...and here in lies the gray area. You claim that nobody has the right to take a life, when in the same breath you acknowledge an 8 month old fetus is a human life. I'd have to assume you would be comfortable with somebody stepping in and stopping somebody from physically harming a 1 second old baby on a delivery table. But you are against somebody stepping in and stopping the assault 2 seconds earlier.
Everybody has the right not to reproduce. That is as simple as keeping sperm away from the egg.
I am not against anyone preventing an abortion.
I completely disagree that it a woman's right to choose, based on the fact that a man also created the fetus, making it an extension of his own life force.
I have said repeatedly that I am not opposed to the use of force to save a life.
You seem to be demanding that the government use force to save the life.
In reality that theory turns into self justification for government violation of rights, brutality and even execution without a trial or arrest.
You seem to want to force compliance, but you should be demanding peaceful methods, not imprisonment or death.
There are more people in this world that would love to take the burden of the child from the mother, than there are people looking to kill fetuses.
Current laws restrict options of the fetus's parents.
Requiring 2 party consent would stop more than half of all abortions.
Allowing mother's to be sell their newborn child for adoption would stop another large chunk of abortions.
You seem to be suggesting another endless war fueled by force.
Planned parenthood can sell your fetus, but the actual mother is prohibited from saving the life by selling the exact same item, just at a later stage of development.
Believe me, there are all kinds of options besides reloading guns and going Jihad on pregnant women.
You attempt repeatedly to box me in with only 2 choices trying to get me to change my mind and side with the use of force, including deadly force as a problem solving tool.
Our government has shown repeatedly that the use of force, including deadly force causes far more harm than good.
I am willing to support stopping abortions.
I am not willing to support using the force of the government on pregnant women.
Your argument of use of force to stop use of force against the fetus is fighting fire with fire, and in the end you will just have increased hatred, resentment and retaliation.
Look at history, the government passed laws that threaten jail for reproducing without the ability to pay for the care of the child.
The government allows businesses to sell newborns for profit, but forbids mothers from doing the same.
We hear constantly people outraged when people have children and they can't support them.
It's no wonder women are pushed into abortions due to government regulation.
Let's take a hypothetical situation.
Schenectady County passes a law allowing parents to have as many children as they like without any threats of jail if you can't afford to take care of the children.
2 party consent for all abortions.
It also would allow the sale of unwanted or newborn children, but with the consent of both parties..
Instead of abortions, there would be alternatives that would help the distressed mother's out of a jam, instead of making threats of force against them during pregnancy.
Using the force of the law to force women to keep unwanted children will only lead to abuse or abandonment.
How many mother's and father's would be on welfare if they got $50,000 a year for unwanted children.
Some people don't want children for various social and economic reasons, and even more people want newborn children.
Keeping these 2 groups apart with the use of the force of the law is the real crime.
Everybody just wants to keep forcing people into regulated and restricted options, then complain when the results are mountains of dead babies.
Logged
