Not really - it’s more like reducing the demand for hit men by making it easier to access arbitration and counseling services, i.e. more avenues for people to resolve their disputes before they get to the hit-man stage.
Are we? Okay, if you say so…
Huh, I thought the language of Roe was more of a compromise on the issue rather than a strict scientific benchmark. There’s some wiggle room in the wording (viability “is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks”), after all. I’m not aware of any case where an autopsy was conducted on an aborted fetus and it was determined after the fact that viability had been achieved.
That’s just another definition, “barbarous”. Anyway (in theory, at least, but not really in practice) the situation you describe already exists in Canada, and we have not descended into barbarism by any definition I know of. From this position, I would not accept the OP’s proposal as it represents a curtailing of liberty. If I lived in a U.S. state with restrictive laws and obstructionist hoop-jumps, I might see the proposal as a significant improvement.
I don’t know that Roe was a compromise, so much as an attempt to determine when the rights of the child become a consideration. obviously a collection of tissue’s interests do not override the mother’s, but a kicking, giggling baby does override some of them. Not her life, obviously, but certainly her convenience.
Again, Shodan, what is your definition of late-term?I used post-viability to define late-term.
You rather condescendingly dismissed my second cite which discussed second trimester terminations.
Are you now changing your definition of ‘late-term’ to include the second trimester, because the 21-24 weeks terminations you cited above are in the second trimester.
In 1997, <24 weeks was pre-viable (16 years later medical advances may have pushed viability to ~22 weeks, but it’s still very much a gray area). Elective abortions are legal up to viability, do you disagree?
Also, to further clarify my first cite (which I can not quote as it is a reading of the chart and symbols, so feel free to check my interpretation): Most states allow for late-term terminations (post viable, third trimester, 24+ weeks gestation, to be clear) in extenuating circumstances for the health and life of the mother. Only Georgia, Louisiana, Utah allow post-viable terminations for lethal fetal abnormality; where Maryland, Texas, Colorado and New Mexico allow for fetal abnormality. (For some reason Colorado and New Mexico are not listed in the chart, but I am aware late-term abortions for fetal abnormality are performed legally there)
I once read an anti-abortion tract that stated that a woman should wait until she was twenty weeks pregnant before seeking an abortion because “25%* of all miscarriages happen within the first twenty weeks of pregnancy, and a miscarriage is safer than an abortion.” It also claimed that viability happened at 21 weeks!
*Actually, 20% of all miscarriages happen in the first eight weeks of pregnancy, but no anti-abortion tract will admit that.
Does anyone know a healthy viable fetus aborted with a healthy mother? You don’t, because it doesn’t happen. There are criminals out there but women don’t abort viable fetuses and making the exception sound like the rule is just what the anti choice people want
I didn’t know Roe explicitly extended rights to the fetus, just put limits on what the states could regulate regarding pregnancy.
Well, once it’s free of her body, then of course the situation changes dramatically. I appreciate and see the value of safe-haven laws, where the mother can indeed (at her convenience) relinquish responsibility and custody of a newborn under the mildly trying requirement that it be at a hospital or fire station or such. I gather these reduce (or are at least meant to reduce) desperation-triggered infanticide and endangerment.
Pro-choice people are not pro-abortion they are pro-life, just believe that an already born person has more rights than a fertile egg. ‘Many’ who call themselves Pro-Life, are just for a fertile egg, embryo, and after it becomes a born person, they don’t want to help support it for the years before it becomes an adult and many could care less about the already born Mother and her other children( if she has any).
I feel when a person who wants to control the lives of others should then make every sacrifice necessary to support a Mother, pay her expenses and aid her in any way while she is pregnant, then any help from child care through their education into adult hood or mind their own business. talk is cheap, action and help is another thing. No one can know what another is capable of, How many are lined up at an abortion clinics waiting to take the fetus, or have it transplanted into themselves if possible? I doubt any. It is a religious issue and many Christians I know, forget that Jesus seemed to want people to mind their own business, He is quoted as saying," let him with out sin cast the first stone"
This is why I generally support a welfare state which would allow mothers to provide at least basic services for their children.
If abortion is as defined by the pro-life-that it involves the taking of a human life-than certainly it is society’s business at least as much as animal cruelty is.
Pro-choice people do not call abortion pro-life anymore than self defense. How can one judge what another can bear?[/QU
There is human life in every man’s sperm, that would mean each ejaculation takes many human lives?
His point is that if you believe (as pro-life people apparently do) that a foetus is a person, you’d be a pretty shitty person if you didn’t try to stop abortions.
That could then mean a fertile Chicken egg is a chicken, a horse fetus is a horse, a pollenated apple blossom is an apple. A frozen embryo can be seen it is not a frozen child!
Biologically there is no difference, once it can be recognized as a child then it is, I stated before, I had 2 miscarriages, my doctor at my request let me see the embryo and it didn’t even come close to looking like a baby. I spent 10 days in the hospital trying to hold on to the second one, even though the test came back positive; after 10 days I had to have a D&C. I was very ill for a long time after that! The best way to avoid abortions is to have free birth control for all women of child bearing age that were not able to care for a child, mentally, physically, financially. Many who are pro-Birth only, also do not want a woman to have birth control because they believe it is sinful, but in many cases the child is abused, or neglected.