Twenty Questions -- Baby Killing Edition

kwright · #1 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 07:44 AM

I have found my new favorite blog.

Twenty Questions -- Baby Killing Edition
Since many of the people commenting on that other post are referring to "murder" in one form or another, here are some questions for those of you who claim to believe that abortion is murder, and that all women who receive them are "murdering their babies."

1) Should women who abort get life sentences in prison and/or the death penalty?
2) If a woman's husband knows she is aborting, should he be charged as an accessory to murder?
3) How about her friends who know?
4) Should abortion doctors receive life sentences in prison and/or the death penalty?
5) If a woman smokes during her pregnancy and the fetus dies as a result, should she be charged with murder?
6) If her husband knew she was a smoker and could kill the fetus, is he criminally negligent?
7) If a woman eats unhealthily during pregnancy and the fetus dies, should she be charged with negligent homicide?
8) If the husband knew, should he, too, be charged?
9) If a woman has a serious medical condition that would almost always lead to the death of a fetus, but gets pregnant anyway, should she be criminally liable if the fetus dies?
10) If her husband knew of this condition, should he, too, be criminally liable?
11) If a company manufactures a product which lights a fire in a fertility clinic, destroying 1500 frozen embryos, should they be liable for mass murder?
12) If an electric company has a power failure which cuts power to a fertility clinic, thawing embryos and rendering them unusable, should they be liable for mass murder?
13) If a pregnant woman reports to her doctor that she is smoking during her pregnancy, should her doctor be mandated to report it to the appropriate agency for dealing with child abuse?
14) If a woman has cancer and her chemotherapy kills a fetus, should she be given a life sentence and/or sentenced to die?
15) If her doctor was aware of her pregnancy, should he be charged as an accessory to murder?
16) Should children who are disabled be allowed to sue a parent for any negligent conduct during pregnancy that may have caused their disability -- for instance, smoking or consuming alcoholic beverages?
17) Should a person with 15 frozen embryos in storage be required to carry each embryo as soon as possible?
18) If I had 15 embryos in storage, should I be able to claim them as dependents on my tax paperwork?
19) If a government agency determined that a woman was being neglectful to her fetus during her pregnancy, should she be forced by the Department of Children and Families to care for the child and/or have it forcefully removed?
20) Should one in three American women be imprisoned or sentenced to death?

If you answered "no" to ANY ONE of these questions, you may hate abortion with all your heart, but you do NOT believe a fetus has the same legal rights as a person from the moment of conception. You may think abortion is disgusting and morally abhorrent, but unless you answered an emphatic "yes" to all of the above, you do not believe that fetuses are actually human beings with human rights. If you answered "yes" to every single one of these questions, you at least have some strong convictions -- but I'm guessing very few people would want to live in that world.

http://mollysavestheday.blogspot.com/

NovAngel · #2 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 08:37 AM

www.getahobby.com

kwright · #3 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 09:19 AM

I noticed the avoidance, any particular reason Nova?

NovAngel · #4 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 09:31 AM

I noticed the avoidance, any particular reason Nova?

Avoidance would have been not answering at all, you already know that I'm for the MAP so to an extent I agree with some of her points, but not all. I just don't see a reason for 4 different threads on abortion.

Just thought I'd help you out to find another hobby besides posting about people considering performing surgery on themselves. Chances are they aren't exactly mentally stable to begin with, it's more than just about an unwanted pregnancy.

Therapy is a better answer than the crap in the OP.

NovAngel · #5 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 09:32 AM

Therapy is a better answer than the crap in the OP.

nevermind, that is for the other thread with the surgical instruments....you have so freaking many threads that now I'm getting confused.

kwright · #6 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by NovAngel

Avoidance would have been not answering at all, you already know that I'm for the MAP so to an extent I agree with some of her points, but not all. I just don't see a reason for 4 different threads on abortion.

Just thought I'd help you out to find another hobby besides posting about people considering performing surgery on themselves. Chances are they aren't exactly mentally stable to begin with, it's more than just about an unwanted pregnancy.

Therapy is a better answer than the crap in the OP.

Had you actually read this, it was not an endorcement for self induced abortion. It was for those who had the courage to open up "underground clinics" in the face of roe being overturned and illegal. try reading.

NovAngel · #7 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 09:39 AM

Had you actually read this, it was not an endorcement for self induced abortion. It was for those who had the courage to open up "underground clinics" in the face of roe being overturned and illegal. try reading.

Like I said I got confused with the two threads but I still stand with this statement in regards to this thread:

Avoidance would have been not answering at all, you already know that I'm for the MAP so to an extent I agree with some of her points, but not all.

Jescafa · #8 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 10:18 AM

If you answered "no" to ANY ONE of these questions, you may hate abortion with all your heart, but you do NOT believe a fetus has the same legal rights as a person from the moment of conception. You may think abortion is disgusting and morally abhorrent, but unless you answered an emphatic "yes" to all of the above, you do not believe that fetuses are actually human beings with human rights.

Gabrielle, you're just PO'd because this is the central flaw of your position on reproductive rights. Terminating a pregnancy is either killing a baby or it's not. You've said repeatedly that it is killing a baby, but you back away from that when it comes to the MAP or other hormonal contraception, as well as with the exceptions you advocate regarding abortion (rape, health). If you truly believe that it's a full-fledged human being from the moment of conception--and you've said repeatedly that you do--then you are essentially condoning murder. How do you justify this? How does anyone who believes a fertilized egg has civil rights, but who also supports hormonal birth control, IVF, etc?

I'd love to hear someone actually have the guts to respond to this instead of just telling Kendra that her dedication to reproductive rights is an inappropriate hobby.

NovAngel · #9 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 12:50 PM

Ah, just as I anticipated, the lap dog comes rushing in to Kendras side.

Anyway frucknut, I'm not going over this with you for the 1001st time as I have already said that I'm against surgical abortion unless the mothers life is in danger, the baby is already dead, or rape....etc. Which in a nutshell means I'm against the majority of cases since only the bottom 4% are for an actual legitimate reason as listed above.

That being said I'm for hormonal BC and the MAP because (and I know you have a hard time wrapping your little head around this) it will lead to LESS SURGICAL ABORTIONS. Expelling an embryo doesn't bother me nearly as much as a surgical abortion on a fetus or late-term abortion.

Don't like my view?? Too frucking bad. YOU don't get to tell me that I have to be totally one way or the other...who the fruck do you think you are??

Also, where are you getting that I'm POed with the article?? I already stated that I agreed with some of the things stated in the OP...pay attention.

Jescafa · #10 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 05:12 PM

Expelling an embryo doesn't bother me nearly as much as a surgical abortion on a fetus or late-term abortion.

Why not? Aren't both things killing a baby? THAT'S the question that you have never, not once, answered, and apparently never will. As I said in my first post on this thread:

If you truly believe that it's a full-fledged human being from the moment of conception--and you've said repeatedly that you do--then you are essentially condoning murder. How do you justify this?

But you didn't have the sack to answer it before, so I don't know why you will now.

The issue is not so much that I don't *like* your POV--which admittedly I don't--it's more that it doesn't make any sense. And I have never once seen you attempt to defend it--you simply start calling names and questioning my intelligence and telling me I'm Kendra's lapdog. If that's you preferred tactic, well, that is what it is--but know that you'll do your viewpoint (whatever the hell your viewpoint is) a better service by arguing it from a place of facts and logic.

Jescafa · #11 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 05:15 PM

FWIW, I do understand that some can be generally opposed to abortion but allow for some exceptions. What I don't understand is how believing a fertilized egg is a full-fledged human being with civil rights can be the basis for this. If that's true, why would it *ever* be OK to kill it?

I do believe it's possible to have a moral opposition to abortion (either with or without exceptions) without believing a fetus is a full-fledged human person. But as I understand it--and Gab has repeatedly confirmed this--she does, and yet still she thinks it is sometimes OK to murder it. I know you disagree, Gab, but I don't think I'm out of line in asking you to explain this.

NovAngel · #12 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 06:26 PM

An embryo being expelled from MAP or BC (I still say it rarely to never happens with BC and if it does it sticks) is NOT the equilivant to a several week old healthy developing fetus, with a heartbeat, being chopped up and sucked into a vacuum....Geez, you must think I cry everytime I get a period and lose a unfertilized egg because it was a potential child..Come on Jes.

If you can't see the difference then I don't know what else to say.

Aren't both things killing a baby? THAT'S the question that you have never, not once, answered, and apparently never will. As I said in my first post on this thread:

Yes, in both cases a she's ending a pregnancy (life).. but one way IMO is much more humane than the other, problem is women don't usually find out until a surgical procedure is needed. It bothers me that 95% of surgical abortions a year are for nothing more than convenience, I find that truly sickening.

If you truly believe that it's a full-fledged human being from the moment of conception--and you've said repeatedly that you do--then you are essentially condoning murder. How do you justify this?

I believe that life does begin at conception but unwanted pregnancys/ abortions are going to happen no matter what Jes, would it make any sense to be against BC, MAP, and abortion?? If you take away BC, condoms, and MAP then what do you think will happen? It's common sense, I don't know why you need me to clarify the obvious.

I'm also not a fan of murder but wouldn't hesitate to kill someone if they broke into my house, that doesn't mean I condone killing.

newmattick · #13 (**permalink**) 03-19-2006, 10:22 PM

Yes, in both cases a she's ending a pregnancy (life).. but one way IMO is much more humane

So..life is only valuable if it is ended in an inhumane way?

Jescafa · #14 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 05:57 AM

An embryo being expelled from MAP or BC (I still say it rarely to never happens with BC and if it does it sticks) is NOT the equilivant to a several week old healthy developing fetus, with a heartbeat, being chopped up and sucked into a vacuum....Geez, you must think I cry everytime I get a period and lose a unfertilized egg because it was a potential child..Come on Jes.

If you can't see the difference then I don't know what else to say.

?? We're talking about fertilized eggs, not unfertilized ones. Of course you dont grieve over menstruating. But if a fertilized egg is a baby to you, then logically you must grieve over all those that are lost b/c of hormonal birth control or the MAP. And yes, whether you acknowledge it or not, this is one of the ways in which all hormonal birth control (and the IUD) routinely works.

I'm sorry...I don't see the difference, not if we're working with the assumption that a fertilized egg is a baby. It's still being killed, you admit this yourself.

Yes, in both cases a she's ending a pregnancy (life).. but one way IMO is much more humane than the other, problem is women don't usually find out until a surgical procedure is needed. It bothers me that 95% of surgical abortions a year are for nothing more than convenience, I find that truly sickening.

Don't you think that 95% of fetal deaths due to MAP or BCP are due to "convenience" as well? How come those are OK with you but surgical abortion, not so much? Do you really think the procedure is that much more humane for the fetus?

I believe that life does begin at conception but unwanted pregnancys/ abortions are going to happen no matter what Jes, would it make any sense to be against BC, MAP, and abortion?? If you take away BC, condoms, and MAP then what do you think will happen? It's common sense, I don't know why you need me to clarify the obvious.

Come on, I think you know that I am in favor of reproductive rights generally, including abortion, contraception, emergency contraception, and comprehensive sex ed. My point is not to dissuade you from supporting birth control, but to make you realize the hypocrisy in your position--and the fact that you don't believe a fertilized egg has the same rights as a post-birth baby, by the simple fact that you think there are some instances in which it is OK to kill it, through no wrongdoing of its own.

I'm also not a fan of murder but wouldn't hesitate to kill someone if they broke into my house, that doesn't mean I condone killing.

See above phrase, "through no wrongdoing of its own." If it's not OK to kill a post-birth baby just because it's the product of rape (and I think we all agree that it is not), why is it OK to kill a fertilized egg? The question remains out there, Meat--you haven't answered it yet.

NovAngel · #15 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 07:47 AM

Jes, no matter what I say, or how I defend my POV, you'll never agree. I'm never going to change my stance either, so I rest my case. I'm starting to feel like one of the BAC's.

So..life is only valuable if it is ended in an inhumane way?

No, abortion is going to happen no matter what Camille. I'd rather it be an embryo being expelled from a MAP than a 20 week old being pulled out of the womb, stabbed in the back of the head with scissors, and thrown in the garbage....If you can't see the difference either then I don't know how else to continue this discussion with either one of you.

Jescafa · #16 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 07:58 AM

Jes, no matter what I say, or how I defend my POV, you'll never agree. I'm never going to change my stance either, so I rest my case. I'm starting to feel like one of the BAC's.

I just want an answer. If I don't agree with the answer, well then I probably will question you further, too bad if that bugs you. But as far as I can see, you haven't yet provided an answer:

If it's not OK to kill a post-birth baby just because it's the product of rape (and I think we all agree that it is not), why is it OK to kill a fertilized egg?

I might add, no matter what the method of killing.

No, abortion is going to happen no matter what Camille. I'd rather it be an embryo being expelled from a MAP than a 20 week old being pulled out of the womb, stabbed in the back of the head with scissors, and thrown in the garbage....If you can't see the difference either then I don't know how else to continue this discussion with either one of you.

First of all, there's quite a middle ground between the two methods (and gestational ages) you've described. Second of all, why do you revert to the term "embryo" when discussing the MAP? According to your repeated statements, it's still a baby, and it's still being killed. It's still killing for convenience, something you claim to abhor.

Tell me, if a more humane method of aborting older fetuses--euthanizing them in utero, possibly--were to be developed, would that be OK with you too, simply on the basis that it's more "humane"? Arguably it would be more humane than even the MAP, would in effect denies a fertilized egg (baby) of nourishment and starves it to death.

Jescafa · #17 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 07:59 AM

*which* in effect denies a fertilized egg of nourishment. Ack, I hate typos.

NovAngel · #18 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 08:00 AM

oh and..

But if a fertilized egg is a baby to you, then logically you must grieve over all those that are lost b/c of hormonal birth control or the MAP.

No, I don't.

And yes, whether you acknowledge it or not, this is one of the ways in which all hormonal birth control (and the IUD) routinely works.

Regardless of my thoughts of abortion this is NOT how BC routinely works. Hormonal BC prevents ovulation. No ovulation= no egg to fertilize. It also thickens the mucus on your cervix to prevent sperm from entering....You need a sex-ed refresher course before you speak on this subject because you're the one encouraging women to throw away their BC pills by making them think their aborting a baby every month, jackass.

Emaline · #19 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 08:07 AM

I just don't see a reason for 4 different threads on abortion.

It is not exactly like she is hogging the board, no one else is posting crap here.

NovAngel · #20 (**permalink**) 03-20-2006, 08:18 AM

I just want an answer. If I don't agree with the answer, well then I probably will question you further, too bad if that bugs you. But as far as I can see, you haven't yet provided an answer:

I have provided you with answers, not my problem that you don't agree with any of them...too bad back at ya.

First of all, there's quite a middle ground between the two methods (and gestational ages) you've described. Second of all, why do you revert to the term "embryo" when discussing the MAP? According to your repeated statements, it's still a baby, and it's still being killed. It's still killing for convenience, something you claim to abhor.

Like I said take a refresher course on sex ed, then you will find out the different gestation ages and what their correct terminology is.

Tell me, if a more humane method of aborting older fetuses--euthanizing them in utero, possibly--were to be developed, would that be OK with you too, simply on the basis that it's more "humane"?

It would depend on what the circumstances are Jes...If someone was told that they had to abort or they would die leaving behind other young kids, I guess I would think euthanization would be a better option before the surgical procedure was performed....although I'm sure she would still be distraught for a very long time after for her loss. God, what a horrible thought.