Because freedom can't protect itself
Why is it that the ACLU does not work just as hard for unborn rights?? It used to be that the "fetus" had to be "viable" which means "it can live outside the womb" another farce. This was the way that the baby killers dressed the pig. Now that there have been advances in science, I don't hear that anymore. HMMM, isn't it interesting that Obama voted to let abortionists do "late term" abortions and if they "failed" meaning that the BABY LIVED, they could just stick it in a closet and let it DIE. strange that there is all this talk about death row and the death penalty but NOTHING ABOUT THE DEATH OF 80 MILLION CHILDEREN SINCE ROWE vs WADE. Isn't it interesting that they have "no rights and me, who fights for them, have none either.
Why is it that you are not going to print THIS? Only from the daily KOZ? hahaha, you and Chris Mathews are really non partisan aren’t you
There's a profound fallacy in your final statement. The decision to have an abortion is, prima facie, a decision to end a child's life. Thus, it is not rooted in a respect for the value of life. Any intelligent person must concede this basic fact regardles of one's side on this particular issue. Perhaps, one may argue that it is a decision rooted in the respect for a lifestyle (i.e. that of the mother), but certainly not in the value of life itself.
For the sake of your own journalistic integrity, Ms. Melling, please reword this statement in such a way that this irony is removed.
This is just another way for men to exert control over women...it's not about value of life.
The thinking is that women can't possibly make responsible decisions, so the government must make the laws to control the women.
Sounds like sharia. It's all about control.
#3, it's about the 42 million completely defenseless people slain by modern genocide every year. About which laws are you complaining? Abortion is legal! I speak for the vast majority of pro-life people when I say that the controlling of women is by no stretch of the sane, intelligent imagination in any way, shape, form, interpretation, or implication, or what have you a reason behind our being pro-life. You could not possibly be any farther from the rationale behind pro-life beliefs. Rather, rescuing babies is our purpose.
Those involved in abortions are the ones consumed with control; control so outrageous that it is thought to supercede a child's right to life; the very same right you enjoy right now.
Of course women can make responsible decisions. Do you honestly think that being pro-life inherently entails harboring a low view of women? If your neighbor were about to stab his child, would you grab the knife? Afterward, how would you respond to accusations of sexism and bigotry toward your neighbor? The accusers would be completely missing the point as are you now. For that matter, what of your neighbor's complaints that you infringed upon his rights? (You mentioned Sharia.) Furthermore, babies could not logically be analogous to the predator because babies do not simply show up within a woman: they are the direct result of the mother's decision to have sex excluding 1% of all cases that involves rape/incest.
This is the pro-life rationale:
-The unborn entity, from the moment of conception, is a full-fledged member of the human community; differing from you only in the criteria of size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency.
-It is prima facie morally wrong to kill any member of that human community.
-Every successful abortion kills an unborn entity, a full-fledged member of the human community.
-Therefore, every successful abortion is prima facie morally wrong.
How's that for real? It is absolutely about the value of life.
David - shame on you for trotting out the old, debunked attack on our President.
Jesse - thank you for the bullet points on pro-life rationale. I do not agree with your first premise, however, negating the remainder of the argument.
How would you deal with a fetus that places the mother's life at significant risk? What if the fetus were the result of rape? What is the fetus were known to have a condition that would cause a short, painful life when it became a child? What if the resources expended to care for that child cause 100 others to suffer for lack of care? Does the failure of many embryos to "take" mean that god is a murderer? Is a woman who drinks, smokes, or otherwise takes risks with her fetus guilty of child endangerment (perhaps so) and what will you do to prevent that?
Are there laws against serving your minor children alcohol?
Are there laws against intoxicating your minor children with alcohol?
Would these laws also apply to pre born?
I can "trot" out the same "old" Do you understand the small significance of abortions done to save the life of the mother? Abortion is done to save the sex life of a people who do not want to make the decision at the right time, which is before they create a life. To have life and then kill it, is an abomination and stench in the nostrils of anyone decent.
When do people “create a life” that society should recognize?
What about the rights of the unborn? A human being at 18-21 days from conception their heart begins to beat. Most women don't know they are pregnant. They have just missed their period. Why is it that when a person's heart stops beating are they called "dead" and when a person's heart begins beating they are not called "alive/viable"?
If abortion stops the unborn beating heart, is this killing?
A beating heart is still "life". Taking the life of someone born or unborn is still killing. Like the Peterson case, he was convicted of killing his wife (Lacey) and his UNBORN son.
"How would you deal with a fetus that places the mother’s life at significant risk? What if the fetus were the result of rape?"
Such cases comprise one percent of all abortions. I have a dear friend who is the result of his mother's being raped. My whole community and I are incredibly grateful that she did not have an abortion performed as he is an incredible and influential person. I do not even support abortion in the case of rape. Neither does my friend.
"What is the fetus were known to have a condition that would cause a short, painful life when it became a child? "
Nonetheless, a chance at life is better than the stripping of one's chance at life. It is worth the risk to give the child a chance.
"What if the resources expended to care for that child cause 100 others to suffer for lack of care? "
The only instance in which I can see such a scenario becoming a reality is that of a family with 101 children. It is not realistic. Can you provide a more specific scenario, please?
"Does the failure of many embryos to 'take' mean that God is a murderer? "
God is sovereign and His ways are beyond our understanding. I protest abortion because it is within our understanding and it is fully within our means to prevent. (be that through diplomatic and/or charitable means, etc.) There is nothing we can do about embryo's which do not implant. There is absolutely something we can do about those who do.
"Is a woman who drinks, smokes, or otherwise takes risks with her fetus guilty of child endangerment (perhaps so) and what will you do to prevent that?"
You inadvertently concede that the unborn is, in fact a human entitled to legal protection.
Should society criminalize killing the unborn?
It is strange how the ACLU and liberals forget about THEIR morals, faith and family values. Most of the people in the position to consider an abortion do not have faith.
Look at what is going on with Obama now. He is picking the Abortion Queen for the Secretary of Health. Obama wants to FORCE doctors to perform abortions and possibly senior killings.
My slogan is "Save a Baby, Abort a Liberal (or ACLU Member)!"
Life is a heart-beat a way.
Besides President Obama, has many churches also forgotten morals?
FOR A BABY TO BE CONCEIVED IT TAKES TWO PEOPLE. SO WITH EVERYONE TALKING ABOUT THE WOMANS RIGHTS TO HER BODY AND THAT IT IS ANOTHER PERSON IN HER, WHAT ABOUT THE DECISION OF THE OTHER PARENT (THE DAD) WHO IS ALSO GETTING THEIR CHILD KILLED. IF THE FATHER WANTS THAT CHILD SHOULD IT BE LEGAL FOR THE MOTHER TO HAVE THE ABORTION BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T WANT IT OR SHOULD SHE HAVE TO HAVE IT IF ONE OF THE PARENTS WOULD KEEP THE CHILD AND RAISE IT.
Should abortion be decided on if the victim is wanted (by the mother, father, or other) or by if the victim is a unique living human?
If you don"t want an abortion than don"t have one. Put this much time effort and "emotion" into world hunger and starvation.
One more thing- At least the ACLU is an organization that stands bold and firm on this position and does not try to tip toe around it, like many who only respond when asked.!
Does the ALCU boldly take a firm position that life includes unique living humans?
More information about formatting options
Get breaking news on issues you care about
Congress: Restore the Voting Rights Act
Sign up for the ACLU Action newsletter.
Chip in to help protect all of our rights and liberties.
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York NY 10004
This is the website of the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU Foundation.
Learn more about these two components of the ACLU.