Apparently many viable babies were also "
I have a couple of questions though.
How is it that these particular "products of conception" (babies) have become suddenly worthy of a murder charge? Wasn't the intent from the outset to end the pregnancy?
And how is it that people are even remotely surprised, let alone shocked, when these kinds of stories surface? This is "Choice", is it not?
Everyday approximately 4000, "products of Conception" (unborn people) are removed from the wombs of their female parents. This goes on day in and day out, all over the country. Women, for any number of reasons, request that the offending product (baby) be removed, and legally and clinically, it is.
And why not? Women have the right to do what they want with their bodies and the products therein.
Reason and conscience inform us, though, that this is not a Truth.
Women know, as they undergo these procedures, that this is not the equivalent of an appendectomy. This is not just a potential person. A legal right is not necessarily a moral one.
I think we have to go back a LONG way to understand how we came to the place where one persons value depends on the subjective judgment of another.
We have to examine perceptions and attitudes that make us uncomfortable.
We have to look at what fertility and children really are, as opposed to what they mean.
Today we have to ability to regulate, demand, forestall and terminate our children.
There is a smorgasbord of contraceptive alternatives, so that a couple can choose the one that gives the most freedom with the least trouble.
There is invitro fertilization, for those that find themselves unable to have children naturally.
There is surrogate parenting, for those whose lifestyles don't support or allow for pregnancy.
There are long term contraceptives, for those who just aren't sure that children are for them.
Many people that are opposed to abortion, still feel that it is the couple's decision when and how a new life will begin. It is always a couple's choice to be intimate or not when they know that there is a chance they will conceive. But if it is true that anyone should be able to be intimate at any time, and the when and how of conception can be controlled artificially, then why not add "if" to the equation? If the method fails, then the when and how go out the window and you are left with "if". If it is a fact that anyone who wants a child should have one, and anyone who doesn't should have the means to that end, then children become a commodity. They become the belongings of others and they are subject to their whims.
From this we get the attitudes that lead us to the "right" to terminate the child already conceived.
So I guess the question then becomes "Who's are the children?"
Do children belong to their parents, like a house, car, or pet?
Do they belong to the state?
Do they belong to themselves? Do parents have the right and duty to bring them up to the best of their ability, or should children determine their own path?
Or, is it possible that Human Conception could be the action of more than just two cells uniting to bring about another creature?
In the mystery of Conception, is a unique, distinct and unrepeatable human individual brought into being?
What determines a person?
This really says it all....
Maybe we really don't want the answers to all those questions. It's complicated.