[W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

[<alt>doxygen]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

You have provided only your opinion and not provided sources that support your opinion. So why on earth would we just accept your opinion of morality on the issue?

It's the opinion of God (as extrapolated from the bible though never explicitly stated). Get with god, or get off my lawn.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

What you don't understand is that my argument is all about morality, and that all of my mention of legality in the course of four threads on this topic -- with the exception of the three questions posed in Abortion 201, which you, Lursa, Minnie, and the other legal experts on abortion ran from -- has been made in order to disabuse you all of the confusion the law has occasioned in your "moral" thinking on the subject, and I do use the scare quotes advisedly.

No, I think I get it.

Do you think that all abortion is immoral, and therefore anyone who participates in abortion is immoral?

 

[year2late]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

You need to review the sanctioning of this practice as described by the Governor of Virginia.

Please update your knowledge of the topic before libeling those with whom you disagree.

Here's a video recording of the great man describing "aborting" a child that is alive outside the womb.

WATCH: Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s Abortion Remarks | Heavy.com

Please quote his (Northam') comments that show he is for killing a born child.

 

[yankintx]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

"Protection of unborn children"

This thread was inspired by exchanges with

minnie616, years2late, Lursa and Scrabaholic

--DP's Four Horsewomen of Abortion--

whose confusion concerning the nature and nomenclature of the human being in the womb

opened my eyes

--a newcomer to abortion debate--

opened my eyes

to the confusion at law

and to the cultural confusion

underlying the confusion of our Querulous Quartet.

The Law has confused them

and through them or the likes of them confused us or the likes of us.

This is how federal law defines that critter in mommy's belly:

18 U.S. Code 01841. Protection of unborn children
(d) As used in this section, the term "unborn child" means a "child in utero," and the term "child in utero" or "child who is in utero" means a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.

18 U.S. Code SS 1841 - Protection of unborn children | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Are we all paying attention?

"a member of the species homo sapiens"

or as the federal law reads in another place:

(C) If the person engaging in the conduct thereby intentionally kills or attempts to kill the unborn child, that person shall...be punished as provided under sections 1111, 1112, and 1113 of this title for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being.

I say, are we paying attention?

"a human being"

Now that we are aware of the legal and cultural confusion, please see Angel's clear and concise Pro-Life/Pro-Choice moral argument at
Abortion 101
Abortion 201
AP Abortion: Moral Responsibility

Think​

How many abortion threads do you start in a week? And yet you bring nothing new to your side.

No way should the government tell a woman what can she do with her body.

Roe V Wade is staying put, no matter how many repetitive threads you start.

Take a leaf from my book, over and out !

 

[Lursa]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

This would seem to require some split second timing.

The doctor(s) are described as making the infant comfortable and then aborting it upon recommendation from the mother after their consultation as the completion step of the delivery/abortion process.

Unless the father was in the room with his attorney, the timing would be difficult.

Of course, this opens the door to a whole different consideration. I'm pretty sure that my mother was tempted to abort me at various points in my teen age years.

If this right is accorded to mothers of delivered new borns, what restraints could be placed upon this right as the years roll by? Is person born in the USA less a citizen with rights at 1 minute than at 16 years?

Here's the transcript from the governor. Please show anywhere where he says the Dr would be compelled to abort (kill) a born baby? Of course he's said no such thing, esp. since there is no such thing as an abortion of a born baby. But please, you've claimed this over and over.

I'm going by the transcripts of the video you provided. Please show where he says what you claim (which I bolded) or even implied it.

The governor, a pediatric neurologist, stressed that late-term abortions were done with the consent of the women and their doctors.*

“And it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s nonviable,” Northam said.

“So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen,” he went on. “The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”​

Northam was describing end-of-life care in a painful circumstance, as his office said in a clarifying statement, not murder.*

No, Virginia’s Governor Did Not Endorse Killing Babies | HuffPost

No, Virginia’s Governor Did Not Endorse Killing Babies | HuffPost

Current laws allow these exact same discussions between parent and Dr of preemies and newborns. Once the baby is born, they assess it's condition. Then they discuss taking extreme measures (resuscitate is one) to save the baby OR the choose the palliative care (keep it comfortable until it expires naturally). It all depends on the medical condition of the baby, it's suffering, it's prognosis, and it's expected quality of life.

That law exists now. The governor describes nothing more or less. Do you object to parents and Drs having the discretion to make these decisions?

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

An observation, already understood by those who have engaged with you, that your purported requests for intellectual debate on abortion are nothing more than poorly disguised, and highly biased, click bait.

Again, your opinion on me and my purpose are duly noted. Anything to say on the topic, besides pissing about me and my style?

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

This is post 72. There are no fictions in it. If you think there are, prove it.

A fetus is not a human being in my country.

When child becomes human being

223 (1) A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not

(a) it has breathed;

(b) it has an independent circulation; or

(c) the navel string is severed.

Marginal note:Killing child

(2) A person commits homicide when he causes injury to a child before or during its birth as a result of which the child dies after becoming a human being.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 206.

Criminal Code


Also, we do not have feticide laws here.

It's all fiction. What's to prove?

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

No, I think I get it.

Do you think that all abortion is immoral, and therefore anyone who participates in abortion is immoral?

The argument, which is based on the natural right to life, consistently posits exceptions where the life of the impregnated woman is at stake.

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

How many abortion threads do you start in a week? And yet you bring nothing new to your side.

No way should the government tell a woman what can she do with her body.

Roe V Wade is staying put, no matter how many repetitive threads you start.

Take a leaf from my book, over and out !

Read better, friend. The poster and posts you criticize are Pro-Choice.
How many uninformed posts do you post in a week?

 

[Scrabaholic]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

It's all fiction. What's to prove?

IOW, you cannot prove your claim that it's fiction. I understand and accept your concession.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

The argument, which is based on the natural right to life, consistently posits exceptions where the life of the impregnated woman is at stake.

And just who is the Arbiter that decides when "life of the impregnated woman is at stake"? When the decision is made, suddenly one life if more valuable than the other? Killing is suddenly "moral"?

One of my friends thinks the baby wins, always, because the "mother had her chance".

It's an ok paradigm and quite tidy in the abstract, but it fails in the real world. At the very least it gets quite ugly.

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

IOW, you cannot prove your claim that it's fiction. I understand and accept your concession.

Yes, I recognize the victory strut. I see Lursa and Minnie do it all the time. Whenever they lose a point.

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

And just who is the Arbiter that decides when "life of the impregnated woman is at stake"? When the decision is made, suddenly one life if more valuable than the other? Killing is suddenly "moral"?

One of my friends thinks the baby wins, always, because the "mother had her chance".

It's an ok paradigm and quite tidy in the abstract, but it fails in the real world. At the very least it gets quite ugly.

The arbiter? The woman gets knowledgeable medical advice and then makes her decision.

One life is not more valuable than another, but only one life is is a moral agent and has the natural right to defend that life.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

The arbiter? The woman gets knowledgeable medical advice and then makes her decision.

Yes. There are 2 possible choices. Is one choice more immoral than the other?

 

[Scrabaholic]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Yes, I recognize the victory strut. I see Lursa and Minnie do it all the time. Whenever they lose a point.

When they win a point.

If you cannot provide a source for you claim, you lose the "point".

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

When they win a point.

If you cannot provide a source for you claim, you lose the "point".

Your experience in internet chat is showing. If I said a finite whole is greater than any of its parts, I need provide no source in any rational exchange with a rational person not afflicted by internetese.

 

[Taxman]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Get a tuition refund, friend.

A fetus is not a human being until it can survive on its own outside the womb with aid from the female.

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

A fetus is not a human being until it can survive on its own outside the womb with aid from the female.

Says who?

 

[Scrabaholic]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Your experience in internet chat is showing. If I said a finite whole is greater than any of its parts, I need provide no source in any rational exchange with a rational person not afflicted by internetese.

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[Scrabaholic]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Says who?

In my country, says the laws.

 

[Lursa]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

In my country, says the laws.

Ours too.

 

[minnie616]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Says who?

The US government does not recognize a fetus as a human being , an individual, a child, or a person.

 

[year2late]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

The US government does not recognize a fetus as a human being , an individual, a child, or a person.

And yet, a fetus is living.

Imagine how that works.:mrgreen:

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

The US government does not recognize a fetus as a human being , an individual, a child, or a person.

So what? Is the US government your moral arbiter?

 

[Angel]

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

In my country, says the laws.

A legal fiction to accommodate the politically driven abortion law. We've been through this before.