Originally Posted by maddoggy00
With regards to opportunity cost - I am not at all talking about anything that has to do with money in terms of abortion. I'm talking about the life of the baby itself. The opportunity is the life; it would have existed if chosen. In Roe vs. Wade this is called "viability" specifically regarding a fetus (see below). Please reread what I already said with that in mind.
The "their" does not refer to the individual exclusively, which is how I'm guessing you interpreted it.
So you are also saying the Supreme Court is stupid? For instance, Roe vs. Wade outlines the term "viability" as the point when a fetus can sustain life with artificial aide outside the whom, and uses this transition point as the line where it is no longer legal to have an abortion, except for unusual circumstance. This viability term is also used to describe avoiding a miscarriage. 40 years ago, the fetus usually reached viability around 26-28 weeks, according to the scientists who witnessed at the time. 40 years later, our technology has increased significantly, and thus the viability point.
I would bear in mind, though, that 90% of all abortions happen in the 1st trimester anyway. So it's not like I'm proposing that all of a sudden 70% of abortions wouldn't be possible anymore.
Interesting poll for you
Edit:
I agree with webster's definition of a homicide and murder... A homicide is killing a person. A fetus <28 weeks under the current law is not considered a human being. I would propose that aborting a fetus after 14 weeks is murder/homicide based on the age of the fetus and it is a separate organism to the mother, which is when the chances of miscarriage are negligible under normal circumstances.
I have no clue what you're talking about regarding genes or the way they look. What does that have to do with abortions or homicides?
The "their" does not refer to the individual exclusively, which is how I'm guessing you interpreted it.
So you are also saying the Supreme Court is stupid? For instance, Roe vs. Wade outlines the term "viability" as the point when a fetus can sustain life with artificial aide outside the whom, and uses this transition point as the line where it is no longer legal to have an abortion, except for unusual circumstance. This viability term is also used to describe avoiding a miscarriage. 40 years ago, the fetus usually reached viability around 26-28 weeks, according to the scientists who witnessed at the time. 40 years later, our technology has increased significantly, and thus the viability point.
I would bear in mind, though, that 90% of all abortions happen in the 1st trimester anyway. So it's not like I'm proposing that all of a sudden 70% of abortions wouldn't be possible anymore.
Interesting poll for you
Edit:
I agree with webster's definition of a homicide and murder... A homicide is killing a person. A fetus <28 weeks under the current law is not considered a human being. I would propose that aborting a fetus after 14 weeks is murder/homicide based on the age of the fetus and it is a separate organism to the mother, which is when the chances of miscarriage are negligible under normal circumstances.
I have no clue what you're talking about regarding genes or the way they look. What does that have to do with abortions or homicides?
I classify it based on the genes not the way it develops or looks. To me what they seem to base it off was weather or not it would live outside of the womb.
