It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth
Nothing will get passed if it is vehemently opposed. That is why, for example, Trump is limiting the approach to deportations to criminals that have done much more than just break the law by entering and staying in the country illegally).
Do you remember, or did you see that Trump rally/town hall meeting where he said that he didn't want to deport good working families who were here illegally, and he asked the crowd if they agreed. The booed like hell against that idea, so he said, "Yeah, okay, I'll deport them too, I guess".
But, yeah I agree. Trump won't be able to a lot of things that he's promised, because he won't have the support. Term limits comes to mind. ALTHOUGH, Obama DID succeed in getting his bill banning Congressmen, etc., from benefiting from insider trading. You never know!
originally posted by: eletheia
originally posted by: SaturnFX
It has to be then a discussion on when life becomes a person.
Two separate things, you may detect life but without the nourishment
and protection of the host/mother there is no viability.
personally, I see this as simply, if the brain is active, then its a person. a person is a thinking being. before and after thinking, its just life that has far less rights..
The brain activates around, absolute earliest, 3 month mark. really it takes the central nervous system a bit longer to form and activate, giving the first sensations.
At 3 months it is still unviable to survive outside of the
Once that happens, only in cases of actual physical emergency, or perhaps massive birth defects that is doing a mercy more than anything...otherwise..its pretty much murder.
you've decided at 3 months.
Amillia Taylor is the worlds youngest premature baby to survive born
at 21 weeks and 6 days. that is 5 and a half months not 3 months.
originally posted by: SaturnFX
And we are discussing when a lifeform becomes something human..personhood. I had to survive for 4 days in a incubator requiring machines..does that mean I could have been aborted in your mind up to 4 days after birth?
stop looking at technical and start considering when a replicating mass becomes a human. start considering what it means to be human. is it simply viability of living on your own without help?
what about people with pacemakers or coma patients.
have some principles already..if its strictly viable, then yeah..anyone who is coma is just meat to you, regardless if brain function.
for me, its simple. humanity is thinking. once thinking starts, once sensation starts, then its a person...this allows me to not have to bend and reshape my stance based on random nonsense...
"What possible legal case/argument will be brought forward that will compel such a ruling?
So, if it was successfully argued that abortion is killing another human being, I'm not sure, but I suppose the same sorts of conditions that apply to killing an adult would apply to abortion.
originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: CranialSponge
It seems like our incoming regime wants to be in the 18th century. It took a long time to pass Roe v. Wade. If it is overturned, Supreme Court Justices serve for life.
originally posted by: Violater1
Your only off by several thousand years on your “18th century” comment. Noted Anthropologist and author J.D. Birdsell (Human evolution: An introduction to the new physical anthropology), has found evidence that murdering babies has been dated back to the Paleolithic and Neolithic Era. Murdering babies is not new, a very famous story of King Herod, is self explanatory. The truth of the matter is that if you want to live in the 21st Century, be against murder.
originally posted by: CranialSponge
The way I see it, civil rights legislations (specifically) absolutely cannot be on a state-by-state basis if you want to live in a country that operates at any kind coherent level for ALL of its citizens.
Civil rights are of important national interest in every 1st world country on the planet, and are not handled on a municipality-by-municipality (or state-by-state, or town-by-town, or whatever) basis.
Unless, of course, you guys want to live in 50 individual teeny weeny little countries ?!
You can't tell women that "all uteruses are belong to us" in one state, while in the state right next door women are not treated as chattel and have the right to decide their own lives and destinies.
Civil rights are civil rights are civil rights, across the board.
Now how you guys go about performing abortions (or not), and making it easily available (or not), and setting limits on abortions (or not) on a state-by-state basis is a completely different ball of wax and should be on a state-by-state basis left up to the denizens of those states to decide what works best for them as a demographic.
But the general civil rights issue (Roe vs Wade) that women do and should continue to have the general overall right to decide for themselves their own lives and fates in the USA ?
THAT is not up for debate.
And for some of you who need reminding:
Roe vs Wade is a civil rights issue first, and an abortion issue second.
So Trump attempting to legislate overall civil rights on a state-by-state basis is a laughable fantasy in his and his extremist cronies' brains at best, and a human rights violation at worst. It would push US women back into 18th century.
I don't care how many republican puppets are sitting on the supreme court.
It would not be allowed to happen.
Sure it takes forever to push through civil rights legislations at first, but once they're in... good luck trying to take them back from people.
It's a Civil Liberty not a Civil Right
"I cannot have children. I have had miscarriages on seven occasions. On one of those occasions, the child I miscarried was severely deformed - it had only one eye...Our culture and religion teaches us that reproductive abnormalities are a sign that women have been unfaithful. For this reason, many of my friends keep quiet about the strange births they have had. In privacy, they give birth, not to children as we like to think of them, but to things we could only describe as "octopuses," "apples," "turtles," and other things in our experience. We do not have Marshallese words for these kinds of babies, because they were never born before the radiation came. Women on Rongelap, Likiek, Ailuk, and other atolls in the Marshall Islands have given birth to these “monster babies.” Many of these women are from atolls that foreign officials have told us were not affected by radiation. We know otherwise, because the health problems are similar to ours. One women on Likiep gave birth to a child with two heads. Her cat also gave birth to a kitten with two heads. There is a young girl on Ailuk today with no knees, three toes on each foot and a missing arm. The most common birth defects on Rongelap and nearby islands have been “jellyfish” babies. These babies are born with no bones in their bodies and with transparent skin. We can see their brains and hearts beating. The babies usually live for a day or two before they stop breathing. Many women die from abnormal pregnancies, and those who survive give birth to what looks like purple grapes that we quickly bury.”
originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: SaturnFX
when does a human fetus stop being human?? should we consider a jelly fish baby human?