Abortion = Murder

Question: Why is abortion not murder, but if you kill a pregnant women it is considered a double homicide?

Answer: Abortion is murder.

Killing a baby is illegal in every way, unless the baby is killed inside the womb and by choice of the mother. It's legal to kill a defenseless baby, but illegal perform capital punishment on murderers and rapist in some states. How is that thinking okay? How is it that people have the right to kill a baby because of the choice that the mother made?

 

It's not someone's choice to end a pregnancy but the woman.

Plus, stupid republicans go for those laws so they can try to go after abortion.

Is there such a thing as a thinking right winger? I mean, the level of stupidity we see on a daily basis on political forums is astounding

 

a double homicide - Not sure about the thinking on that one. Somehow, legislatures want to punish someone - whoever is assaulting the pregnant woman, I suppose - beyond the assault on the adult. So some states have added penalties for harming the fetus. To me it shows a lack of faith in the legal system - that someone might get away with assaulting the woman, & so a charge is tacked on for assaulting the fetus.

Abortion is murder - No, not since the Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade. There is a specific exemption for the fetus. & the pregnancy is divided into thirds. Abortion is essentially elective in the first trimester - which is when most abortions take place.

US law doesn't talk about babies - the legal system balances the rights of the woman, the state, & the fetus. The state can begin to regulate abortion in the 2nd trimester, & can regulate more heavily in the 3rd. In the US, the law is secular - so are the executive & legislative branches, for that matter. The judiciary weighs the rights & responsibilities of all the parties, & tries to find a consensus that everyone can agree to. The fetus doesn't get a say, really - or rather, the woman is assumed to speak for the fetus. Technology (host or artificial uteruses) may eventually get around the issue - but those are still off a ways.

 

Why does the baby have rights when a crime has been committed against the mother, but it does not have rights when the mom makes the choice to kill the baby?

 

Ask the people who wrote that law. They specifically excluded abortion

 

It isn't a double homicide in my country.

Incorrect. Murder is the ILLEGAL killing of a person/human being by a person/human being. Legal abortion CANNOT be murder.

Another one without a uterus wanting to dictate to those of us with one what we can or cannot do with the contents of ours......

 

I am conservative and pro choice. I am for minimal govt interference in our lives. It is for doctors to practice medicine, not the govt.

 

"contents of ours", it's a baby. It's neither your content or mine. It is it's own "content."

 

That law specifically exempts abortion. Why?

 

If it's inside of the uterus, it is part of the contents. Good grief, do you not understand simple words?

 

Like I said, it my country it is not homicide.

 

These issues are decided - in the US - in law. US law in Roe v. Wade recognizes the fetus. You can call it a baby if you like, but the court isn't going to rule on the basis of warm & cuddly language. The Supreme Court operates as best it can to reduce the law to writing, which the courts & police can then enforce. If the Legislative branch - or the US voters @ large - have a sizable dissenting opinion, they can work to change the law.

So far - since 1973 CE - the only consensus I see in the US is a willingness to live under Roe v. Wade, as the Supreme Court handed it down.

 

In most countries, abortion is differenciated from infanticid by the state of developpement of the foetus.

 

Yes, infanticide is killing an infant. In this country to be an infant one must be born.

Abortion is killing a fetus. No matter what country one is in a fetus is not an infant anymore than it's a senior citizen...

 

Their is a huge difference between the pile of undistinguised cells of a 2 weeks foetus and a 8th month foestus however. When their is awareness, their is life.

 

The FETUS does not have rights no matter what happens to the woman it's in.

It does have some protections after 23 weeks gestation.

If someone kills a woman's fetus without her consent then they have a more serious charge because they did more damage, harmed the woman more, than normal.

 

There is "life" from the moment of conception (afterall the woman it's in is alive).

When there is BIRTH there are RIGHTS.

 

I disagree. There are very limited rights to life granted to late term fetuses.

 

I'm really pro abortion, but I'm totally against considering a late term fetus only as a "thing".

 

As I posted: It does have some protections after 23 weeks gestation. If the woman's life or health is in danger the fetus has no right to force her to birth it...

 

Who does that? Most people who deal in facts refer to it as a fetus which is what it is.

 

A protection in this case is a right. It can over ride the mothers wishes but not risk her health.

 

Well, I'm not going back and forth.....BUT only a PERSON can have rights and no one becomes a PERSON until birth.

 

There is nowhere in law that says only a person can have rights

 

A woman can choose to abort her baby for any reason, such as a baby would embarrass her, or impact her career. Then is it ok for a mother to kill her baby because it screams in a restaurant and embarrasses her, or because she cannot find a babysitter and will miss an important business meeting?