Except for the fact that they show a complete disdain for the welfare of the fetus and for the baby they force to be born. And they don’t care if the fetus is dead; they still want to force the woman to give birth to it. And again, they work to harm women in general, not just by opposing abortion.
Yes, because it doesn’t fit the facts. You are in the position of someone trying to argue that the Ku Klux Klan means well.
In which case, you are not part of the “pro-life” movement in the first place because you are not trying to coerce and terrorize women. If you think that women should be allowed to choose, then by definition you are part of the pro-choice side.
IIRC, Carl Sagan observed that fetuses only acquire brain waves during the 3rd trimester. That seems like a reasonable dividing line to me. It’s not clear that brain waves imply thought. But it’s unlikely that thought occurs without brain waves. So there’s a safety margin.
Now for myself, my take is that human babies are born prematurely anyway, to the extent that most mammals are way more competent a week after they are born than human babies are. So using brain waves is adding a safety margin to a safety margin. And first trimester abortions are morally irrelevant. That said, my opinion is in the minority: most Americans accept a degree of moral complexity with regards to first trimester abortions. I don’t, except with regards to the feelings of the mother. For that reason, I used contraception rigorously and without exception when I dated.
Your cite has been found wanting. HB 954 was amended by Georgia Republicans to allow exceptions, such as when delivering poses a health risk to the mother, or the baby is not likely to live.
I was under the impression that Anti choice was riding along with the religious right, and that they got behind Republicans for the most part. RCC and the fetus worshipping dogma they spew can never be moderate, so why should a party aligned with reproductive choice give up on the war, when the battles are still ongoing?
Irrelevant; you asked if they wanted to force women to birth dead babies, and they proposed a bill that would have done so. Changing it later doesn’t make the original version have never existed.
The best way to stop Abortions and still let a Woman choose, is to provide a good effective Birth Control, and let the husband and wife decide when( or if) they want children, Also vote on other issues, the extremists are trying to push their beliefs on others. not taking into consideration that children who are not wanted suffer. If the parents can not care for physically, mentally,financially should be able to decide what the size of their family should be. We do have separation of Church and State and Abortion is a religious issue.One need just look to Haiti and see what happens when there are more mouths to feed than a parent can handle.
Responsible parenthood should be taught to all who are old enough to procreate.Abstinence alone doesn’t work for many, and if they are immature, they need to know what happens to a child they must be responsible for.
If parents are over burdend it doesn’t make for a good marriage either.
I don’t know anyone who is pro-abortion. They are prolife of all the already born, not just unborn. I believe once the child can be known as a child, seen as a child then it is protected by the law. If proper birth control is available, then there would be far less need for an abortion and a lot less poverty and child abuse.
The term Pro-Life as used is not a correct term. It should be pro- birth, once the child is born there is little care about it. The so called Pro-Lifers don’t want there to be taxes to raise the child to adult hood, or give child care to the one’s the mother can’t support, educate,feed, clothe or love.It is easy to sit back and complain or march against the woman, but thinking a few diapers or a little baby food can help one’s consience just isn’t enough. There are 18 years the person needs help. The money spent on advertising,marching and picketing places could be used to help the already born,then perhaps they are really Pro-Life!
In other words as I expected there was no point in responding to your request for a cite, since you are going to interpret anything and everything as the anti-choicers being “well meaning and misunderstood”.
Yes, but it’s kind of AMAZING the way discouraging abortion keeps involving burdening and oppressing women. Maybe it is not vilification. Maybe it is simple observation. You know: walks like a duck, quacks like a duck …
IANADoctor. My understanding is that the condition can be anywhere from treatable with a good prognosis to profound brain damage to the fetus and a danger to the mother.
Hopefully a doctor can give better detail.
I think more interesting is a fetus with Anencephaly (no brain). The baby may be born alive (many are stillborn) but rarely live more than a day or two and are never conscious (they have no higher functioning brain).
Near as I can tell bringing such a baby to term is not a particular danger to the mother but making her carry it to term seems cruel in the extreme.
Should a mother be allowed to terminate late term (her choice) in such a case?
Are you under the impression that morality is not legislated, or that it shouldn’t be? I wonder if you can consistently maintain that position?
Just shouting “its my body, I’ll do whatever the fuck I want” is a good way to get people to dismiss you just as easily as you might dismiss someone that just keeps yelling “murderer!” outside of abortion clinics.
Beyond the prominent pro-life Democrats that have been mentioned in this thread, it’s been 15 years since the Clintons started saying abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare.” If that’s not a moderate position, I don’t know what is. It has nothing to do with how they will fare in the House elections and it goes without saying that they held the House from 2006-10 (and they’d controlled it for long stretches before that) without moving further to the right on this issue.