# Pro-choice / Pro-Life? Are 3 counts of 1st degree murder what's needed here? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 26, 2002, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choice-pro-life-are-3-counts-of-1st-degree-murder-whats-needed-here/116084 "2002-06-26T18:48:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2002, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choice-pro-life-are-3-counts-of-1st-degree-murder-whats-needed-here/116084/21 "2002-06-28T23:09:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JohnBckWLD \* > \*\*What about swollen ankles or hemoroids? :rolleyes: \*\* Swollen ankles and hemorroids are not matters of “emotional” or “familial” trouble, so that point is irrelevant to the topic at hand. ---
**Author:** ![QueenAl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/d26b3c/32.png) [@QueenAl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QueenAl)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2002, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choice-pro-life-are-3-counts-of-1st-degree-murder-whats-needed-here/116084/22 "2002-06-28T23:26:35Z")
I’ve never quite understood the American law on abortion; it seems as mixed-up as any laws can ever be. As comparison, the law in the UK is that up till week 16, a doctor must certify that there are compelling health reasons for an abortion to be carried out - but this can mean nothing more than not wanting to have a kid - and from weeks 16-23 the same law applies, only tighter; it’s not unknown for an abortion to be refused at this stage. The health reasons have to be pretty compelling. From 24 weeks, abortion is illegal. 24 weeks is also the stage at which a fetus becomes ‘viable’, and could survive outside the womb, so I think this is the right limit to set. And IMHO, there should be a limit. **JohnBckWLD** , The case you cited reminded me of the Omagh bombing, in which a woman who was eight-month pregnant with twins was killed (along with a cople dozen other people, mostly schoolchildren). My gut feeling has always been to add an extra two to the death total. However, I’m not so sure this should be enshrined in law; as **Snickers** said, that could be a slippery slope. ---
**Author:** ![Rocza](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ce7236/32.png) [@Rocza](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rocza)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2002, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choice-pro-life-are-3-counts-of-1st-degree-murder-whats-needed-here/116084/23 "2002-06-28T23:32:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JThunder \* > **I can’t believe you said that. It cited statements from legal publications AND the judgment of the Senate Judiciary Committee – one of the highest authorities in the land. By what stretch of the imagination can we call this “nothing”?** First off, apologies for the horrid coding in my previous post. It was not clear what I meant with the word “assertion” in the first sentence but I thought I did a good job of clarifying later on in that post. I clearly said in that post there are “no significant legal barriers”. My apologies if that was not clear. However, your habit of breaking a reply to one of my posts into several replies and quoting one sentence at a time and ignoring the rest of the post in each of your replies appears to be deliberately aimed at misinterpretating what I am saying. > [@](#): > > \*\ ***Rocza** , your objections are simply unfounded. The article I cited doesn’t merely “assert” that abortion is effectively available on demand throughout the nine months of pregnancy. Rather, it substantiates that claim through published legal opinions and the judgment of an officially designated Senate body. If you’re going to claim other wise, it seems to me that you should be the one providing contrary evidence. > > Now you go on by saying that only a doctor should judge such matters, and so forth, and so on. That issue is worthy of discussion, but i **it is not the matter under debate**. Nor is the matter of whether the current laws are reasonable or not. Rather the question of whether abortion on demand was available throughout pregnancy, and the answer is YES.\*\* Your site shows no \*\*legal \*\* barriers to abortion at any period in the pregnancy \*\*if **a doctor agrees that it is the woman’s best interest. I agree and I stated that before. However that is a far cry from \*\* on demand**. If I wasn’t clear before, let me say it now. I agree that you provided enough information here that if I disagreed it would be my responsibility to provide contrary cites. I see “on demand” as a woman being able to go to a hospital at 8 months and decide that she wants an abortion and then automatically gets one. And you have provided nothing to back that up. You have repeatedly asserted that a woman’s health is defined as so broad that a woman can get an \*\* elective abortion with no medical reason \*\* in the ninth month. Please back that up. In other words, you made an assertion but provided no information as to whether this is happening or how prevalent it is. You have also said that you disagree with the definition of woman’s health but provide no substitute definition. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Besides, maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think that emotional impact alone is a sufficient **health** hazard, and neither are family relationships _per se_. I agree with the U.S. Senate – such a definition of health impact is so broad as to be virtually meaningless. \*\* I thought you earlier in this post said that "Now you go on by saying that only a doctor should judge such matters, and so forth, and so on. That issue is worthy of discussion, but it is not the matter under debate. " If you don’t wish to debate it then don’t. But don’t bring it up (and post your opinion) after you said you don’t wish to address it in my prior post and ignored some points raised about a woman’s age and mental situation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choice-pro-life-are-3-counts-of-1st-degree-murder-whats-needed-here/116084.md?page=1)