Quote:
Originally Posted by JHC
MOST people are averse to partial birth not because it is more brutal but because it is more commonly performed later in the pregnancy. A D&C can be performed quite early.
Your logic is faulty.
And for this reason alone do I believe that the complete ban is wrong. Just like millions of other people, you equate "partial birth" with killing a full term baby. This is not necessarily the case.
|
Whoa there!
What logic is faulty? Where did I even attempt to employ logic? I made an observation about the nature of the law and said I agreed with the court decision. How can my logic be faulty?
And where did I equate "'
partial birth' with killing a full term baby"?
Kindly don't toss me in with "millions of other people" just so you can label me!
Brutality is, admittedly, subjective. I would say that there is something especially brutal and disturbing about the doctor looking directly at the fetus'/baby's head and then plunging a sharp instrament into it.
I support the decision because it bans a procedure in which the fetus/baby is half-way out of the women before being killed and is then removed the rest of the way. It's not like the women is avoiding the birth procedure here.
They might as well remove it without stabbing it.
If it really isn't viable, it'll die and the result is the same as an abortion.
If it is viable and can live outside the womb, then thank goodness we didn't stab it in the head!