Helloplite said:
Kasz216 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
MrBubbles said:
"but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.”
i agree with this position, in theory...but i really cant argue for it. the rape itself would be a great trauma for them to deal with, so i dont know how many women could deal with carrying the child even if its just going to be put up for adoption.
|
It's the way he is saying it. I would never refer to a fetus as a child, just like I wouldn't with a newly fertilized egg.
If only there was a way of measuring when they become self-conscious. In my opinion that's when abortion should not be acceptable anymore.
|
Define self consious.
If it's Brainwaves, it's about 4-6 weeks before our current cutoff rate.
actual awarness of self above that of an animal level? That's not until like 2 years old.
|
Can you back your claim on this? It seems too much in my opinion.
I think that human awareness takes some time to be developed but it depends on the case -- some children attain it before the age of 1, and some right around it. I believe the 2 year mark is way after it has happened.
|
Offhand? No. Just guessing back on my psychology degree. Didn't really care about child psychology though.
Point is. It's after kids are born. So a "human consiousness" arguement means that you'd be free to kill born children.
I'm pro-choice, but i tend to find that most pro-choice people are horribly uninformed and don't actually have a logical "Pro-choice" cutoff or reasoning for why they want to cutoff to be at that level... just relying on the current status quo. Which really is kind of problematic.
