Converation thread

It is considered double homicide when either the baby is grown and matured or when the mother knew of the fetus and decided to keep it, therefore a women making her choice to not have a baby either due to the fact she's not financially stable or any other reason. Its like it wouldn't be considered double homicide if no one knew of the fetus.

"It is considered double homicide when either the baby is grown and matured or when the mother knew of the fetus and decided to keep it," and "Its like it wouldn't be considered double homicide if no one knew of the fetus." -Your quotes.

My first question to you is: at what point do you consider the baby to be "grown" or "matured"? At what point does the law consider a baby to be "grown" or "matured"? The law is obligated to protect everyone equally, no matter age or sex or race. The fetus is also protected constitutionally, as…  Read more it is guaranteed life, liberty, and a pursuit of happiness, since a fetus is, by definition, "posterity". Additionally, if a pregnant woman is killed, and a pathologist finds a fetus inside the woman (which he/she would in an autopsy), the killer will be charged with double homicide. Furthermore, there is no way to ask the woman if she wanted the baby or not, because she is already dead.

I can see where you're coming from with the double homicide analogy, but let's flip the script for a moment. Many laws around the world define the start of life at the point of viability outside the womb, which is usually around 24 weeks. Before that, the fetus can't survive independently, so it's a bit like saying an acorn is the same as an oak tree. Sure, one can potentially become the other, but they're not the same thing.

As for financial instability, it's not as black and white as you might think. Yes, there are financial aids and adoption, but neither is…  Read more a magical solution. Financial aid often doesn't cover all costs and adoption can be a heart-wrenching process. It's not about choosing the easy way out, it's about choosing the less painful path in a situation where all choices are hard.

What do you think? Can you see any gray areas in this black and white picture?

"Many laws around the world define the start of life at the point of viability outside the womb, which is usually around 24 weeks."

Good point, but this is America, and the American constitution protects our "posterity" and grants its rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To bring other countries into this argument is rather irrelevant, because this argument is focused on American politics -- this is an American political website.

A fetus cannot survive independently. However, neither can my great grandma who is on life support. If we were to shut off her lif…  Read moree support, she would die. Just like how if a baby were taken from a womb prematurely, he/she would die. Does the need for assistance take away from their values of life? After all, both instances meet the 5 criterion of life, therefore scientifically, they must be alive.

The fetus is a living, growing human being--not a potential life. It is scientifically proven that it is a life, because it meets the 5 criterion of life. There is no difference in value between a baby in the womb, grandma on life support, or joe smith driving to work. All are live humans and deserve the same rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

So I disagree, however you bring good points