what about the fourteenth amendment? and what about laws against rApę and murder? morality is not an individual thing else wise we should never punish anyone. please think about what you are saying before you say it. and the handmaid's tale has no link to illegalizing abortion. please think for once! if we cannot value ones' life above ones' freedom then murder should be legal. please think! also, do you happen to know what 'Fetus' means? Fetus is a medical term for a human being that is fully developed with all of its systems functional and ready to use, it just needs to get bigger. on another note, the handmaids tale is more likely to happen in a proabortion society. think about it. people don't want to have children, yet the population has to remain stable, so the governtment forces fertile women to bear children to make up for the people who refuse to have children for their own selfish reasons... If a bit of freedom, is so vastly more important that someones life. we loose.

I think you need to read the Handmaid Tale. Because that book was SPECIFICALLY written to address this issue. ..and a "fetus" is the term used for ---in this case----for a human embryo that has completed that stage of development and has developed all the structures we generally associate with human form, but is not yet mature enough to survive outside of the womb. Which usually corresponds with about the second trimester of pregnancy. TRUST me. You do NOT want to get into a -blam!-ing debate over medical terminology with me. You will lose. BADLY. Because I not only understand the medicine and biology here. I also understand the law and the history .

HAHAHAHAHAHA

...and now comes the contempt. So. -blam!-ing. Predictable. You authoritarians really need to get some new tricks.

The woman's body in this scenario does not exist in a vacuum. There is another body inside it. I see that as a sharp distinction from "her body". If simply saying no, she shouldn't be allowed to just end the life of the body inside hers [i]because she feels like it [/i]is "putting her fetus over her" than so be it.

A "body" that is incomplete, under-developed, and cannot live independently . Thus....is very much arguable as to whether or not is it a full person from a LEGAL or MORAL standpoint. YOU see it as a "sharp distinction". Nature. The Law....and OTHER moral codes do not. ...and we do NOT live in a theocracy. Where your personal religious and moral beliefs define Reality and the Law for everyone else. Like so many people who are anti-abortion you show a casual disregard for the human rights of the pregnant woman. Are you going to compel a woman who has been -blam!- to bear the child of her attacker? Are you going to compel a woman to bear a child that is severely disabled due to birth defects? Are you going to compel a woman to bear a child even when doing so may delay the treatment of cancer....or cause her death due to other medical problems. Because that's often the issues that we have to confront out in the real world. Yes, some women are courageous enough to decide to bear these children under these conditions. But IT IS THEIR CHOICE TO DO SO. Not someone telling them what they have to do, with no SKIN in the game but their own sense of righteousness and propriety. ...and if these women get to maintain autonomy over their own bodies, why do they get to...and not EVERY woman. Bottomline is that once you start stripping women of the most BASIC human right----the right to determine what will and wont be done to their bodies----you are DANGEROUSLY close to reducing them to a form of reproductive enslavement. Because---as an African-American---that was the most BRUTAL aspect of our enslavement. The loss of control over what was done with and to our own bodies.

[quote]A "body" that is incomplete, under-developed, and cannot live independently . Thus....is very much arguable as to whether or not is it a full person from a LEGAL or MORAL standpoint. YOU see it as a "sharp distinction". Nature. The Law....and OTHER moral codes do not. ...and we do NOT live in a theocracy. Where your personal religious and moral beliefs define Reality and the Law for everyone else. Like so many people who are anti-abortion you show a casual disregard for the human rights of the pregnant woman. Are you going to compel a woman who has been -blam!- to bear the child of her attacker? Are you going to compel a woman to bear a child that is severely disabled due to birth defects? Are you going to compel a woman to bear a child even when doing so may delay the treatment of cancer....or cause her death due to other medical problems. Because that's often the issues that we have to confront out in the real world. Yes, some women are courageous enough to decide to bear these children under these conditions. But IT IS THEIR CHOICE TO DO SO. Not someone telling them what they have to do, with no SKIN in the game but their own sense of righteousness and propriety. ...and if these women get to maintain autonomy over their own bodies, why do they get to...and not EVERY woman. Bottomline is that once you start stripping women of the most BASIC human right----the right to determine what will and wont be done to their bodies----you are DANGEROUSLY close to reducing them to a form of reproductive enslavement. Because---as an African-American---that was the most BRUTAL aspect of our enslavement. The loss of control over what was done with and to our own bodies.[/quote] Oh brother, so many things to rebut. 1) you admit how debatable it is that an underdeveloped body is a "person"... and go on to argue about it anyway, so I'm going to argue against it. For all the "my body" arguments, we are still talking about something that has it's own heartbeat relatively early. "But it's underdeveloped" has no merit with me. None. Not buying it. It [i]is[/i] developing the only thing it really needs is time. Abortion is legal (in some states, and people who don't live there can travel there to get it done) [i]after[/i] viability, so that's another reason I don't buy that argument. 2) who said anything about religion? I didn't say anything about religion, and religion is [i]not[/i] any part of my basis for being anti abortion. Your side track rant about theocracy is irrelevant. You want to talk about "nature"? What's "natural" about sucking baby parts out of a womb with a hose? I don't know what "nature" you're talking about. There is nothing natural about it. 3) my individual morality and beliefs? Moral issues are regulated by society [i]all the damn time.[/i] theft. Murder. -blam!-. Assault. Child pornography. Drug laws. Prostitution. Fraud. I could go on and on. Morality [i]is[/i] regulated and it [i]is[/i] enforced by society in numerous ways. It's not like I'm the only one who has a problem with abortion and even if I was, I would have the same right to express my opinion and petition my government to act as anyone else. Deal with it. This part pisses me off, see, you can disagree with me on abortion, you can tell me you don't have a problem with it. That's a discussion that we can have, and no, [i]that[/i] wouldn't piss me off but you cannot sit here and preach to me that morality essentially has no place in our society. 4) "well what about sexual asault", "well what about medical emergency X".... well what about the fact that even buzzfeed admits that most abortions happen not because of some emergency or because of sexual assault, but because having a baby is inconvenient, what about THOSE abortions? What about the MOST COMMON abortions? "Abortion is okay if its because the woman and baby will die anyway" is not a blank check justifying every abortion performed on a whim. 5) "you're telling these women what to do/not do with [i]their[/i] bodies" But I'm not concerned about [i]their[/i] bodies. I'm concerned about the living thing that didn't ask to be made. "Reproductive enslavement" excuse me? This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever had tossed at me in a conversation about abortion, ever. I'll tell you what, when we start talking about impregnating women against their will, ourselves, then get back to me with this lunacy, until then, no, not buying it. 5) last, but certainly not least, "because as an African american"... Are you aware of the whole thing with Margaret Sanger, founder of planned parenthood, being an advocate for using abortion to curb the black population, because they were, in her words, "genetically inferior", and "have a propensity to produce human weeds"? I'm curious to hear what your African American thoughts on that are. Aside from that, not buying the race card either. This has nothing to with enslavement. A woman who [i]wasn't [/i] sexually assaulted, [i]not[/i] wanting an abortion because of some life or death medical emergency, but because it's more [i]convenient,[/i] is [i]not [/i] a race issue. And it [i]certainly [/i] has nothing to do with slavery. I am amazed, literally amazed, that you would even remotely compare the idea of "no, you can't legally have an abortion just because it's more convenient for you" to somehow involve, I don't know, sex slaves? Human breeding farms (with sex slaves?) Literal slaves like, in general, as if women might as well be chained up with a boot on their neck without unfettered access to abortion.

Once again, your [i]personal [/i] religious and moral beliefs are not binding to others in a free and secular society. No matter how you try to spin and rationalize this, you've got nothing else to justify your position. Which is why this country has a First Amendment. Which protects [i]all of us[/i] from having some one else's religious and moral beliefs imposed upon us under the penalty of law. This country does not have a "culture" problem. We have a [i]boundaries[/i] problems. Where people like yourself feel that the intensity and certainty of your personal beliefs define reality for everyone else, and that---because you're "right"---you get to force others to live in ways that have to meet your approval. No we don't. Thanks to the Constitution.

[quote]Once again, your [i]personal [/i] religious and moral beliefs are not binding to others in a free and secular society. No matter how you try to spin and rationalize this, you've got nothing else to justify your position. Which is why this country has a First Amendment. Which protects [i]all of us[/i] from having some one else's religious and moral beliefs imposed upon us under the penalty of law. This country does not have a "culture" problem. We have a [i]boundaries[/i] problems. Where people like yourself feel that the intensity and certainty of your personal beliefs define reality for everyone else, and that---because you're "right"---you get to force others to live in ways that have to meet your approval. No we don't. Thanks to the Constitution.[/quote] >implying not sanctioning baby murder is "forcing" anybody to do anything >implying opposition to abortion has to be a religious issue >implying morals have no place in law, ignoring the fact that law is based on the concept of morality. ie, -blam!- and murder are illegal because they hurt people >obligatory "you got nothing" when [i]you[/i] aren't making a valid argument

Like I said you've got nothing but your own belief that you're right, and that belief give you the right to force other people to live according to what YOU believe. So explain to me how that make radical anti-abortion people who shoot and intimidate obstetricians who perform these [i]legal[/i] procedures any different from Islamic terrorists or white nationalists who feel the have the right to push their racial beliefs with violence? Take your time. This should be interesting....

[quote]Like I said you've got nothing but your own belief that you're right, and that belief give you the right to force other people to live according to what YOU believe. So explain to me how that make radical anti-abortion people who shoot and intimidate obstetricians who perform these [i]legal[/i] procedures any different from Islamic terrorists or white nationalists who feel the have the right to push their racial beliefs with violence? Take your time. This should be interesting....[/quote] >forcing other people to live what I believe I believe -blam!- is wrong. I believe rapists should be punished. "But that's just your moral opinion you can't enforce that"- is that what you'd tell me? >shooting/intimidating abortionists When did I say anything about That? No, I don't support that at all. Yes, I think they're scumbags but I recognize it is not my place to initiate, or advocate violence against them. You keep harping on "you don't have a right to impose morality" Do you understand how laws work? >enough people have a problem with something >enough people put pressure on government to change it >hopefully, they change it. You're making the morality argument so broad i would like to know if you'd also tell me: We shouldn't do anything about rapists just because we think it's wrong. We shouldn't do anything about theft just because we think it's wrong We shouldn't do anything about vandalism just because it's wrong [i]"don't tell me i can't beat my woman to death for cheating on me man, you can't impose your morals on me [/i]

Just and endless string of irrelevant and non -analogous arguments. It's not about what you believe. It's about what we as a society can agree on. And your notion that a fetus is equal to an infant is a minority viewpoint. One you are free to live your own life by, but have no right to try to force others to do so. End of story.

>no right to force others to do so Like I'm forcing anyone to get pregnant in the first place. "You shouldn't be allowed murder your baby just because you feel like it" Yeah, -blam!- me right? I will speak out against abortion. I will vote for people who oppose it. And I will advocate that people in office, take action against it. I have every right to do those things, and if you don't like it, pound sand. "Irrelevant arguments" i have tried repeatedly to lay out for you must have gone completely over your head. People like you are why I usually don't put this much time into my posts.