Why is that if you...

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

If the act is done in a place where abortion is legal... you should be prosecuted for assault, nothing more.

trust_nobody

denying a woman a choice still isn't murder.

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"]So if you punch a pregnant women in the belly and cause her to lose the "fetus", you should not be charged with any crime? Because it's not really anything living?sonicare

If the act is done in a place where abortion is legal... you should be prosecuted for assault, nothing more.

Yes, and the basis behind granting the woman that right is "her body". If it were two bodies, she'd not have that right. If it were two bodies, the government would be responsible for protecting that second body from the first. But it is not two bodies. It is only her body, and she is free to do whatever she wants to any part of her body. It is only assault.

[QUOTE="trust_nobody"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"] Abortion is an argument about whether the women has the choice to abort her fetus. In this case, the women is not making the choice. That's not assault.sbtim

denying a woman a choice still isn't murder.

[QUOTE="sbtim"]

[QUOTE="trust_nobody"]

'Nuff said.

trust_nobody

denying a woman a choice still isn't murder.

yes. potential life means nothing. up until that fetus becomes a baby, and a person, it's nothing more than part of a woman's body. No different from her spleen or her little finger.

[QUOTE="trust_nobody"]

[QUOTE="sbtim"]

denying a woman a choice still isn't murder.

sbtim

yes. potential life means nothing. up until that fetus becomes a baby, and a person, it's nothing more than part of a woman's body. No different from her spleen or her little finger.

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

If the act is done in a place where abortion is legal... you should be prosecuted for assault, nothing more.

Yes, and the basis behind granting the woman that right is "her body". If it were two bodies, she'd not have that right. If it were two bodies, the government would be responsible for protecting that second body from the first. But it is not two bodies. It is only her body, and she is free to do whatever she wants to any part of her body. It is only assault.

[QUOTE="trust_nobody"]

[QUOTE="sbtim"]

denying a woman a choice still isn't murder.

sbtim

yes. potential life means nothing. up until that fetus becomes a baby, and a person, it's nothing more than part of a woman's body. No different from her spleen or her little finger.

What about morality ?

or right and wrong ?

[QUOTE="trust_nobody"]

[QUOTE="sbtim"]

denying a woman a choice still isn't murder.

sbtim

yes. potential life means nothing. up until that fetus becomes a baby, and a person, it's nothing more than part of a woman's body. No different from her spleen or her little finger.

Obvious troll is obvious.

[QUOTE="sbtim"]

[QUOTE="trust_nobody"]

But it should be considered so, when the choice is allowing or preventing a life form to develop which was created by the woman. Are you saying you don't agree?

pecanin

yes. potential life means nothing. up until that fetus becomes a baby, and a person, it's nothing more than part of a woman's body. No different from her spleen or her little finger.

What about morality ?

or right and wrong ?

lot's of things are immoral but not illegal....

u killed a baby and a mommy. thats a double kill

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="sonicare"] Abortion is an argument about whether the women has the choice to abort her fetus. In this case, the women is not making the choice. That's not assault.sonicare

Yes, and the basis behind granting the woman that right is "her body". If it were two bodies, she'd not have that right. If it were two bodies, the government would be responsible for protecting that second body from the first. But it is not two bodies. It is only her body, and she is free to do whatever she wants to any part of her body. It is only assault.

Bullcrap. It is entirely about whether or not that thing inside her is a life. Constitution says "...no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, blah blah blah without due process... nor deny any person equal protection of the laws". If that thing is considered a life, the government is obligated to protect it.

this discussion grows tiresome. I suppose the only conclusion is that our government has not made up their minds as to WHAT THE HELL a fetus is. Not surprising considering they're a bunch of idiots.

Maybe it should not be 2 counts but like 1.5 or another deciaml depending on the stage of developmnet the fetus is in.

[QUOTE="pecanin"]

[QUOTE="sbtim"]

yes. potential life means nothing. up until that fetus becomes a baby, and a person, it's nothing more than part of a woman's body. No different from her spleen or her little finger.

sbtim

What about morality ?

or right and wrong ?

lot's of things are immoral but not illegal....

That is why 70% of ppl on this planet live in fear from this or that

thin line between moral and legal

Maybe it should not be 2 counts but like 1.5 or another deciaml depending on the stage of developmnet the fetus is in.

Dawq902

this discussion grows tiresome. I suppose the only conclusion is that our government has not made up their minds as to WHAT THE HELL a fetus is. Not surprising considering they're a bunch of idiots.

sbtim