The Silent Scream

Still thinking about the abortion debate? Here's something everyone should see before they make up their mind.  There are five videos.  They should be listed below in the right order from segment one, to segment five.   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqZDP9TeJxg&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yU_DQ_7NcDA&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JOOcS2Q_is&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMTMfrXaqRQ&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9AoG_uQ14M&mode=related&search=

Maybe, but this really has nothing to do with whether or not there should be an impediment (a legal one) to prevent murder, half murder, or whatever term you want to apply to this taking of innocent life.  The point is, is that once the being is there, it has this right, and it is the duty of any reasonable government to protect it, period.

As long as the fetus can't live outside the womb of a living, breathing, voting woman, then it isn't just one life the government is protecting and possessing, it's two. Consentual protection and possession by the society (the government) is a part of a social contract that assures liberty in exchange for this 'possession'. Non-consentual protection and possession is communism.


>>12 said: "Essentially, she gave the ultimate consent necessary for the creation of the fetus within her.  At this point, my analogy becomes valid."

And then >>12 said: "It doesn't matter whose fault it is.  The point is is that the fetus has a right to life, and the proper function of government is to protect that right to life from infringement.

So does it, or doesn't it matter that if a man doesn't have all the information or feel safe enough in his knowledge about the woman he's about to have intercourse with?

It's good to see you're finally straying away from the "whose's responsibility" argument (one you were losing, horribly) and going with something else. It's just that your comments seem contradictory.