Florida woman forced to give birth to a baby that will die immediately

Incorrect, if you are willing to insert your religious beliefs to intervene in the private medical decisions of say my girlfriend it’s reasonable to assume you have several other bad positions given the evidentiary info. It’s like knowing Charles Manson is a psychopath and assuming that he has done many other bad things. I am willing to hear you out though just not on this thread. Done with it here.

 

Baby forced to be born - outrage.

Babies killed before birth - “Eh”

 

So how do you feel about abortion if the fetus is retarded?

PS - solid virtue signaling here. You’re like a real life Tim Tebow aren’t you. Except radically different in several very important ways.

 

To some it may be. I think that is way to far down the trail.

I havent veen vague. I think abortion should be illegal period outside of medical issues. I think that can cover a broad number of things. I do not believe abortion just because ot will be hard is good enough.

I also support exceptions for rape victims though I know that puts me in a moral corner because its still a life. That is just something I can live with because of the harm already done to the woman. It becomes a defacto health issue based on that circumstance.

 

Ask around. Some of your lefty friends here can set you straight. There are also endless archives of threads here.

And every single one of us inserts our beliefs into other peoples lives. Every law that I disagree with is forced on me by the enforcement of someone elses belief.

 

That's not reasonable to me or to a majority of Americans.

 

What is the "human equation"? Seems pretty arbitrary to me. Fetuses and embryos are missing much of what I'd call the "human equation," which is why, as @mdgator05 pointed out, this is a philosophical question that government really should stay out of. Granted, I think government should do everything it can to lower the number of abortions, short of banning the practice.

But even I am accepting of a line. At viability, I think it's fair for the government to prohibit abortions unless it is necessary for the health of the mother. At that point, you have something that can fairly be classified as an independent human life.

 

I’m coming in late on this but Justice Kavanaugh gave a pretty clear response to that: “may a state bar a resident of that State from traveling to another State to obtain an abortion? In my view, the answer is no based on the constitutional right to interstate travel.”
Kavanaugh Says States May Not Bar Travel to Obtain an Abortion

 

Totally agree with this and I’d add that I really can’t think of an acceptable reason that isn’t health related to abort a fetus once it has reached viability. I feel like plenty of time has elapsed at that point for a woman to have chosen to abort if she did not want the baby for an arbitrary reason. Far harder to justify, IMO, after that point.

 

Ask Thomas Alito and Barrett and most GOP federal judges in red states.

 

The Dobbs decision was a 5-4 vote, and I doubt Roberts would go along with outlawing interstate commerce. So what Alito or Barrett would have to say is irrelevant.

 

i know but Roberts wont be on the court forever and a federal judge can certainly come up with some ridiculous ruling that may not be stayed pending appeal.

 

Roberts is 68 years old, Thomas is 74 so you can expect to see Thomas replaced well before Roberts leaves.

 

I am pretty sure that you are incorrect. Once viability has been reached, the fatal abnormality no longer allows for an abortion. These are 2 different standards, and the presence of a fatal abnormality doesn’t mean that viability has not been reached.

 

I just saw that this issue was already addressed by other posters. Sorry for the redundancy.

 

It should take at least one juror in favor of executing an innocent person before the chemicals are injected.

 

What is interesting about your position is you don’t think it is murder. Obviously I agree with that.

But conversely, if you don’t think it is murder, it seems like the case for abortion weakens. I would think that the bar would have to be very high in order to deprive an individual the right to control her body and to force her to bring a pregnancy to term against her will. If one truly believed the fetus should have all the rights of a living born human, and is fundamentally equal, then there is an underlying logic that could theoretically supercede the woman’s right to bodily autonomy. However, if it is something less than that, I struggle to see how one justifies taking a woman’s right to bodily autonomy away.

What specifically about a less than 15 week fetus makes it too far down the road? What attributes?

 

I generally agree. The exception is fetal abnormalities or testing revealing a serious medical condition the fetus will have.

 

Reading the posts in this thread gives one a better feel for how nightmarish drafting a viable abortion rights amendment will be. Again, the goal should be to get one on every state's ballot for the 2024 general election. Past time to put an end to this, the minority should not be dictating medical rights to the majority.