[charlieo1126@gmail.com]

Can’t wait to see how many men on here will be discussing what a woman should or not do with her own body

[Bjeanj]

Food for thought.

[Bill14564]

Here we go again with simplistic comments about a complex subject.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

I don't know the legal definition of murder - I expect it is different in every state, but I am pretty sure it has to do with death/killing of a person/human. You can't "murder" a butterfly or dog - I think.

Consider, if you see a person bleeding out on the side of the road and you don't do anything to help them, did you murder them?

Is abortion murder? If it has to be killing a person, then we circle back to what is a person.

First - define human, then we can decide if something is murder.

Depends on the State. In Minnesota, no matter what month the pregnancy is in, if you kill a pregnant woman and the fetus dies as well, it is a double homicide which, depending on the situation, you can be charged with double murder.

[Taltarzac725]

Only up to woman, her doctor and maybe her religious adviser. The state should not have any control over reproductive rights.

[jimbomaybe]

Murder = knowingly, intentionally, without legal justification taking the life of another human being, different from "killing" and of course "manslaughter" that is different as well

[Madelaine Amee]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

When does it become murder??

Embryo can't survive without help.

Fetus can't survive without help.

Newborn can't survive without help.

My thoughts exactly. However, I draw the line at late term abortion. If you are going to abort get it over and done with ASAP.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

And yet, abortion is not against the law federally, it is merely moving from a federal decision to a state decision. States rights is a very big part of the legal system, and there will be states who will support it, and states that won't. Sending the decision down to the states will suck for low income states with restrictive laws, and become a medical travel destination for other states. That is the nature of state's rights.

Was the decision correct in the first place? or was the decision a favorable over reach of the federal government?
My google legal degree has expired, , so I really don't know, and the issue becomes one of process, not one of emotion. And I don't know which process, current or prior, is correct, but i suspect that the decision to return the power to states rights is correct. Then I hope [s] some people get voted out of office[/s]

and the strikethrough bbs code isn't implemented here

not legal guy

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Only up to woman, her doctor and maybe her religious adviser. The state should not have any control over reproductive rights.

Who is protecting the rights of the fetus/baby??

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

Who is protecting the rights of the fetus/baby??

The fetus/baby have many rights depending on the context.

Fetal Personhood – Washington and Lee Law Review

[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by Madelaine Amee

My thoughts exactly. However, I draw the line at late term abortion. If you are going to abort get it over and done with ASAP.

Where to draw the line ? sometime before the fetus looks something like a baby and not something that crawled out of a swamp ? That might soothe a lot of feelings, but what is the ethical difference ?,, sure my part in reproduction is easy, the heavy lifting is someone else's problem

[Two Bills]

Surely such a sensitive and emotive subject should be taken by a national/state referendum?
Seems to big and powerful a subject, to be decided by nine people.
Even to an outsider like myself, it wasn't rocket science to understand how the SC would vote, and what decision they would arrive at, given the political bias of the court.
Most opinion polls show a large majority in favor of Pro Choice.

[stevecmo]

I trust all you "my body, my choice" folks feel the same about vaccines? Asking for a friend.

[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

Surely such a sensitive and emotive subject should be taken by a national/state referendum?
Seems to big and powerful a subject, to be decided by nine people.
Even to an outsider like myself, it wasn't rocket science to understand how the SC would vote, and what decision they would arrive at, given the political bias of the court.
Most opinion polls show a large majority in favor of Pro Choice.

If the S C does it job it makes decisions according to the law not current public opinion, our elected representatives can make and change laws, even the constitution itself if there is the collective political will to do so

[Moderator]

This is a complex/interesting situation, and so far the discussion has mainly left politics out of it, with offending posts removed. Moderators are happy to leave it up as long as politics/race/immigration/personal insults/you-know-the-drill are not presented. Otherwise, the thread will be closed.

Debate away, within the rules.