Cobb

Regardless of what you say or think

A baby is a baby. Just because you cannot see it, doesn't mean it does not exist. An existing baby is an existing citizen and deserves the rights and protection of our great Nation. Also, I believe God has put into all men, the natural instinct to protect the most vulnerable. You, by denying existence and citizenship until a child is born, which is not even scientifically practical, are abdicating your personal responsibility to protect those that cannot protect themselves.

I agree that the baby exists before it is born, and I believe that the natural instinct is right as well. But you cannot put the government everywhere human life exists. That's why there are borders and limits to the powers of government.

Simply because God recognizes something or the spirit of God in man recognizes something does not mean we must create, and defend laws about that something - even if that something is a baby, or a fetus, or a sperm, or a gleam in my eye.

I'm drawing lines, but I'm not denying life.

Well you know my view on this, Cobb. Human life begins at conception and should be protected at conception. It isn't government instrusion to protect life. We have homicide laws on the books. In my view, abortion is homicide.

The touchy part comes in because that life is within the body of another human being on whom it depends. In an ideal world, people would wait until marriage to procreate. In the absence of marriage, if they don't want the child, give him to someone who does. Killing an unborn baby is atrocious and should be regulated. I'm a radical. I'd like to see Roe v. Wade overturned and abortion regulated by the states.

I'd like to agree with you on all points, Cobb, but I am worried about this administration's willingness to pander to those who find even birth control an abomination.

However, as much hand-wringing is going on, I'm fairly confident that Bush can point to the bunk "partial-birth" abortion bill signed last year and say he's done his job on that front. I hope.

Abortion is no more homicide than miscarriage is manslaughter or that falling down the stairs is wreckless endangerment.

Clearly the body is the battlefield. Where does my authority over myself end? Abortion is like cutting off an arm that grows back. Something is wrong with the person who cuts it off again and again - but should they lose the right?

I don't GWBush has anything to gain by appeasing radicals like LaShawn. He has won the big fight, and he is the Compassionate Conservative. He may feel as if there is nothing to lose by doing so, but he doesn't seem to be the kind of man who would go back on his promise to heal the divisiveness.

Abortion regulated at the state level is like marriage regulated at the state level. Does anybody who's 14 really just move to Alabama where it's legal for them to do it? On the other hand, people who live in dry counties are perfectly happy, and it doesn't bother the liquor industry or drinkers much.

Life does not begin at conception. Life begins when the baby gets a brain, and heart, and lungs. Without these it isn't 'alive' (though I really don't count alive until it's born). No a person who hasn't been born IS NOT a citizen of it's country. Also, why should someone suffer for something they don't want?
If I didn't want a child, I would find some way to not have it. It's too painful to go through all that for nothing. I wish I could move to a place where it was legal, just to be there and know that that place was protecting women's rights.

A fetus is like an arm that you cut off and it grows back?!? You know, I am in awe of the idiocy that constantly flows from pro-choicers. An arm?!? That grows back?!? What are you? A freaking 3 year-old? Speaking of which... That would be a good age to draw a line... Before the age of three, all parents have the right to terminate their progeny (read: detached arms).
And what's with this pro-life movement=radicals crap? Does that make those who mean to destroy innocent life moderates? Laughable! You know, you guys like to make this about religion. There are all kinds of people who know that abortion is wrong and is murder. Just look it up. Liberals even. Feminists. Democrats. And not just those who are Christian. But, these people get swept aside. Nonetheless, they exist. They exist because they know that killing other people is wrong, and therefore, abortion is wrong. One doesn't need a Bible to figure that one out.
Furthermore, if abortion is such a great thing, let's put it on the Discovery Channel. They put all kinds of medical procedures on there. Why not that one??? We all want to see how great it is! I do. I want to see these abortionists - these great champions of women - doing their thing. Afterall, abortion is a celebration of the constitution - isn't it? In that wonderful procedure, we can find everything that it means to be an American. It's like apple pie... except with a bunch of amputated arms? Arms??? Try children, dummy. Dead children. Mutilated children, idiot!

Hey Joseph, take a chill pill. Better yet, take a Vioxx.

I am neither pro-life nor pro-choice. If you read the context of what I've been saying, it's that this country could stand more restrictions on abortion and the pro-life group, which contains radicals too, is not as dangerous as they are made out to be. That is because of the very reasons you state in the middle of your tirade. Lots of people find abortion to be a poor choice.

Abortion isn't murder anywhere in the world and it won't ever be because people understand that the death of an unborn child, while very unfortunate, is less significant than the disposition of her mother. Whether you like the metaphor or not, childbearing women can become pregnant again and again. The eggs are expendable, the mother is not.

The logic of this is simple and has no religious origin or need. Healthy women are capable of having a dozen women in their lives. Most, in today's world choose to have fewer than three beause of socioeconomic reasons. Are they murdering the other unborn, or does the value of that life change as it grows in the womb? I think it is simple common sense that says women do not have a duty to their fertilized eggs because the value of these, while great, is not as great is that of a 7 month fetus.

I think that for a start if we can't agree on this change in value, then we have little to talk about.

I would like to point out that if we have a government that has homicide laws and tries to protect unborn fetuses and all of the people that say it is murder. what is capital punishment then, it not a bunch of hypocricy

Yes I DO have a typekey identity but....

If humanity starts at conception, as SLE and LB and Joseph Dorer hold, then what should government do with those mothers who are so careless as to miscarry? The numbers are huge, and we now have the science to test every reproductive-age woman once per month and punish her should she be pregnant in one month and calllously "lose" the pregnancy in the second month.

Oh, and what about those infants that are born pre-term and low birth rate? Shouldn't the state aggressively support their right to life? Shouldn't all

The previous two examples are of course bear-baiting, but our science is ahead of our ability for ethical choice, at both the beginning of life and the end of life.

Yes, I am pro-choice. Why? Not because I believe abortion should be used as a primary form of birth control (I don't) but because it allows women the freedom to use many forms of birth control that are low-tech and low-cost (and not so great on effectiveness, too).

I am pro-choice because it allows the use of secondary- abortifacent birth control methods (such as the IUD) which many women tolerate extremely well (the DalKon shield of the 1970s was an ancillary design failure, not a primary design failure). We don't fully understand the functionality of the IUD--it may somehow act to inhibit fertilization as well as implantation.

I am pro-choice because not every pregnancy can or should be carried to term. The natural ratio of fertilizaiton to live birth is significantly less than 1:1--it may be as low as 20:1 (DANG I can't find the reference)--at any rate, there are a great number of fertilized embryos that do not successfully implant or do not progress to full pregnancy. I just do not see how adding human choice in the first 8-12 weeks of pregnancy is a moral evil.

I am also pro-choice because I am old enough to have heard stories of women--married women, mind you--who did not have access to birth control and the terrible terrible choices they faced, back there in the early 1970s and before.