no but my family should be able to decide if they want to keep me on life support or not, and hope they would make a logical decision to pull the plug if I was past the point of any hope, instead of ruining their lives clinging to essentially a hunk of meat that is no longer me. no, I think decisions like that should be made by the family/guardians and a coma is not the same as brain dead
There are problems with just the state level. Different states will have different abortion rules and regulations. Including age, parent notification, licencing etc. Woman, young adults, teenagers will cross state lines to states where its legal for what they went. A legistrative nightmare.
What about me pulling the plug on your life support if i were a family member & i was the one who actually put you on life support in the first place?
But why should all the states be forced to ban it? Outright murder isn't even banned at the federal level, and if a substantial number of states choose to keep it legal, maybe banning it is not what the people want.
well if there was proof someone had purposely put someone into vegetative state then most likely there would be criminal charges/conviction that would remove someone from their guardian status
How so? Haven't people done this for a variety of things throughout the history of the US? Drinking laws/ages come to mind...
It's the way people like ssandecki get their personal version of socialism instituted. The founding fathers didn't design the country specifically with a balance of state and federal rights in mind, and then also add "but for most stuff it'll be confusing so ignore the Constitution". It's quite clear that they felt multiple versions of laws for the same issue was much better than a blanket solution for all. Why do people try and pick and choose when we apply this concept?
Kinda like a child at the time you claim is brain dead for the first few weeks? and you basically say the person responsible for causing such, should not have the option to kill the being in a vegetative state?
So you still call yourself a Christian Not having a baby is the same as having an abortion (where the baby gets murdered before he gets a chance to live). I don't know what Church you go to where they condone abortion (in the early stages) but if I was you I would question whether or not my belief is actually a Christian one. This is not specifically aimed at GRIM but it's addressed to leftists in general: I also don't get how you can be against the death penalty for murderers and want to kill unborn babies. You can call it abortion but we know what abortion means: the killing of unborn babies.
I'm not sure how many different times I can explain this, I know you guys were probably not the top of your class but come on When something is a "baby" is subject to a lot of opinions But I think we can agree executing innocent people is big no go, can't we? It's been shown that our criminal justice system is flawed and convicts the wrong people sometimes , therefore executing people based on a flawed system will lead to executing the wrong person. So essentially being for the death penalty is to be for murdering an innocent person once in awhile.
#1 Most of the US supports abortion above and beyond what I do, those same people are Christians. #2 You have proven yourself to not follow the teachings of the bible to the letter, everyone sways a tad, especially the nuts like you. #3 What church do you go to that condones bashing others who do not agree with you? Who condones claiming you're a 'better' christian because you go to church more often than someone else? Seriously what a lame attempt at an agrument you have here. #4 Not all beliefs christians have are based strictly off the bible, you have proven it yourself over and over. You claim it is, falsely I might add. #5 I am not a leftist, nor am I fully against the death penalty.
Regardless if you believe in abortions or not it should be ONLY up to the mother and father to decided what to do, I truly believe both parents must agree.
How about when the father is unknown? Talk about a true 'legislative nightmare' Or when the 'father' was a rapist?....
My point at the beginning of this thread. Yes, if the mother chooses so she should be allowed to abort a baby she did not want and not be criticized, we make abortion what it is today.
Yeah, but I still disagree with you. A mother cannot decide to kill her born child, how does she gain the right to kill her unborn child? The way the law is now, abortions can be performed 10 minutes before birth. Are you going to argue with me that a baby in that situation has no rights as a living being? Everyone talks about the "mother's rights". I'm curious to know about the mother's responsibilities? If she gets pregnant, is she not responsible for the possible consequence of childbirth?
sure, plus she is responsible for the consequences of having an abortion, which could be eternal hell fire or something
Umm, besides the phony religious downsides, how about the mental ability to know you killed your child.