A secular arguement for the alteration of existing abortion law

[DogmaticDownSouth]

@Whateverist - not sure what your point is other than to prove my point. The treatise may be long, but you don't have to read it , Not sure what you are adding by stating you don't know what I'm going to say, but I must be wrong. That's not a logical argument. You may want to argue that the world is not flat, but just by dismissing the argument that the world is flat you have not contributed to a rationale discussion. You are addressing a conclusion you don't like rather than the argument that got there. The Church didn't like Gallileo for stating the Earth was not the center of the universe, but you don't have to like the conclusion, if the rationale is sound then it's sound.

@ mh.brewer - again off topic. I am asking about the moral logic of this argument. Who should pay for the care is not relevant to the morality of this particular argument. Who should pay for the emergency room visits of uninsured motorists involved in a MVA is a different question then should the motorist receive care wouldn't you agree? {not wanting to open up a single payer argument on this thread, if interested in that discussion let's start another one) Also not your business, nor does it change the validity of my argument but 3rd year med student in the NICU and 4th year on pediatrics. Got to know the family well and still keep in touch. Getting back to my argument, do you have a valid criticism of the argument itself rather then the conclusion that you may not like? that is the question.

---

I concede the earth is round

---

By the way, I am by far from the only one to have expierence with 24 week gestation infants

https://penut-trial.org/node/41
[/url]
[url=https://penut-trial.org/node/41]Just one of many links