A Crying Baby Is Not Alive?

[msjaxn2004]

I don't think that it is anyones business but there own what they do with their body and ALL aspects of their lives. If you get pregnant and want to keep your child then do it. If you don't do as you see fit. Don't judge or critisize someone for what they do becuase until you are put in that persons shoes, you know NOTHING ABOUT ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!![u]

[tinybear]

So I take it you think it's OK for mothers to kill newborn babies.

[SVMc]

We don't know if this person did give birth to a live baby, no on knows that. I think I've made that point in several of my previous posts.

[MerlinsByte]

[Q]msjaxn2004 I don't think that it is anyones business but there own what they do with their body and ALL aspects of their lives. If you get pregnant and want to keep your child then do it. If you don't do as you see fit. Don't judge or critisize someone for what they do becuase until you are put in that persons shoes, you know NOTHING ABOUT ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!![u]
02-01-2005 04:16 PM [Q]


Merlin response: msjaxn, your view would be great! Except for one small detail. You are hurting someone's else's body when you make the decision to kill him or her. If your logic were reversed why not just kill yourself if you don't want the baby? In that way you wouldn't have to worry about anything abhorrent, like killing someone who may want to live. The only reason that I am not a rabid pro lifer is I am not yet sure when a life has a soul or is self conscious. Until then I am semi rabid pro-life. And one can usually choose to make a baby. I would be more understanding in other cases such as rape. However I can understand your freedom rant as I value freedom from government intervention and censorship dearly.


mb

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: MerlinsByte Merlin response: msjaxn, your view would be great! Except for one small detail. You are hurting someone's else's body when you make the decision to kill him or her.

This is the reason every debate even remotely connected to abortion fails. The distinction between lump of cells and living person is ALWAYS a line that has been defined by the poster LONG before any thread of this type even begins. Some people place the line at zygote while others place it as 5 minutes before birth and neither side will ever agree with the other.

[tinybear]

NORTH LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) - A newborn was tossed out a car window onto the grass beside a busy street Thursday afternoon, and the car sped off, authorities said.

Investigators were seeking the parents of the boy, whose umbilical cord was still attached when he was found by a woman passer-by. Doctors believe the infant was less than an hour old at the time.

Sheriff's spokesman Jim Leljedal said the woman brought the infant to the sheriff's office. The baby was taken to Broward General Medical Center, which upgraded his condition from critical to serious Thursday night.

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/sto...0050210FLAD101

[Chris the Chees]

Quote by: tinybear NORTH LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) - A newborn was tossed out a car window onto the grass beside a busy street Thursday afternoon, and the car sped off, authorities said. Investigators were seeking the parents of the boy, whose umbilical cord was still attached when he was found by a woman passer-by. Doctors believe the infant was less than an hour old at the time. Sheriff's spokesman Jim Leljedal said the woman brought the infant to the sheriff's office. The baby was taken to Broward General Medical Center, which upgraded his condition from critical to serious Thursday night. http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/sto...0050210FLAD101

What was the point in posting that sick story? Unless of course you are foolishly trying to use this lone example as an attack on the ethical values of the entire pro-choice lobby.

[tinybear]

You know what pro-choice means don't you, Chris? It means giving one human being the choice to end the life of another human being.

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: tinybear You know what pro-choice means don't you, Chris? It means giving one human being the choice to end the life of another human being.

Incorrect, because under medical definition, a human is not alive until its heart is beating.

[Chris the Chees]

Quote by: tinybear You know what pro-choice means don't you, Chris? It means giving one human being the choice to end the life of another human being.

An embryo is not alive by any medical definition. Biologically it is alive, but it is not a sentient being.

But conservatives have never been fans of accuracy, or even logic for that matter.

But on that note its time for some dead baby jokes: -

Whats blue and sits at the bottom of a swimming pool? A Dead baby!

Whats green and sits at the bottom of a swimming pool? The same baby one month later!

[John the Wise]

Chris, my limey friend, why is it that the child isnt given a choice?? Or for that matter, lets take the child out of the equation for a second. What about ME. Lets say i lose my mind for few hours and decide to make the biggest mistake of my life, and i engage in certain acts that produce a child. Both me and the woman are made this terrible decision, so why is it her decision that the pregnancy should be murdered (word choice used for a reason). Wheres my say in all this. Half of those cells are mine, So why cant I have a choice.

I said Terrible decision not from a standpoint of "I hate children" but because i am unmarried and 19 years old, and essentially a bum college student.

[Chris the Chees]

Wheres my say in all this. Half of those cells are mine

Nope, I disagree, if it was your body, then maybe. but the fact of the matter, is that an unwanted pregnancy is rather like a parasite.

[John the Wise]

I had a part in this too (this hypothetical) Wheres my say. Perhaps i want to take on that parasite myself. We (me and the woman) both screwed up. I dont see how that child should have to suffer because of it. If I am willing, why cant i take the child??

Or for that matter (perhaps im going off topic) why dont the parents of a pregnant minor have a say?? Why is it that Parents must give an OK for any other medical procedure, except abortion. In some states anyway.

[ericsp23]

why is it that the child isnt given a choice??

Because a fetus is incapable of making choices.

Wheres my say in all this. Half of those cells are mine, So why cant I have a choice.

Legally speaking a father has no rights to a child until after birth. A father's rights can only be granted on a birth certificate or by court order.
And from a purely logical point of view, it makes no sense to grant a father the right to make decisions for a fetus. The mother is the one who has to carry the child inside her body for nine months and go through the pain of delivery. It is absurd to claim that someone who can only watch in relative comfort as another person suffers has an equal say over what is causing that person to suffer.
Another point against this argument is that you cannot know with absolute certainty that you are the father of the child until a genetic test confirms it, and generally speaking, in vitro genetic testing is only conducted in cases where there is significant danger of a genetic defect in the fetus. So any man could claim to be the father of the child, and until a genetic test is conducted to confirm or deny the claim, it is you and (possibly) the mother's word against his that the child is not his.

[John the Wise]

Because a fetus is incapable of making choices.

Many mentally handicapped are incappable of making choices. They are given rights.

And from a purely logical point of view, it makes no sense to grant a father the right to make decisions for a fetus.

From your logic. I say that I had a hand in giving life to that child and i should have a say in whether or not to destroy it. I understand that pregnancy isnt fun, but the woman brought it on herself (im not gonna bring up rape because the numbers of pregnancy by rape are too small, and it doesnt really go with the point im trying to make) and she should have to deal with what she has done, especially if a life is at stake. If the difference between life and death is the woman's discomfort and pain, then so be it.

But i guess this is all just a moot point for me personally. As i would never marry sombody who thinks that abortion is ok. Also i would never sleep with anybody im not married to. But thats me.

I would say a large reason that so many of us righties are against abortion is that so many see it as a form of controception, or birth control. "Its ok to have sex, because if i get pregnant, ill just have an abortion" If men (or in the case of minors, parents) had a voice in the decision, i think this view wouldnt persist.

[ericsp23]

Many mentally handicapped are incappable of making choices. They are given rights.

If a person is so handicapped that they are not capable of making decisions it is common for the courts to take away the right to make decisions from those people and give it to someone else.

I say that I had a hand in giving life to that child and i should have a say in whether or not to destroy it.

How could you know with absolute certainty that did have a hand in giving the child life? Unless you have the mother under 24 hour surveillance you can't.

[John the Wise]

If a person is so handicapped that they are not capable of making decisions it is common for the courts to take away the right to make decisions from those people and give it to someone else.

The court would never give those decisions to a person who thought killing the handicapped person was a good idea.

How could you know with absolute certainty that did have a hand in giving the child life? Unless you have the mother under 24 hour surveillance you can't.

By that Logic one could say, "how do you know aliens didnt implant the fetus" Nothing exists on absolute certainty. Besides the fact that if a woman is pregnant, and i want to take that child, and i can said the child should be mine, then why cant i take the child. It is entirely selfish and inhuman to to do something that isnt in the best interest of the child, and ending the live isnt in the best interest.

[Karin]

Did anyone bother to fact check? This case exists yes, but the decision was based on reasonable doubt that murder occurred, not seperatopn from the mother.

Read the transcript and be informed.

[url]http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2002/1stDistrict/November/Html/1000273.htm[/ur

edited: sorry abut bumping up an old debte, it just frustrated me that no one noticed.

[Mia]

Quote by: SVMc "Liberal" means many different things to different people (especially of different countires), but in the context of that article it is an insult and probably not worth rising to.

It certainly is insulting to suggest that a liberal-minded person would condone murder. If the law states that i'ts abotion and not murder until 'complete separation', the judges hands are tied. It's the law that needs changing.

Quote by: tinybear Where is it written in the statute books that a newborn baby remains a foetus with no independent life of its own unless and until completely separated from the mother?

In Illinois. Where this case took place. That's 1/2 of the problem in this case.

[Mia]

Quote by: Pooeypants Then one has to ask, when does the baby become self aware and do we actually have a soul? As you know, the latter is very much debateble as well.

The closest I can up up with to a reasonable line to draw, is the point at which a fetus can live independantly of it's mother, it is now a baby.

Why a woman at that stage cannot suck it up and let the baby live with one of the million parents dying to adopt I will never understand.

I would have grave difficulty terminating a three-week old fetus, and the circumstances would have to be extreme. Single motherhood or poverty would not be extreme enough to do that.

So at 5 months, say. No way! It's clearly a life of it's own at that point. Yes, it's dependant completely on it's mother, but so is a 3 week old born child. It's still not solely her property.

If she's carried it that long it should be a crime to kill it unless her life is at risk - the only problem I have with the late-term abortion law is that it makes no clause for this.

Quote by: Pooeypants Incorrect, because under medical definition, a human is not alive until its heart is beating.

Do you realize how soon a fetus has a heartbeat? By your argument, abortion becomes murder very soon.


BTW, in the case at hand - what about circumstantial evidence? The fact that she denied being pregnant and made no plans for assistance with a safe delivery, in fact, did not even tell her husband until after it was all over?

A person planning on keeping the child would have, at the very least, fessed up when it was coming and gotten assistance.