?
Let me ask you a simple yes or no question: Do you believe fetuses that survive an abortion are entitled to protection under the law like any other newborn?
Of course, you’re right, therefore it doesn’t happen. You got me. Also, Obama isn’t the president, there wasn’t anything called the USSR and Kim Kardashian didn’t just have a baby.
I’m not sure why one false thing being on the internet implies that everything on the internet is false. But be sure to remember that next time you ask someone for a cite.
Hopefully these links are more believable then Alien Abduction websites. I believe the person in the first link and the doctor in the second both have their own wiki pages, but I didn’t feel the need to get into that since this was just about showing that some fetuses are aborted and still living under their own power.
I notice you’re in Europe. In America, abortion is legal much later in pregnancy than it is in most of Europe, which is why it might sound strange to you.
Occasionally in late term abortions, the infant is born before it can be killed while still in the uterus. Some of the survivors of these situations have spoken up against abortion. Gianna Jessen is a fairly famous example of someone who was meant to be aborted but managed to survive.
Because simply saying “google it, it’s true!” Is no evidence. If you want to demonstrate something’s true to someone who is asking, demonstrate it. Find credible cites, link to them and prove your point.
Just saying “google it” does not prove anything. The claim is fairly extreme- the examples you listed are common knowledge. More extreme claims require a bit more effort to be backed up.
For any post-abortion survivors, is the woman now responsible as the parent? Does she have to find the father to release his parental rights if she chooses to put the baby up for adoption? Does he have to pay child support if she accepts the child?
I’m genuinely curious about the ramifications- is policy outlined in the bill regarding custody and support for the baby?
Whoops, I didn’t notice that you had used the same two examples I did since I posted shortly after you did.
Here are a few more examples:
Undercover video from a late term abortion clinic where the abortion counselor mentions that if the “patient’s” 23 week old fetus is born alive that it will die once they put it in a jar of solution to be sent to the lab (about 3 minutes into the video). Around 4:45, the counselor mentions that if the baby is born at home, “just flush it”. More stories of born alive infants
If people really wanted to stop deaths of Babies (rather than score political points on abortion) they would call for universal free maternity care. The US has a worse perinatal mortality rate than Cuba. In Canada where there is provision for maternity and perinatal care for all, the rate is even lower. If the US had a fair health care system, say like Canada, 8000 children per year who currently die in the US would survive.
It seems that babies at threat of abortion are far more important than babies at risk from the US health care system.
A silly argument since they already are, assuming they exist.
The only reason the anti-abortion movement does anything is out of malice towards women, therefore these laws exist to persecute women and will be enforced that way. That’s what always happens, regardless of what kind of fake-benevolent speeches the womanhaters make beforehand.
This protection has not always existed. Various cultures in history have withheld full human status from new borns well after delivery.
What the moral difference is between destroying a foetus or a live baby is relative- culturally dependent. There is no clear scientific answer to this, merely a cultural belief.
