“Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001
how about this mac do you agree that the two extrems of this arguement are the "life begins outside the womb" & "life begins at conception" (which i'm guessing you are in this camp) crowds? and that any real meaningful legislation is going to come from somewhere in the middle of the two? and that my arguement does not support either extreme but lies somewhere in the middle of the two extremes?
Well, not as clear cut as you would like I am sure.
"As opposed to brain death, persistent vegetative state (PVS) is not recognized by statute as death in any legal system. In the US and UK, courts have required petitions before termination of life support that demonstrate that any recovery of cognitive functions above a vegetative state is assessed as impossible by authoritative medical opinion."
Persistent vegetative state - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2.) i think the law should pretty much stay the way it is now with MY clarification/cooperation of the laws conserning when someone is LEGALLY alive and dead.
Only that 'your' particular clarification, or definition as it stands is woefully inaccurate.
applicable word here is 'current'.3.) no, i didn't get mad that the current law helps my arguement.
life of the mother is the only one I would concede paying for.4.) i said tax payers should cover the bill when a women gets a "needed" (which you agree that there are conditions in which they are appropriate)abortion 3 times seems like plenty to me after that it is clear she is using it for contriception at which point i think the tax payer is no longer liable.
Amendment process is the only way that this becomes anything close to an actual right. Short of that it will always be politicized.5.) change the law. good luck with that.
how again is my definition not accurate?
yes current, good luck getting your FAR right views passed!
so then if it was your mother/wife's life on the line you would want abortions available for them or would you prefer they get a back ally type?
This is a common scare tactic of misinformation used by the pro abortion crowd. It is neither factual, nor is it an honest question.so then if it was your mother/wife's life on the line you would want abortions available for them or would you prefer they get a back ally type?
okay then you are not for having abortions made available to women who NEED them even if it was your mother or wife's life that was on the line?
now i am getting confused!!!
Now you are just outright misrepresenting my position. Is that where we are going? Dishonest arguments, fear mongering, and misrepresenting opponents positions?okay then you are not for having abortions made available to women who NEED them even if it was your mother or wife's life that was on the line?
Now?now i am getting confused!!!