84HuskerLaw
New member
Nearly every abortion kills an unborn child by stopping a beating heart. I imagine a heartbeat can be detected very soon after conception and probably not long after the woman becomes aware she 'may' be pregnant.
I believe most states in the U.S. protect the unborn child as a 'person' for purposes of murder in the event that an assault occurs against the woman. Someone punches her in the stomach and she 'aborts' the baby and loses her child can and quite probably would be charged with murder. However, if the Planned Parenthood 'doctor' convinces her to let him suck the 'fetus' (he will call it that instead of unborn baby of course) out of her with a shop vac and some vice grips and a sharp knife, and liberals call that 'healthcare' and a woman's 'right to choose' and perfectly legal and in fact so vital that we need federal tax money to subisidize this a couple million times a year.
Abortion by any other name is still the killing of an unborn baby (although the 'partial birth' abortion is actually the killing of a born baby as apparently for the late term 'babies' it is much easier for the abortionist to simply deliver the baby and then kill it on the table rather than have to do all that work in the tight confines of the woman's birth canal and womb. The entire subject is horrible to discuss and needs to be shown weekly on national television around the supper hour so the great bulk of decent, moral and righteous people will honestly know what is going on every day in the name of 'the woman's right to choos'.
Morally and ethically and logically, the only truly legal abortion would one where under the fundamental right every person has to self defense, the continued existence of the unborn child in the woman threatens her life. Truly ONLY if the choice is between saving the mother or the baby is there a reasonable argument as to the woman having the 'right to choose' in my view. One can argue also that if it becomes a choice between the value of the mother's life versus the life of the unborn baby, there are plenty of grounds to maintain the baby's life has more social value than the mother. She has already had a good number of years of life and so we must decide whether an innocent child is more worthy of saving that an adult. This gets into some very heavy and difficult 'factual' discussions beyond the scope of this discussion. Self defense of one's own life is really the ONLY justification a woman has for killing her baby, born or not. No different that any other life and death situations. One has the right to defense one-self and the lives of others against the unjustified attack or threat by another person or persons.
Protecting one's 'lifestyle' or personal freedom from the responsibility for caring for a child one brought into being is NOT sufficient. The pregnancy that results from rape is tragic and most regrettable to say the least. Whether or not a woman has the right to kill that innocent baby just because the father of the said child is repulsive or reprehensible as a human being is of course another issue. Surely she would not be rendered an outcast from society if she rightfully chose to give the baby up for adoption or otherwise as she ought not be obligated to care for and raise an unwanted child.
I believe most states in the U.S. protect the unborn child as a 'person' for purposes of murder in the event that an assault occurs against the woman. Someone punches her in the stomach and she 'aborts' the baby and loses her child can and quite probably would be charged with murder. However, if the Planned Parenthood 'doctor' convinces her to let him suck the 'fetus' (he will call it that instead of unborn baby of course) out of her with a shop vac and some vice grips and a sharp knife, and liberals call that 'healthcare' and a woman's 'right to choose' and perfectly legal and in fact so vital that we need federal tax money to subisidize this a couple million times a year.
Abortion by any other name is still the killing of an unborn baby (although the 'partial birth' abortion is actually the killing of a born baby as apparently for the late term 'babies' it is much easier for the abortionist to simply deliver the baby and then kill it on the table rather than have to do all that work in the tight confines of the woman's birth canal and womb. The entire subject is horrible to discuss and needs to be shown weekly on national television around the supper hour so the great bulk of decent, moral and righteous people will honestly know what is going on every day in the name of 'the woman's right to choos'.
Morally and ethically and logically, the only truly legal abortion would one where under the fundamental right every person has to self defense, the continued existence of the unborn child in the woman threatens her life. Truly ONLY if the choice is between saving the mother or the baby is there a reasonable argument as to the woman having the 'right to choose' in my view. One can argue also that if it becomes a choice between the value of the mother's life versus the life of the unborn baby, there are plenty of grounds to maintain the baby's life has more social value than the mother. She has already had a good number of years of life and so we must decide whether an innocent child is more worthy of saving that an adult. This gets into some very heavy and difficult 'factual' discussions beyond the scope of this discussion. Self defense of one's own life is really the ONLY justification a woman has for killing her baby, born or not. No different that any other life and death situations. One has the right to defense one-self and the lives of others against the unjustified attack or threat by another person or persons.
Protecting one's 'lifestyle' or personal freedom from the responsibility for caring for a child one brought into being is NOT sufficient. The pregnancy that results from rape is tragic and most regrettable to say the least. Whether or not a woman has the right to kill that innocent baby just because the father of the said child is repulsive or reprehensible as a human being is of course another issue. Surely she would not be rendered an outcast from society if she rightfully chose to give the baby up for adoption or otherwise as she ought not be obligated to care for and raise an unwanted child.
