When it came to whether or not an unborn baby is a human life, even you admit that we can't know for sure. So if we can't "for sure" rule out that it is a human life, why would we be willing to take our chances on ending a human life? I mean, consider this example. Someone has passed out on the sidewalk and a passerby walks up. They don't know if the person is alive or dead. Would it be acceptable for them to just ignore the person who may be alive but in desperate need of help because they think they person is probably "not alive"? Of course you'd expect them to call for help and start CPR or other life-saving measures! But you are saying that since we don't "KNOW" the baby is a human life, it is okay to kill it? I know the example seems far fetched, but to me, the idea that anyone would be okay with killing a "potential" human life is far fetched. I truly do not understand how this is a reality in the society in which we live.

As for the second question, the issue is innocence vs. guilt. If you commit murder, you're not an innocent victim of the state. The unborn baby, however, has done nothing to harm another. Of course I can't say that 100% of those on death row were not wrongly convicted. That is a problem of our justice system, because some people are more concerned about getting A conviction than getting the right person convicted. I can tell you that I believe that the instances of wrongful convictions are few and far between. And there are many more cases where the person who is guilty gets off due to a technicality than there are of innocent people being wrongfully convicted. I find it interesting that you seem to think that to save the few who may have been wrongfully convicted that we should not put anyone to death no matter how clear their guilt is, but it's okay to kill any unborn baby because, well, they may not be human life afterall. Nothing about that seems messed up to you???

I completely agree with you that fathers should be held accountable. Absolutely. Without a doubt. I also agree that more needs to be done for the babies that are born.

BTW, most "medical procedures" aren't designed for the purposes of ending the development of a human being.

In this country, eating animals for food has always been accepted practice. Ending human life has not. I'm not saying that everyone has to agree with "my morals" and in fact I've stepped up to say that I do not support laws that force people to comply with beliefs I hold on a purely religious basis. But eating meat is something that has always been practiced and accepted here and it in no way equates to killing unborn babies.

• Location: weapon2277
• it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests