Neither Horza nor Gravy has attempted to rebut my point about post-birth abortions, so it looks like they at least admit it is a real thing now, and not just a "Trumptard" straw-man. Progress of a kind.
Not going to comment on Horza's baby eating comment. Obviously nonsensical.
As for Gravy's comment about "punishing women", that is not the purpose at all. The purpose is to not unfairly punish the child, who had no say in it's conception, or it's genetics. It has a right to live just as much as you do.
If you are genuinely concerned about the rare case of an extremely ill child being a drain on the family taking care of it, the solution is to create programs to help those families, not to create policies that murder the child.
That is why we don't have policies in the United States that call for murdering people when it is convenient. That certainly is a valid solution to a number of problems, but we are not living in that kind of society.
Finally, you are grossly misreading the 14th amendment. The unborn child also has the right of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. If you are referring to the Roe v. Wade due process clause, that is not a great place to go. Not only is that an extremely new addition, which means it hasn't fully solidified in terms of whether we want it or not, but we are actively discussing overturning it. Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg was highly critical of Roe v. Wade's implementation.
|