posted on Jun, 9 2013 @ 01:41 PM
Originally posted by Trubl
Im gonna have to agree with Benevolent Heretic on this one. Why should the government have a say on what an individual's choice is? We have already
forfeited many of our "choices" to the governement already.
Many who have the pro-life stance are religious and there is nothing wrong with that. But what happend to seperation of church and state?
Choices are great as long as they do not infringe on others right to choice. This all comes down to is a fetus a human being or is it just cells that
at some point (birth maybe) it becomes a human with inalienable rights?
That there is the defining line between pro-choice or pro-life. I'm sure no one in this discussion would think that it is ok a month after birth to
abort....everyone of us sees this as murder and the infringement on the inalienable rights of another....
Trubl, just apply your logic in your post above to a human that is 1 month old....does it make sense, so why apply it to one that is still in the
This is nothing we can debate and as I said pro-choice sees a human in the womb as an "it" and a pro-life sees it as a human being.
The part that is very troubling to me from a few posters here are the ones that DO see it as a human being, but feel its life isn't worth the trouble
to have if its mother feels that way or feels it too much of a burden on her....very troubling...
edit on 9-6-2013 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)