Brain-dead woman must carry fetus to birth because of abortion ban, family says

[hecatmoggie]

No, this is largely due to religious beliefs of leading parties. It doesn't prove every life is "valuable."
Is this what you're basing the "valuable" thing on? Religion?

that is your assumption/belief - but you cannot prove that's the reason. Again - if you're arguing that human life doesn't have value at all, prove that. Because I've given ample proof it DOES have value

For the zilliionth time, I can't even answer these questions unless you tell me what you mean by "valuable."
We have laws not to kill born human beings because if we didn't society would be in a shambles and it would be literal anarchy. It's pretty simple.

and you think that's why we look at our partners in life, our kids and have such love and value for them that we'd die ourselves for them ? because society would be in shambles and anarchy ?

c'mon

our laws/society is reflection of our humanity - we love our family, our kids, our friend ... they have great value don't they? Laws are forged around that. You can add religion too sure, most religions reflect value of lives/souls absoltuely

the reasons behind why you and I place value on our family, our kids, our friends ..... THAT is the value of them and that value was there before they were born, same living human lives 1 day before as 1 day after

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

lets take serial killers for example - they don't believe the people they kill have any value, right? Those people wasn't doing anything for the serial killers, wasn't making them feel good ... they assigned no value to those lives

Serial killers are, for the large part, psychotic and sociopathic. They don't "value" the lives of those who are for them, either. They're broken or perhaps are genetically missing whatever evolution has made most of us a social species.

are they correct in believing like that?

Did they ever kill a killer? Now there's a question. You believe whatever you mean by "value" goes out the window when someone does something REALLY bad; I know because you've said you're pro-capital punishment.

What if a serial killer killed a killer? Based on your beliefs about how "value" can simply disappear due to actions, would this be okay by you, because the now-slain other killer doesn't have any value anymore based on their actions?

As far as people a serial killer has slain who apparently aren't bad people per whatever your definition may be, are they correct in believing no life has any "value"? Since they don't function as the vast majority, I don't think it comes down to correct or incorrect. It comes down to: they're incapable of seeing anyone else's life, even the lives of those who love them, as meaningful.

I want to thank you for the responses. Unlike others, you're really giving me a lot to think about here and angles on pro-abortion views that's new and different. This is a good discussion
I see your points but coral reefs, bacteria, insects ... they're not humans.

 

[Lursa]

maybe our entire country/Constitution is rooted in emotionally/religiously ?


I agree, they're valuable


I agree


well they're not humans so not the SAME rights ....

what is the punishment for destroying bald eagle eggs? https://www.fws.gov/law/bald-and-golden-eagle-protection-act

bald eagle eggs are more valuable according to our federal laws than unborn babies are - agreed ??? (not state levels)

sea turtle eggs too

https://www.gc.noaa.gov/documents/gces/6-ESA/esa_1208.pdf

coral reefs? http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...e&URL=0400-0499/0403/Sections/0403.93345.html


unborn babies in Vermont ? nope - kill them anytime the mothers says so



do you see what has value and what doesn't ?

No more answers till you answer these All are basic foundations for this issue, yet you hide and just ask more. Give direct answers specific to each question. You know this, you just avoid it to avoid answers you dont want to give.

Again you cant answer the question. That's always the sign of failure. All you're doing is posting "value" and "baby" over and over.

If it's all about personal value...as it should be...then pro-choice is the moral position. Clearly. No one else forces their 'value' for her unborn on her by law. Why should someone else be entitled to do that? Please explain?

Now, where is my answer to this: When it comes to fetal "personhood," the question is...why would Congress change/amend the Constitution to recognize that?

...your attempts at using fetal homicide laws dont make any argument against abortion or the human DNA of the unborn.

You need to explain what the value of the unborn is? And why abortion is wrong? since you dont have the law on your side. I do really, because "at the moment" Dobbs is very clear that, by enabling the states to allow women/their doctors to kill their unborn with no due process...the unborn have no federal legal status, are not persons, and have no rights recognized

 

[hecatmoggie]

I 100% value the lives of those I love, I value them as important to me.

do they have value on their own ? does their value change depending on who's looking at them ? I don't know them at all ... and I can tell you they have value as human beings
see the difference? I don't need to know them for their value to be just exactly what it is

I also value life enough to think war and the death penalty are bizarre and brutal. I am against horrors like genocide, but not because each individual life "has value" to me, I don't know those people...and you're the one who has said that value apparently goes down if someone does very bad things, so who knows? There might even be murderers in any given group. But I have a sense of justice. Not revenge or retribution. Justice.

all that is awful - every human in the above you mentioned has value
even the person who committed heinous crimes has value - they just decided to forfeit their lives to satisfy their desires. Their choice to do those things, choices have consequences

Yes, because how can we even have a discussion on what "I value" or don't "value" if you won't even tell me what that means? Above, you've even told me what I do or don't "value." (???) Sight unseen, no less.
So you obviously have a strong sense of what you mean by value. What are you talking about? Keeping the population up, becoming workers to support other people, or what is the value you're talking about? Until you can tell me, I can't refute or confirm your assumptions about what "I value."

easy - you said you valued the lives of those you love. There. THAT is the value. You're not alone, almost every human values other human lives. Some like serial killers don't but they're rare.

think of the person you love the most - THAT is the value I'm talking about

What? I do value my loved ones, they are very important to me.

THAT is the value I'm talking about

I don't have to show it to you or describe it - you know it already unlike other posters here

 

[hecatmoggie]

Dont ask me...you tell me if that's your argument. No more games. No more answers till you answer your own question ...and these All are basic foundations for this issue, yet you hide and just ask more:

too many arrows, bolded font and colors .... I don't even know what that all means

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

who gets to determine someone's value of life ?

The pregnant woman gets to determine with her own, already-born body.

pro-abortion says the woman can have a baby killed ...

Pro-choice says the woman can make a choice. In my choice, for example, I had my three gorgeous sons, and mourned three miscarriages.

the Dad can't,

Once men suddenly evolve to carry fetuses in their scrotums, they will. Until then, it is the woman's body that will be affected in numerous ways, and even put at risk.

but he will have to be forced against his will to financially provide.

And so will the mother. Once a child is born, that child must be provided for. The state and fed will assign financial contributions based on whatever each already earns. And the overwhelming majority of single mothers work, BTW.

Also, when the baby is born the woman can no longer determine the baby's life, society/Govt protects it.

That's correct. Once a baby is born, the mother can't decide to murder it. After birth, it's called murder. She can decide what happens with her own body after the baby is born...sometimes. Adriana Smith didn't, for example. Her body was kept pumping and churning in favor of the fetus surviving.

Oh and also, pro-abortion wants hospitals and medical providers to recognize the baby's value and provide, some have said the Fed Govt needs to provide $$$ and support as well. Why can't they decide?

Because it is the government that makes the laws on what protections a born person gets. Their power, their responsibility. They make the rules, we follow them. When we can't pay for their rules and their decisions, they step in and (somewhat) pay $$$.

and then of course a few posters indicate human life has no value except the value we each place on it - meaning you can value someone and I might find zero value in the same person. Who's right?

We are, since you have already said a person can be killed under certain circumstances.

 

[hecatmoggie]

No more answers till you answer these All are basic foundations for this issue, yet you hide and just ask more. ANd dont change my questions and then just write what you want (a man's value for the unborn doesnt supersede her rights and bodily autonomy and consent and health risks. That's morally wrong....so your "statements" arent an argument. They're not "why" and they dont address what I asked.)




Nope @stealthycat ...if your "claim" was correct, they would have done so or be doing so. They are not, so you're wrong. Again, arguments are about "why" not your unsupported statements as if they're fact.

I'm sorry - I'm not playing your games of demands of answers when I do the best I can

See the exchanges I have with EnchantedMuggle? I'd give you the same courtesy if you'd engage the same way

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

do they have value on their own ?

I don't know. What do you mean by "value"?

If you're talking about being loved by their families, that's the value those families feel.

IS that what you're talking about? Someone's value is based on whether someone loves them? Okay, Pregnant Woman X doesn't love the embryo in her body. Now what? By your own definition the fetus does not have "value."

does their value change depending on who's looking at them ?

Depending on the person's POV? Yes. You have already agreed to that by saying capital punishment is fine, and war is fine.

I don't know them at all ... and I can tell you they have value as human beings

How? Based on what?

see the difference? I don't need to know them for their value to be just exactly what it is

What value?

all that is awful - every human in the above you mentioned has value
even the person who committed heinous crimes has value - they just decided to forfeit their lives to satisfy their desires.

LOL. "They decided" to go to the chair?

No, other people who have decided that the "inherent value" thing was wrong about, well, this particular person, and therefore that person must be fried toot sweet.

Their choice to do those things, choices have consequences

Like their life suddenly not having "value" even though all life has "value"? Well, except this life and that one and that one, of course....

easy - you said you valued the lives of those you love. There. THAT is the value.

Correct!

I don't love any strangers.

Is this the metric you're using for "value," whether someone is loved? Why can't you just explain what you mean by "value"?

You're not alone, almost every human values other human lives.

Of course. We have evolved to be a societal species. Unlike some animals, nearly 100% of the time if we do not live in a group we will die prematurely.

Some like serial killers don't but they're rare.

So all lhuman life does not have whatever you mean by value.

think of the person you love the most - THAT is the value I'm talking about

You're saying you love a fetus you've never met the same way you love your family?

THAT is the value I'm talking about

See above.

I don't have to show it to you or describe it - you know it already unlike other posters here

No I do not, unless it's what I'm guessing it is: your definition of "value" is based on your religion, which is one religion of many.

 

[Lursa]

sigh - are you not listening ?

IF there is a value to life after a baby is born - then that has to also extend to BEFORE the baby is born. Why? Its the same living human life. It doesn't magically become alive form something dead at birth you know, that's biology

If a person doesn't believe human life has value at all? then I can see them being pro-abortion. Why not kill it in the womb, doesn't matter anyway

But is a person has value after being born? it most assuredly does BEFORE birth as well - why? because its literally the same living human life

Who says? What legal or moral authority? <<Question to answer You are making all that up. Just because it has Homo sapiens DNA doesnt mean it has value. DNA is biology....science doesnt value the unborn or born of any species, period. A dead human body has human DNA...why isnt it a person with rights? Or have the same value as a born person? So then you'll say "living." Ah...so you add a qualifier for your convenience. "Living" is a status you add. The DNA doesnt matter.

The status of the unborn and born do...and that's where subjective rights and laws are assigned by society and codified. Like in our Const.

If a person doesnt like what's codified in the Const and federal law regarding the unborn, then each person is entitled to act on their own beliefs or values...so there's no immoral use of force against women. Each woman has a 'choice.'

That's what pro-choice means. Each woman can decide what's best for her needs and risks and life. What would entitle some other person to demand her beliefs and values and health and consent be overridden based on "their" beliefs and values? <<<< QUESTION for you to answer

 

[hecatmoggie]

Serial killers are, for the large part, psychotic and sociopathic. They don't "value" the lives of those who are for them, either. They're broken or perhaps are genetically missing whatever evolution has made most of us a social species.

that's correct - they lack the ability to understand a human life's value, I agree

Did they ever kill a killer? Now there's a question. You believe whatever you mean by "value" goes out the window when someone does something REALLY bad; I know because you've said you're pro-capital punishment.
What if a serial killer killed a killer? Based on your beliefs about how "value" can simply disappear due to actions, would this be okay by you, because the now-slain other killer doesn't have any value anymore based on their actions?
As far as people a serial killer has slain who apparently aren't bad people per whatever your definition may be, are they correct in believing no life has any "value"? Since they don't function as the vast majority, I don't think it comes down to correct or incorrect. It comes down to: they're incapable of seeing anyone else's life, even the lives of those who love them, as meaningful.

no, EVERY human life has value. Adolph Hitlers life had value - his choices and decisions were horrible but every life has value. A serial killer killing a serial killer? One valuable life made an awful choice and killed an awful human being who also had value too even if he was a serial killed.

my point was this

you don't see value in the lives of the unborn or you'd not accept/condone them being killed in the womb. Many women are crushed when their babies dies (my ex and I lost a baby/miscarriage) .... why? Would you tell them it had no value and was just a zef and wasn't worth anything? No - that unborn life had value whether you believed it or not. Its not for a person to decide a life's value - not for any one person, no, its not, and that's why we have laws protecting human life and many laws now protecting unborn life

Because of Sanger and Nazi's and eugenics and the drive to kill off black people legalized abortion and planned parenthood was born and for 50 years people were told from K-12 into college women had a Right to have their unborn's killed. That conditioning diluted how our society values human life and we're finally reversing that now that Roe is dead and gone

Unborn human lives has as much value 1 day before birth as 1 day after, the people you love? They were value before you met them, all the way from when they were in the womb

 

[Lursa]

too many arrows, bolded font and colors .... I don't even know what that all means

Just break out each quoted part separately and answer it. It's very simple, you use the quote feature proficiently all the time.

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

that is your assumption/belief - but you cannot prove that's the reason. Again - if you're arguing that human life doesn't have value at all, prove that. Because I've given ample proof it DOES have value




and you think that's why we look at our partners in life, our kids and have such love and value for them that we'd die ourselves for them ? because society would be in shambles and anarchy ?

c'mon

our laws/society is reflection of our humanity - we love our family, our kids, our friend ... they have great value don't they? Laws are forged around that. You can add religion too sure, most religions reflect value of lives/souls absoltuely

the reasons behind why you and I place value on our family, our kids, our friends ..... THAT is the value of them and that value was there before they were born, same living human lives 1 day before as 1 day after

What you're saying is: a person has value if they're loved.

So, okay. Some Pregnant Stranger Z doesn't love the embryo in her body. Neither does anybody else. Now what?

And saying laws were put down because the law givers "loved" the people...LOLOLOL At what point in history has that been true? Laws are put down in order to keep the group from flying to pieces. And of course, in some cases, to control.

 

[Lursa]

I'm sorry - I'm not playing your games of demands of answers when I do the best I can

See the exchanges I have with EnchantedMuggle? I'd give you the same courtesy if you'd engage the same way

I'm not doing that nickel and dime, line by line, lose the context schtick...where is it getting either of you? That's why I keep trying to bring you back to solid ground, basic answers. You use all sorts of tactics to avoid direct argument...I'm not playing that game.

Your posts are incredibly dishonest since you keep posting things that have been disproven. So I'm cutting out the scar tissue and keeping to the foundational things. If you can answer those, directly, then the argument can move forward. I'm pretty sure you cannot and still maintain your position (except based on your feelings) so of course you wont...you dont want to move it forward.

 

[jaeger19]

so the most valuable person in your life could have no value to me - and both could be true?

apology accepted - I never said your accusation

and no, you're wrong, both can be valuable at the same time

there was no apology. Your position is exactly what I said
How can they have the same value if you consistently side with the unborn?

then she killed the unborn with what she did, yes

So when do we arrest and convict women who use chemical birth control and iuds for murder?

but still affected - you were wrong

No not wrong. As I clearly stated there is a huge difference in the affect of an unborn inside a mother and once born.

the better question is ... does what I think about your father change what his value in life it ?

( my Dad was terminal brain cancer a little over 2 years ago, the second man I watched wither away and die from cancer. I know what you describe, I've lived it)

Stop evading
Do you believe if my elderly father is on life support with no chance of recovery. Should the state demand everything be done to keep him alive ?
If not why not if it’s about protecting the right to life.?.

( sorry for your loss by the way. But surely you would not argue that if you did not do everything for your father near the end that you didn’t value him would you?. Surely you would not have wanted the state to make his and your decisions for him based merely on prolonging and protecting his life )

what is this "self determination" ? AI says "Self-determination refers to the ability of individuals or groups to make their own choices and control their own lives. It encompasses the idea of autonomy, where individuals feel in control of their behaviors and goals, and the capacity to act in ways that lead to meaningful change. In the context of international law, self-determination often refers to the right of a people to freely determine their political status and pursue their own economic, social, and cultural development. "

you think a 1 day old baby has that ?

Yes. They tell mom when they want to eat When they want to sleep. If they are in pain.
They are now a distinct individual completely biologically separated from the mother.

 

[hecatmoggie]

I don't know. What do you mean by "value"?
If you're talking about being loved by their families, that's the value those families feel.
IS that what you're talking about? Someone's value is based on whether someone loves them? Okay, Pregnant Woman X doesn't love the embryo in her body. Now what? By your own definition the fetus does not have "value."

you're trying to say that each person gets to decide values on human life - that life doesn't have inherent/intrinsic value, that each of use can place value on someone's lives ?

isn't that what serial killers do ?

Depending on the person's POV? Yes. You have already agreed to that by saying capital punishment is fine, and war is fine.How? Based on what?
What value?
LOL. "They decided" to go to the chair?

yes they did

No, other people who have decided that the "inherent value" thing was wrong about, well, this particular person, and therefore that person must be fried toot sweet.
Like their life suddenly not having "value" even though all life has "value"? Well, except this life and that one and that one, of course....
Correct!

I don't love any strangers.

you think strangers lives have no value ?

Is this the metric you're using for "value," whether someone is loved? Why can't you just explain what you mean by "value"?
Of course. We have evolved to be a societal species. Unlike some animals, nearly 100% of the time if we do not live in a group we will die prematurely.
So all lhuman life does not have whatever you mean by value.

yes even they have value - horrible choices in life they make even them yes

You're saying you love a fetus you've never met the same way you love your family?

"love" no ... but the unborn has value absolutely

I know nobody you love .. .they all have value

See above.
No I do not, unless it's what I'm guessing it is: your definition of "value" is based on your religion, which is one religion of many.

you don't know why you value the people you do ?

 

[hecatmoggie]

Who says?

biology 101

a woman HAS to have a living unborn in her womb for a pregnancy to be

you seriously don't believe that? you think its dead? not human ? what exactly ?

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Brain-dead woman must carry fetus to birth because of abortion ban, family says

A hospital is using a breathing tube and other measures to keep a brain-dead Georgia woman's body functioning because she is pregnant

abcnews.go.com

A hospital is using a breathing tube and other measures to keep a brain-dead Georgia woman's body functioning because she is pregnant
ATLANTA -- A pregnant woman in Georgia was declared brain-dead after a medical emergency and has been kept on life support for three months by doctors to allow enough time for the baby to be born and comply with Georgia’s strict anti-abortion law, family members say.

The GOP just views women as inccubators. Lets force a brain dead woman to give birth to a child that will grow up without a mother. Bang up job anti science religious extremists.

The GOP is all about forced birth, they're terrible people and extremists. Controlling someone's body like this even in their death is fascist as ****.

You should expect nothing less from a state run by brain-dead GQP minions.

 

[hecatmoggie]

What you're saying is: a person has value if they're loved.
So, okay. Some Pregnant Stranger Z doesn't love the embryo in her body. Neither does anybody else. Now what?
And saying laws were put down because the law givers "loved" the people...LOLOLOL At what point in history has that been true? Laws are put down in order to keep the group from flying to pieces. And of course, in some cases, to control.

so you're argument is love = value ??? and that's all ?

 

[Lursa]

Now, where is my answer to this: When it comes to fetal "personhood," the question is...why would Congress change/amend the Constitution to recognize that?

to protect human life of course

Nope. If your "claim" was correct, they would have done so or be doing so. They are not, so you're wrong. Again, arguments are about "why" not your unsupported statements as if they're fact. Please answer the actual question of why.

(See? Simple to just pop it out separately. Now do me the courtesy of answering "why?)"

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

that's correct - they lack the ability to understand a human life's value, I agree



no, EVERY human life has value. Adolph Hitlers life had value - his choices and decisions were horrible but every life has value. A serial killer killing a serial killer? One valuable life made an awful choice and killed an awful human being who also had value too even if he was a serial killed.

So then you believe none of the above should be killed?

my point was this

you don't see value in the lives of the unborn or you'd not accept/condone them being killed in the womb.

You can't make that assumption since you're not telling me what metric you're using for "value." Except for, "people love babies." So, okay. A given woman, and indeed the man who is also 50% of this embryo existing, doesn't/don't love the embryo. Now what?

Many women are crushed when their babies dies (my ex and I lost a baby/miscarriage) .... why?

Because I loved my babies and I loved my fetuses.

Would you tell them it had no value and was just a zef and wasn't worth anything?

I can't tell an embryo anything. It literally can't understand anything.

So no.

No - that unborn life had value whether you believed it or not.

To you? My miscarriages had value to you?

You loved them?

Okay, so then tell me what you loved about them. When they would have been born. You love them, correct? So tell me all about it.

Its not for a person to decide a life's value -

Not based on one single metric that others must be forced to also decide, no.

Also, if it's not for a person to decide a life's value, then why have you decided life's value?

not for any one person, no, its not, and that's why we have laws protecting human life and many laws now protecting unborn life

We have laws protecting human life...under some circumstances...so society will remain society and not some anarchistic free-for-all.

We have laws protecting fetuses due to a specific religion, one of many religions.

Because of Sanger and Nazi's and eugenics and the drive to kill off black people legalized abortion and planned parenthood was born and for 50 years people were told from K-12 into college women had a Right to have their unborn's killed.

WTF? So women make the decision whether or not to have their bodies carry a fetus because Nazis blacks school?

Also, if the above is true and this is only for 50 years, why was abortion common in the U.S. until the mid-1700s when religious folk and those who were afraid of midwives who seemed to have "power" made laws about it?

That conditioning diluted how our society values human life and we're finally reversing that now that Roe is dead and gone

See above. If this is true then why was abortion, usually decided as moral only based on whether or not the pregnant woman had had "quickening" (feeling the fetus move), common among many cultures including our own for hundreds or thousands of years, depending upon the given group?

Unborn human lives has as much value 1 day before birth as 1 day after, the people you love? They were value before you met them, all the way from when they were in the womb

No matter how much you're trying to avoid it, once again this is coming down to religious belief. That couldn't be any closer to "when I was made in secret" if it tried.

But not everyone has your beliefs.

Beliefs, do you understand that part?

 

[hecatmoggie]

there was no apology. Your position is exactly what I said
How can they have the same value if you consistently side with the unborn?

a bold face lie unless you show me the post I said it - and I highly encourage you to do that

or, admit it was lying

So when do we arrest and convict women who use chemical birth control and iuds for murder?
No not wrong. As I clearly stated there is a huge difference in the affect of an unborn inside a mother and once born.
Stop evading
Do you believe if my elderly father is on life support with no chance of recovery. Should the state demand everything be done to keep him alive ?
If not why not if it’s about protecting the right to life.?.
Yes. They tell mom when they want to eat When they want to sleep. If they are in pain.
They are now a distinct individual completely biologically separated from the mother.

none of the rest matters until you show me the post where I said what you're accusing

do that - or just admit you're being dishonest and lying about the accusations you made towards me

it shouldn't be hard - you're very adamant and should have a few of my posts to point towards where I said what you accused

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

so you're argument is love = value ??? and that's all ?

No, this was your assertion. You claim that because people love their family members, then all human life "has value."

If that's true then the unloved wandering around this earth need to worry and worry hard.

 

[Lursa]

Who says? What legal or moral authority? <<Question to answer You are making all that up. Just because it has Homo sapiens DNA doesnt mean it has value. DNA is biology....science doesnt value the unborn or born of any species, period. A dead human body has human DNA...why isnt it a person with rights? Or have the same value as a born person? So then you'll say "living." Ah...so you add a qualifier for your convenience. "Living" is a status you add. The DNA doesnt matter.

The status of the unborn and born do...and that's where subjective rights and laws are assigned by society and codified. Like in our Const.

If a person doesnt like what's codified in the Const and federal law regarding the unborn, then each person is entitled to act on their own beliefs or values...so there's no immoral use of force against women. Each woman has a 'choice.'

That's what pro-choice means. Each woman can decide what's best for her needs and risks and life. What would entitle some other person to demand her beliefs and values and health and consent be overridden based on "their" beliefs and values? <<<< QUESTION for you to answer

biology 101

a woman HAS to have a living unborn in her womb for a pregnancy to be

you seriously don't believe that? you think its dead? not human ? what exactly ?

Why did you cut out the part where I already showed that biology is not an authority on your "opinion" on value? Since biology doesnt recognize value, your post is wrong. And you try to hide by deleting everything else and avoiding the questions.

Now do you see why your posting is in bad faith and has no credibility? Your post only shows moral cowardice and the realization that you have nothing but "feelings" and no rational argument for an anti-abortion position. Your post only peppered the thread with stupid questions that were countered in my post before you even desperately wrote them.

 

[Gordy327]

because its a living human life

now, you tell me why its NOT valuable

Tell me why its valuable? What's its value? Thats your assertion, not mine!

maybe our entire country/Constitution is rooted in emotionally/religiously ?

Not the Constitution. But the rest of the country, sure. Thats the problem. People are overly emotional and irrational.

unborn babies in Vermont ? nope - kill them anytime the mothers says so

If that's what they choose, sure. Why not?

do you see what has value and what doesn't ?

Can you explain what value is?

too many arrows, bolded font and colors .... I don't even know what that all means

It means you've been dodging questions posed to you.

 

[hecatmoggie]

So then you believe none of the above should be killed?

SHOULD be ? no ... .people do forfeit their lives by choice and that does separate innocent life from guilty life and of course factoring in choices and decisions matter too

You can't make that assumption since you're not telling me what metric you're using for "value." Except for, "people love babies." So, okay. A given woman, and indeed the man who is also 50% of this embryo existing, doesn't/don't love the embryo. Now what?

of course I can and here's why

the father? lets say he 100% doesn't care - does that mean he should escape all his responsibilities? She might love the unborn, he doesn't ..... which one of them gets to put the value on that life ?

my point is that life has value regardless if both love it or neither. Nobody gets to assign value to innocent human life

Because I loved my babies and I loved my fetuses.

and I understand that love and that valuation

I can't tell an embryo anything. It literally can't understand anything. So no.

I mean telling other women their unborns have no value

To you? My miscarriages had value to you?
You loved them?
Okay, so then tell me what you loved about them. When they would have been born. You love them, correct? So tell me all about it.

when your babies were in the womb they had value - to you, right? Mine to me as well. We didn't know if they'd live another day or weeks or months ..... so yes, their value is there absolutely

Not based on one single metric that others must be forced to also decide, no.
Also, if it's not for a person to decide a life's value, then why have you decided life's value?

I didn't decide it - its what it is regardless. I don't assign value to the people you love most do I? and neither do you. Their value IS WHAT IT IS, regardless

We have laws protecting human life...under some circumstances...so society will remain society and not some anarchistic free-for-all.
We have laws protecting fetuses due to a specific religion, one of many religions.

and there is the big inconsistency .... protect life or don't.

WTF? So women make the decision whether or not to have their bodies carry a fetus because Nazis blacks school?
Also, if the above is true and this is only for 50 years, why was abortion common in the U.S. until the mid-1700s when religious folk and those who were afraid of midwives who seemed to have "power" made laws about it?

I think I'm older than you most likely - and to see how school's coerce/lead/change generations beliefs on things is fascinating

if RIGHT NOW we started teaching K-12 that unborn babies lives mattered ... in 25 years when those K-12 is voting? they'd change everything because they'd reflects on 12 years of being taught that unborn babies had value

do you disagree ?

See above. If this is true then why was abortion, usually decided as moral only based on whether or not the pregnant woman had had "quickening" (feeling the fetus move), common among many cultures including our own for hundreds or thousands of years, depending upon the given group?

I don't know about the many cultures

No matter how much you're trying to avoid it, once again this is coming down to religious belief. That couldn't be any closer to "when I was made in secret" if it tried.
But not everyone has your beliefs.
Beliefs, do you understand that part?

except I don't use that

biology says with 100% fact an unborn baby is a living human life and other than age? no different really at 1 day before birth than 1 day after and IF that's true (and we've proven it is) ... than what's the difference 10 days before birth ? 100 days ?

we protect innocent human life in the USA - illegal to kill people, illegal to hurt or damage people etc. All that should absolutely extend to BEFORE birth - why ? because hospitals have to recognize that life and treat it and the man/father is bound by law financially towards that unborn and we have fetal protection laws as well

there is only 1 thing that does not protect the unborn life and that's in some states women are allowed to have the unborn killed. inconsistent with how the USA values life