Originally posted by DeathByClotheshanger:
I think anti-abortionists are almost as bad as the terrorists we are trying to defeat.
Why are you trying to impose your beliefs on another person? It's really no different than trying to have the whole world convert to Islam. Or those holy rollers who want the entire country to revert back to the stone age and become super-christians.
if I don't want to, I don't have to.
Leave me the f--- alone.
Until the baby is able to survive witout extensive medical help, it's part of her body. While I don't agree with later birth abortions, in all reality, that woman should be able to do whatever she wants.
Lord knows we don't need anymore unwanted children in this world.
It's very easy to say it's a womans right to choose when the other party is unable to speak. :rolleyes:
Calling Pro-Lifers terrorists now...somehow I don't think that people who advocate life over death can be called
terrorists.
The dependancy of a child is irrelevant. If that was so, then death by parents could legally be held until the age when a child is no longer financially dependant. Even an infant out of the womb is soley dependant on the parents.
I don't think we are forcing our ideaology upon anyone; in fact, I think quite the opposite. Everyday we have to accomodate someone...no more "under God," it's a womans choice, politically correct bullshit. We should try the
morally correct thing for a change. The number of "super-christians" as you call them is far outnumbered by the liberal media and the loose sociological image created by hollywood, and the acceptance of this as the "norm".
The baby may be a part of her body in the sense that yes, the two are connected. But in that same idea, it is also a part of the mans body. Genes came from two distinct people. Because the female carries (and supplies the baby with nutrients), the child is soley dependant on the woman to survive. But that give ANYONE the right to kill that life. It is a being that exists within another; simply because it cannot speak for or defend itself is a rather preposterous rationalization for destroying it.
