Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980
I am laughing a little, because are making a lot of assumptions because of my stance on a issue, that you really should not. Heads up, I am pro-second amendment and quite tired of the non-sense trying to take away firearms , lets not get sidetracked, no debate there.
|
I made no assumptions, you missed the point. Ask yourself what the right to bear arms and the right to abortion have in common, when you figure it out you will understand the point I was making.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980
This is not a partisan issue really, it is about the principle and right to body autonomy. Rights of the "baby" , "kick in" at viability outside the womb, which was 24 weeks, third trimester under Roer. That is reasonable, but its not enough for the religious zealots, intent on imposing their "moral" view on people.
|
If you want true body autonomy (love these dumb terms you kids come up with), I suggest you learn to become a hermit. If the Rights of the baby only kicks in at 24 weeks, how do you reconcile the fact that they can become victims of homicide at any age of gestation as codified under title 18 of the U.S. code (unborn victims of violence act)? How exactly do you square that with your moral code.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980
Yes, it is a all or nothing when it comes to a individuals right to body autonomy, the right to govern their own reproduction. Quite hypocritical to claim to be for liberty and freedom, then to restrict half the population, or let the states decide if they want to restrict half the population's rights. Same principle we had to fight on the injection mandate last year, body autonomy, its one of the few black and white issues out there. So called pro-lifers almost fetishize the unborn and value a non viable fetus more than a living breathing human being already alive.
|
Talk about zealousness.