| akuma587 said: @ Mrstickball: So then why don't we prosecute women for drinking alcohol and doing drugs while they are pregnant when there is tons of documented evidence that it causes severe harm to the babies? Why don't we prosecute women who genetic diseases that will transfer to their children and make the children's life miserable? Why don't we prosecute a women for not getting prenatal care if it results in a miscarriage? Why shouldn't we prosecute parents for feeding their children unhealthy foods? Why shouldn't we prosecute parents for not giving their kids vitamins? Why shouldn't we prosecute parents for spanking their kids? That causes pain. You can argue that based on our scientific knowledge we should abort children if we know they will have Down's syndrome or some other incurable condition. Using science on the abortion issue is a slippery slope, as it can lead to absurd results sometimes. It is as much a constitutional issue as a scientific one. |
Why don't we prosecute women for harming their unborn children with drugs & alchohol? I don't know. May be a good idea, given the fact we already do that when the kids are born, and have parents that let them become malnourished & are negligent parents.
Also, your taking the rest of the argument to the level of being retarded. An abortion is a choice by the mother to destroy the fetus. Your bringing in retarded, baseless arguments into it, and you know it. There's a huge diffeence between a woman walking into a clinic and asking a doctor to rip apart an 8 week old fetus, and remove it from her, and her having a naturally occuring genetic defect given to the baby.
Parents are stupid, but in America, we do prosecute them when they do things far beyond the normal, including murder, which is a choice. Again, social services takes children every day away from unsafe homes of bad parents, and we see bad, incompotent parents punished for being dumb. But that doesn't mean that when we punish the parents, we kill the kids for living with unsafe parents, do we? But in this instance (abortion) it's approved of, and considered a right by the mother.
And I agree that it's a constitutional issue as much as a scientific one. And I'm on the side that when you have a fully healthy baby (again, in 90%+ of the abortions, this is the motivation/reasoning) and destroy it, your murdering a person. People should take more responsibility for their actions, even if it means carrying a baby to term. That doesn't mean that a retarded decision by that woman should force her to mother the child for the rest of her life, but it does mean there should be consequences - the same kind of you do something extreme such as drink and drive (having your license taken away).
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
