<p>
But it’s not illogical at all, unless you admit that fetuses are not human life. Manslaughter is the taking of a life, whether accidental or not. Murder is the intentional taking of life. If you think that killing a pregnant woman is double homicide, then potential life must be equal to life. Why then does it not apply for manslaughter? It’s a double standard, plain and simple. You’re saying it’s only sometimes a human life.</p>
<p>
most people I know who are pro-life say they won’t abort their babies, whether or not they were conceived via rape, etc. (i’m of this school of thought, too)…hmm… :/</p>
<p>I’m pro-Federalism; I believe that American society would function so much better if social issues appeared as ballot initiatives. So, New York and Hawaii would be pro-choice states (either voted on directly by the electorate or by the state legislature) and Mississippi and Arkansas would be pro-life. In reality, I’m pro-10th amendment! I know this is a moral cop out, but I really don’t have a strong opinion about social issues (if pressed up against a wall with a gun I would have to say I’m nominally pro-life, but with numerous exceptions). Issues of governmental authority however are a whole other matter!</p>
<p>has anyone read the freakonomics part about abortion?</p>
<p>
Just so you know, that’s not what Federalism is. Federalism doesn’t say that everything should be a ballot initiative. Federalism is that some duties go to the states and some go to the federal government. Further, federalist theory supports the idea the that tyranny of the majority is a Bad Thing™ and thus abortion should never be on a ballot initiative.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What about the Unborn Victims of Violence Act?</p>
<p>
I have… .</p>
<p>
Doesn’t apply on the state level, where the majority of crimes are tried, only on the federal level.</p>