On 8/1/12 12:21 PM, Han wrote:
-MIKE- wrote in news:jvbl7f$3ge$1
@speranza.aioe.org:

The human being inside
the womb will never get a chance to see how difficult or easy life is.
Bottom line, it is a life.

The fetus is a /potential/ life. There is a difference.

Modern science has shown that the only difference between the life of a
fetus and the life of any other human, is real estate. The baby inside
the womb has unique dna, brainwaves, beating heart, feels pain, etc,
etc, etc. premature birth babies are surviving earlier and earlier
every year with advances in medical science. Yet, with all our advances
in science, with our species supposedly evolving and improving, we
blindly and foolishly, because of the choice agenda, refer to a living
human being inside a womb as just a blob of tissue.


There is no
guarantee that pregnancy and birth will happen without danger to mother or
fetus.Many times there is a need for intensive medical intervention.

You keep bringing that up and I already explained how those abortions
account for such a such a small percentage that it's a moot point. I
also explained that every abortion restrictive legislation has included
exemptions for that. Why do you use 1/10 of 1 percent of cases to argue
the other 99.9 percent?


Perhaps that is why "nature" made fecundity so much greater than
"necessary" for maintaining population.

I know it sounds very bad (and I don't really think it is good) to end a
potential life. But, sorry to say, I insist that the wishes of the
potential mother rate far above those of the potential of a fetus. The
better of 2 bad alternatives.


It is a moral dilemma, for sure.
I would rather grant the same basic human rights to both humans.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply