Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddahaid
Yes I agree part of the worlds problem is a lack of a moral compass but morals are something you can't effectively legislate without becoming that totalitarian state that I don't think you want anymore than I do. People complain about democrats creating a nanny state but doesn't this fall under the same category?
|
I could see that if it was no abortion at all. But drawing a line by saying "before proof of life is ok, but not after" didn't seem unreasonable.
In any other arena, we would consider a heartbeat to be sufficient proof of a living creature's existence. Doesn't need to be self-aware life - otherwise we wouldn't consider day-old puppies to be alive; nor blind hairless marsupials moving to their mother's pouch to continue development...
One may argue that we consider people to be dead if they have a heartbeat but no brain activity - the difference, however is such people are generally in hospital well after completion of gestation where there is no additional development that will occur. To put it brutally - the brain-dead had their chance at life, the fetus was never given the chance to begin with...