The left will never admit this, but their answer to that question is pretty simple. It's when the thot decides she wants to keep the baby. This allows others who kill the fetus to prosecuted for murder but allows her to shoot the baby in the face on its way out of the womb if she doesn't want it.
Years ago a famous bioethicist stated their position very clearly. A mother has the right to terminate the life of the child at any point, even months after birth. As far as I know he still has a job and has tenure at his university.
They have no trouble telling us that women rule our daily lives, so why do they have a problem telling us that they believe a woman should have unilateral, unchallengeable power to decide who gets the chance to exist?
This can also be extended to later on. She doesn't want the kid anymore? Not a life according to some. Considering infanticide is committed disproportionately by women I am not surprised this is a position some hold.
The left will never admit this, but their answer to that question is pretty simple. It's when the thot decides she wants to keep the baby. This allows others who kill the fetus to prosecuted for murder but allows her to shoot the baby in the face on its way out of the womb if she doesn't want it.
Years ago a famous bioethicist stated their position very clearly. A mother has the right to terminate the life of the child at any point, even months after birth. As far as I know he still has a job and has tenure at his university.
It takes an ethicist to be that unethical.
I'm actually surprised they don't admit it.
They have no trouble telling us that women rule our daily lives, so why do they have a problem telling us that they believe a woman should have unilateral, unchallengeable power to decide who gets the chance to exist?
This can also be extended to later on. She doesn't want the kid anymore? Not a life according to some. Considering infanticide is committed disproportionately by women I am not surprised this is a position some hold.