Pro-lifers, how do you know the intent of the baby?

All I know is, damn, that kid is probably going to be effed up for life.

But I agree, I guess we couldn't really know the intent. People will argue and say, "It's a baby! They have no murderous intent!"

OR DO THEY?

Dun dun duuuuunnnn!

The actions of a 1 year old can't be treated as manslaughter or murder either. Does that mean the 1 year old doesn't have a fully developed human conscious?

Also, your definition manslaughter is false. Merely causing a death isn't enough for manslaughter, even for adults. There's also an intent requirement. No, a fetus wouldn't have that intent, but neither would a 1 year old. By your logic, is then a 1 year old an underdeveloped human consciousness that can be terminated at a parent's whim?

I told myself that I wasnt gonna answer the last stupid question you asked, but here I go. I do not think that you can link fully developed human and conscious of making a decision. I hope your argument doesnt rest with this. A 6 month old is incabable of making that conscious decision as well. This does not make them any less of a person. But if this was not part of your argument then I apologize. What action exactly of the baby are you talking about? The baby doesnt do anything to kill the mother. I think it must have more to do with what the mother's body is experiencing as opposed to what the baby is physically doing. That is like saying that if somebody for whatever reason dies on a plane because of altitude changes (probably doesnt happen, but maybe it has if they had a particular medical condition) that the pilot is somehow responsible and should be charged with murder or manslaughter. Makes no sense whatsoever.

If the life of the mother is threatened by the pregnancy, the mother has an awful choice to make.

A fetus is not capable of intent.

With technology available today, a 20 week old fetus has a good chance to survive.

If the mother can physically survive until the 20th week, the baby can be delivered by c-section and has a good chance at survival. If not, she has to weigh her choices.

The intent of the baby is irrelevant. See, you can't even entertain a different perspective. It is wrong per se as the taking of innocent life.

What you are saying is like Adultery is okay if everybody agrees. That's caveman logic.

I love it when the anti-abortion people say that the fetus might be another Mozart, Michelangelo, etc, while not admitting that it might be another Manson or Hitler.

I'm pro-choice. I became pregnant while using birth control. She just turned 30 that's what CHOICE means! It's also interesting that the anti-abortion people are also against birth control. If they prevent pregnancy in the first place, abortion is not necessary.

I believe that a baby is a baby at conception, with that said, I believe that babies can be born evil and they can be born to serve God. No one really knows but God and thus we should not judge.

Well, I have no opinion on the matter. This is something the mother should decide, not me.

Edit: Morganie4, when I see your posts, I automatically give you a thumbs down, without even reading your nonsense.

Medical accidents or difficulties are not murder.

The original question was silly.

This one is too.

The baby wouldn't want it's mother to die, if it could make a choice. Please, what's the baby going to say, "she kept eating those spicy foods, and I just hate her....she must die!"

Silly.

Pro lifer? As opposed to Pro deather?