- Joined
- Jan 28, 2006
- Messages
- 51,123
- Reaction score
- 15,259
- Location
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I aim to please, milady.
The law technically does give her discretion through the whole pregnancy and that, I cannot agree with. I have posted many times the scientific evidence indicating that the fetus has no awareness, cognition, salience, nor sentience before the 21st week of pregnancy. We can reference those other threads if you like, but I am sure you remember them.
At such a time as the fetus can show the mental capabilities of a human being (baby), then it is has a definitive right to life like any other human. The mother's wishes are no longer all important because her rights end where the new life's begins. Position internal or external of the womb has NEVER been a consideration of mine on this issue.
One primary separation of Theist/Deist from Atheist/Humanist is that a Theist/Deist views the brain as the filter of the conscious while the Atheist/Humanist views the brain as the originator of the consciousness.
Each of these of coarse come from 2 opposed premises.
The Theist/Deist premise: Everything starts with a Consciousness and moves down into the material; ie "God created..";
The Atheist/Humanist premise: Everything starts in the material and moves up into conciseness; ie "Evolution".
Our folly as a people is that we have placed "The Laws of Nature" in opposition to "Nature's God", and this we should not do.
Both the laws of nature and nature’s God entitle one to a separate and equal station.
This is true with women’s rights.
This is true with unborn’s rights.
To proffer one and forsake the other is foolishness, IMO.