When they can hire a lawyer and because they have the cash and can.

Good luck with Fay.

When McCain establishes rights for fetuses, the police forces will need special Abortion Prevention Squads. All women who become pregnant will have to register with the authorities so they can be closely monitored throughout their terms in order to make sure they do not induce a miscarriage.

Can you imagine the time-off with pay women would get?

When McCain establishes rights for fetuses, the police forces will need special Abortion Prevention Squads. All women who become pregnant will have to register with the authorities so they can be closely monitored throughout their terms in order to make sure they do not induce a miscarriage.

good_golly2 Says:

I understand the feeble point you are trying to make, but it is meaningless. If the death of an adult is induced with poison, it cannot be considered a “natural death.” Yet, not every apparently natural death is considered suspicious and not every apparently natural death is investigated.

But whether or not someone gets caught has nothing to do with the basic question you keep avoiding.

When do human rights begin, and why?

Gigi, why do you keep repeating this:

not every apparently natural death is considered suspicious and not every apparently natural death is investigated.

as if it dismisses the reality that some apparently natural deaths ARE considered suspicious and are investigated?

Again I ask (not expecting a cogent answer, but still, I ask):

Do you dismiss the possibility that some women will seek to induce a miscarriage and disguise it as a natural cause?

Should we let these women get away with murdering these human beings?

Let’s go to Websters!

the deliberate prevention of conception or impregnation by any of various drugs, techniques, or devices; birth control.

So, again, I ask rather simply, is contraception abortion?

good_golly2 Says:
Ralph; The law does not investigate every death by natural causes. Thus, your hypothetical has no basis in reality or the law.

But the law does investigate SOME deaths by natural causes, does it not?

And some murders are disguised as deaths by natural causes, no? That’s how murderers hope to get away with it.

Do you dismiss the possibility that some women will seek to induce a miscarriage and disguise it as a natural cause?

Should we let these women get away with murdering these human beings?

good_golly2 Says:
So, when do human rights begin, and why?

Gigi, let’s focus here:

first we’ll deal with your preferred scenario (Human rights begin at conception for the fetus), then we’ll deal with our positions on the question. Deal?

So, given your position that human rights begin at conception (which would necessarily outlaw abortion, as you favor), how does one deal with a miscarriage during pregnancy?

Certainly, one must consider the possibility that it was a spontaneous, natural occurrence — God’s own abortion, let’s say — but one must always consider the possibility that it was induced by deliberate physical stress or chemical ingestion or some other inventive method. In such cases as these, surely one would have to consider the miscarriage as murder. And it would have to be investigated and prosecuted as such, no?

Thanks for your prompt attention to this urgent consequence of your position.

DRxJ Says:
(YAWN)

Does anyone here ever notice that good_goony 2.0 posts a lot of fluff, without really saying anything?

Y’know, now that you mention it…

That explains why I kept trying to get some sense out of her, and utterly failing to do so.

She ignores the several answers she has already received, at the same time that she refuses to address the issue I brought up with her — namely, the realization that, if one defines “Human Rights” as beginning with conception, as Gigi seeks to do, then one must confront the legal consequences of induced miscarriages that are disguised as spontaneous ones.

Without the legal option of abortion, some women who haven’t planned on becoming mothers are going to take measures to see that their pregnancies don’t go full term. Since, under Gigi’s and McSame’s regime these fetuses would be considered live human beings, these acts would have to be considered murder, right?

So how does the law then determine which miscarriages are natural causes and which are murder?

They must be investigated.

Can Gigi explain how one can get around investigating every miscarriage as a potential crime, if a fetus is a human being with full human rights from the moment of conception?

I don’t see a way around it.

Does anyone here ever notice that good_goony 2.0 posts a lot of fluff, without really saying anything?

Let’s see if she can answer this one simple question without deflecting to another topic:
Is contraception considered abortion?

The woman’s body rejects the fetus, causing it to die. She did not intend to kill it, but she did. Therefore, it is unintentional manslaughter.

It should be called a spontaneous abortion. And they are counted as abortions.

shoeless makes a better argument.

http://www.tips-q.com/content/tedious-yet-civil-civil-forum