Given today's Scotus hearing on abortion laws, What is the difference between a mother aborting her unborn baby and her being murdered while pregnant?

[BillyBalls]

A mother can legally kill her unborn baby.

So why is it a double criminal homicide if a pregnant woman is murdered?

Because law makers are stupid.

Because women are incapable of being in control of their reproductive systems.

Because killing the unborn only is wrong depending who kills the unborn.

[MCheetah]

Because something that isn't "born" isn't yet "living." It's "pre-life."

I've talked about this before, but I'm pro-choice and the world is overpopulated and underdeveloped, as it is. Why people pretend to give a sh*t about unborn babies, but then stop giving a sh*t about them as soon as they're born and even go so far as to complain about welfare, which would ensure the baby stays alive, is ridiculous, to me.

It's like, "Okay, this baby is now born to an unfit mother. It's going to live 20+ years of pain, trauma, and emotional suffering to this mother that never wanted it, but that''s no skin off my ass and I don't give a sh*t. Just so long as you don't 'murder' that undeveloped fetus prior to birth. Cause THAT'S bad for some reason, but not the pain, neglect, and abuse said child is going to experience. Who cares if we breed a bunch of school shooters and rapists, as long as we don't abort a pre-life fetus."

And yeah, I do think women who are unfit to be mothers shouldn't be having loose sex and abandoning contraceptives, in the first place. But the same applies to men who are unfit to be fathers and think that stupid f*cking "pull out method" is going to be reliable and that "condoms feel bad." Unless you're willing to get snipped, shut the f*ck up. Either use protection or face the consequences. But don't force a child to be raised by two (or likely, one) dumbass person who don't even know how to use condoms or pills. THAT is what is unfair to a child, not sparing it a lifetime of pain and neglect before it commits suicide-by-cop anyway.

Again, I'm both pro-choice and pro-death penalty. Pretending like aborting a fetus is the same as stabbing a born baby with a knife, is very disingenuous. Especially to those who don't want to pay taxes to ensure that child actually stays alive. "I should tell mothers that they have to raise their kids, but I don't want to actually have to pay for any of it. That's not my responsibility, but forcing them into motherhood somehow is."

I can agree with conservatives about many things, but not this.

[MCheetah]

So to give a short answer: A mother being murdered is a death of a mother and unborn fetus. An abortion is just that: an abortion. You can't kill what isn't even born yet. Otherwise, eating eggs would be "murder" as well.

[BillyBalls]

Abortion kills human life.

That is a biological fact.

To say otherwise is to deny science.

You can argue ethical points. But abortion kills human life.

[MCheetah]

So does war, famine, political corruption (especially in China), hunger, thirst, and biological threats. And yet so many people seem to not care about any of those existing problems, but spend so much time harping on hypothetical "What If" children.

[BillyBalls]

Pre born is pre life?

Sounds like the typical word game a liberal would play.

Lots of bad thing happen in this would.

So since a kid might die of Covid lets abort the kid so he doesn't get sick and die.

Sounds a bit like pretzel logic.

[MCheetah]

None of this disputes or contradicts anything I said.

By your own logic, you're murdering sperm every time you masturbate, so you probably shouldn't do that either or else you're a hypocrite. And like I said before, you probably should go vegan as well, because eating eggs is also murdering the lives of "babies."

[normalice]

It isn't murder. No one has the right to another person's body. This is why when a rich person needs a new heart they can't just grab you off the street and take yours and when you refuse to donate your heart and the rich guy dies, you are not guilty of murder. You can't even take an organ from a dead person without their prior consent. We only have this ambiguity around pregnant women because Nixon needed a culture war issue to win re election and making noise about abortions is what he came up with.

[BillyBalls]

Either it's one way or the other.

Those "clump of cells" are either human life or not.

So if abortion is okay, then laws that allow for a double homicide charges. When a pregnant woman is killed should not exist.

[normalice]

In my opinion it should be up to the woman to decide if the clump of cells in her own body should be considered human. I understand that isn't an absolute but perhaps it shouldn't be.

[BillyBalls]

It's a binary option.

The clump of cells either gets the protection of law or it doesn't.

Sorta like saying a black person doesn't count if shot by a cop.

[normalice]

It'd not a binary option. Very few things in nature are.

[Anonymous]

Because murder of a pregnant woman deprives the woman of choice.

[BillyBalls]

The Choice happened when she chose to get pregnant.

Also, "choice" does not define when life begins. Or when life ends.

Once again. It is a binary question.

Is life destroyed depending on "who chooses to end it"?

[Opinion Owner]

You’re missing the point, and clearly thinking too emotionally.

[Massageman]

All three, to a degree.

If people would learn to keep their pants on, we would barely need ANY abortions.

As far as laws and what is/isn't constitutional, the Supreme Court over the years has simply allowed too much to be added to the Constitution instead of simply thumb-upping or downing the laws on the books. Some SCOTUS regimes have essentially rewritten the Constitution, allowing free rein to add to the "mommy powers" of the feds.

The oxymoron (heavy on the moron part) you offered is indicative of how the socialists will do darn near anything to take control of us, our lives and our country.

[abc3643]

Is this a real question?
Are you not capable of answering this yourself or are you simply that immature?

[BillyBalls]

So it is true.

Abortion on demand is necessary due to the inability of women to exercise control over their bodies/reproductive systems.

[abc3643]

This:

"... inability of women to exercise control over their bodies/reproductive systems."

Yeah... like when they get raped or the guy deliberately breaks the condom he is going to use or...

Since you are young, I will cut you some slack. Google "Todd Akin" who died 2 months ago.

As to your actual question, that depends on the jurisdiction. (Do you understand what a legal jurisdiction is? It's OK if you don't, but it is something that you should learn about.) In some jurisdictions, it _IS_ considered a double homicide depending on the stage of development of the fetus. All this stuff is up in the air though regarding legal crap including the undecided SCOTUS case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization which was argued on 01 DEC 2021.

None of this stuff is going to be settled in our lifetimes and what is irksome is that the law and Nature/science are fundamentally at odds with one another. Until the lawyers and judges get their heads out of their ass and fully recognize this fact, shit like this will go on for generations.

[BillyBalls]

You did not address the the underlying point. Why is there a need for abortion as a means of birth control.

Any woman who is raped should go to the closest ER and take the "plan B" pill. She should get a rape kit done so the rapist can be prosecuted.

It seems you are the one who lacks the maturity to have an intellectual discussion.

Since you are so concerned with rape victims who end up pregnant, off the top of your head do you know what percent of abortions are a result of rape?

[abc3643]

OK, you really need to do some growing up.
Bookmark this conversation so, in 20 years, you can reflect on who you were and, hopefully, be thankful for who you grew up to be.

[BillyBalls]

Actually I am older than you.

I am a college graduate who has study both biology and philosophy.

So I am educated enough to opine on things of this nature with a valid opinion.

[abc3643]

Frankly, if you are older than me (I turn 59 in a month), then I have to ask why did you lie in your profile and say that you are 20?

Regardless, I don't care how old you are.
You have growing-up to do.

I say this because, if you are as old as you now claim, then you should understand the nuances of human existence and human nature and should be able to answer your own questions.

[abc3643]

Don't bother replying.
I am muting this thread.

[NorthwestRider]

Oh great another stupid cultural war question 🙄

Who freaking cares about abortions. Healthcare, education and infrastructure are much more important

[BillyBalls]

At least you didn't equate "abortion on demand" with healthcare.

[Snakeyes7]

It supposedly depends on whether the mother considers it a baby for the first case. The mother's choice in the latter case is irrelevant, it was a baby.

[BillyBalls]

That makes no sense.

Either it is or it isn't.

[Snakeyes7]

Exactly

[Waldoe]

sounds like you have an agenda and are not interested in others opinions, 3 choices, all support 1 side of the debate...

[BillyBalls]

Just asking a philosophical question.

No agenda here.

Sounds like you cannot logically make a counter point.

[Waldoe]

Vote A. Vote B. Vote C. are the choices... so I can tell that is the only options she will consider, or it would have been an "Open" question

[OddBeMe]

DA’s can label charges differently, but ultimately it’s unlawful termination of a pregnancy.

[BillyBalls]

And thus the law is inconsistent.

Either the unborn has legal standing or it does not no matter how the pregnancy is terminated.

If the unborn is a piece of property, then at worst it should be a civil versus criminal offense.

[OddBeMe]

Yes the law is inconsistent because conservatives like states rights instead of central govt.

[OddBeMe]

But regardless, we’re all in control of our own bodies. Period.

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

Because abortion is done safely and on the will of the mother. Simple.

[BillyBalls]

What the fuck is that supposed to mean.

So the killing of the unborn life "was done safely"?

As opposed to killing the unborn UNSafely?

So killing in "a safe manner" makes it OTEY?

WHAT THE FUCK?

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

Yes safely for the mother. Anything else that causes the baby to die, aside from natural miscarriage and abortion, will require to do harm the mother violently.

When abortion is on the table the life that matters is the mother's.

Abortion is not murder.

[BillyBalls]

Abortion kills human life. That is a biological fact.

If you say otherwise you are a science denier.

Playing word games such as "abortion is not murder" does not change that fact.

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

It is a life. But that live is not the same as the life of an already born human. So it's not murder.

[BillyBalls]

So 5 minutes before popping out its mothers vagina the life is not equal to 5 minutes after?

That makes no fucking sense!!!

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

Abortion is only allowed a few weeks into pregnancy, not 5 minutes before it borns.

One fertilized egg does not have the same value as a already born baby has.

[BillyBalls]

If an abortion is done in the 1st week or 5 minutes before birth the result is the same... the killing of human life.

But back to my question.

Why is abortion on demand necessary if women are truly in control of their bodies/reproductive systems?

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

Again. While there is live inside a fertilized egg it's does not has the same value that an already born baby has.

Because women need abortion to have that control. It's good for men too, since we don't have to be fathers of children with don't want with women we don't want.

[BillyBalls]

You sound like Hitler.

"People who are non News and have Blonde hair and blue eyes have a higher valued life"

Who the he'll are you or anyone else to assign value to an individual life?

[BillyBalls]

*Non Jews...

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

Do you know what fertilization in vitro is? An egg is fertilized outside the body of the mother in a lab and then placed in the uterus. Stays outside after being fertilized in optimal conditions for about a week.
Imagine this...
You have a gun to your head. You have to decide one thing to kill. Either a live already born baby or one in vitro fertilized egg. Two lives.
Which one you chose?

You will end the fertilized in vitro egg right? I made this question before to other pro life and they all chose the egg. Why? Because everyone deep down knows they are not equivalent.

[BillyBalls]

So are you saying that a 5 minute old baby has more value than 5 minutes before it was born?

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

No one aborts a baby 5 minutes before it's born. You abrt it before the baby is even half formed.

But answer the question.

[jimmy2]

Its law and its a terrible law