14 year old rape victim from Warsaw denied abortion!

I am so very tired of dealing with "choicers" that it makes me want to vomit.

Inside her, was a little baby,...who knew nothing of the reason why it was there...but only knew its mother.

abortion is not "OK" for anyone. I oppose it in all its forms. It is murder.

Yahweh is from the beginning, and He will be for all of eternity. Read the Bible.

Anti-abortion violence is violence committed against individuals and organizations that provide abortion.[1] Incidents of violence have included destruction of property, in the form of vandalism, to crimes against people, including kidnapping, stalking, assault, attempted murder, and murder, to crimes affecting both people and property, including arson and bombings.

ou don't like abortions? So don't have one. Simple.

Of course it didn't know its mother. It didn't know anything: it wasn't capable of thought!

But here's an idea: inside you are two perfectly good kidneys, two perfectly good lungs and two perfectly good corneas, all of which can be transplanted into people who have none. Once you have used your body to give life to people who need it, then you can criticise people who refuse to do the same. You do give blood as often as you medically can, don't you?

Gunslinger, chimpanzee's are highly intelligent animals and also have an acute sense of danger yet we can't murder them. They feel and are one of God's creatures. How can we murder a baby when the woman invariably doesn't have malice aforethought? The foetus doesn't have a sense of danger as it is in the mother's womb and can't see any danger.

As a Christian, you should value God's creatures, true?

that I am here "debating" with a bunch of selfish goons from hell

but people in general who speak in favor of abortion, are selfish cowardly abominable pieces of sh*t, and as stated, their worthless opinions go in the sh*t-dumpster

The real truth is that many legislators from around the world have ruled it to be legal and we should try and at least hear them out

I'm a humanitarian guy who protests stances against the Palestinians and any other oppressed peoples. I would also like to see conceived babies emerge as well-nourished, healthy ones. However, we musn't let that blight our judgements.

Gunslinger, I want you to address these issues:

1) Do you really think that most women have malice aforethought when making the decision to abort?

2) Is it fair and natural to the kid to allow the situation to arise where they must ask their adopted parents who their real parents are? Is it fair to keep that as a secret from them? How would you like to hear that you were a bast*rd child not born out of wedlock and love (as God would have it) but out of a heinous crime such as rape? Depending on the sensitivity of the child, that could lead to infinite torment and a collapse of their identity. After all, the purpose of life is a life of purpose. I don't know about you but part of that purpose involves a rich family life with parents who wanted me and still want me. Their love and support is invaluable and priceless to me. What sentimental feelings has that child born of rape? Does quality of life have no meaning to you??

3) Also, check out www.suicide.org/rape-victims-prone-to-suicide.html. It says that 33% of rape victims are prone to suicide so that's a further danger in and of itself. Wouldn't you want to drop the burden by aborting? The kid will always serve as a harsh reminder by being carried around in her belly.

Another issue, foetal sentience. What awareness does it have of termination?

'Ann Furedi, director of the Birth Control Trust, is more concerned about the psychological impact that this kind of speculation could have on women: 89 per cent of aborted foetuses are less than 12 weeks old, only 1.2 per cent of abortions are carried out when the mother is above 20 weeks pregnant, usually because of foetal abnormality', taken from a brilliant article, http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=102525&secti oncode=264

I surmise that the number of aborted foetuses for raped women would be even higher, between 95-100%.

NOT ONE of the pro-life lobby had any meaningful medical expertise?? Doesn't inspire much confidence!

We both have truths, are mine the same as yours? ;)

Surely the thought of a child growing up knowing he or she was the product of rape is a terrible thing, to say the least. My words could not do justice the all the pain involved in such a situation. But I know of so many people, who God bless them they would adopt a child with any disabilities, and with any background, and have, and continue to. Why? Because they are Christian, and they understand that real and deep love comes from God, and is in spite of all the dirt, filth, and pain that surrounds us as fallen people,...and especially in cases such as this. Real Christian people know and understand God, the fact the God the Father sent His only Son Jesus to die for our filthy disgusting sins, and to cleanse us thereof,...shows truly, that God loves, even who we think is most un-loveable.

The ones that I find the scariest are the extreme pro-lifers who kill doctors.

1) I agree with you that legislators can be clueless and insensitive but that's a matter for society to regulate and all of us have to accept that sb has to represent us and make laws. That doesn't change the fact that they declared it to be legal. This is for society to change through the relevant democratic channels and discussion through the appropriate forums (fora). "How very human the child is"??? Define very human please (it has the human genome of course). You are wrong, it is how very human the unborn child (foetus) not even will be but may be (miscarriages, sorry, it was you who introduced stats against your own case). Let's say 'will likely be'. In the earliest formative stages, zygote-embryo, you are wrong. However, I also accept that it MUST undergo this formative stage to become as we are so that's where I compromise. The problem for anti-abortionists is in seeing that. I know that if sb killed my bro's young baby or my wife's bro's young baby in front of my eyes (because they are tangible and have taken their first breath is the argument of many), I'd see that as infanticide and would be furious. As long as anti-abortionists can see what I'm saying here, I'll be happy. Still, Gunslinger, please don't make inferential leaps and be careful of your definitions/terminology. Things like this hinge on words.

2) You are confusing the militant wing of Hamas with normal, everyday Palestinians who are not aggressive by nature. Anyway, kids should be well-nourished beings.

3) They don't have malice aforethought, right. Therefore, it doesn't fit the definition of murder as you have claimed that abortion is. Wanna try and meet the definition of infanticide then? This is definitional stuff and concerns the nature of crimes. I'll give you the legal definitions as this is my specialism from uni.

4) First off, I don't assume either way if you have considered that point or not. I don't 'think' that at all as I don't know you. You are just a forum user like I at this time. Gunslinger, please don't turn it on its head. I am well aware of the love and support that many adoptive parents provide. That's in no way in question. However, there is no substitute for real parents, right? You didn't address my questions directly at all. Wow, you could be a legislator ;) ;) ;) God gives us all love, yes!

5) Ridiculous, Gunslinger! Suicidal thoughts are the corollary of being raped for many. Rape is the proximate cause and abortion is then restitution. What is a "completed rape"? ....."Murderous social plague"? You have just admitted above that it isn't murder, albeit tacitly. Why on earth are you discussing numbers when I am discussing principle? .....Emotion driven as opposed to robot driven? I'm a human, are you? Are the two, reason and emotion, mutually incompatible? According to you, I don't even feel for the woman anyway but am somehow selfish in addressing practicalities.

6) A guy who is about to be murdered KNOWS he is going to be so, feels fear and has a very acute perception of his existence at that moment. Your ignorance led you, in one dismissive stroke, to wipe out the importance of foetal sentience. Sentience is a core issue and there is a fantastic Star Trek episode where Picard defends Data against the deconstruction wishes of Bruce Maddox, a scientist who wishes to examine him for being only a machine. Data can speak and has broad awareness of implications. Does a foetus? Can a foetus talk? I know that it probably will but it still doesn't have sentient status like a zygote and embryo.

7) Easy answer for me. I don't give a toss what she is concerned about, her stats matter. 89% abort within 12 weeks according to those stats. The remaining ones, well, abortion is not black&white so, without further knowledge of the specifics of those cases, I care not to pass judgement.

8) OK, I'm prepared to admit that my stats were way too high (I only surmised after all) but, based on one source, I am not going to believe that yours are any better. How do I know that those views weren't extracted to serve an agenda? Where is my guarantee?

It stands to reason that many women would get an abortion after rape if they are self respecting individuals.

9) I think you were ignorant as I was referring to that link which you likely didn't even read. Hmm, "in reference to the link 2 paras above" is not clear enough for you??? I wasn't talking about the pro-life lobby as a whole.

10) I thought, firstly, that you'd recognise what wink marks meant. Secondly, that it was taken from a play you no doubt know, Jesus Christ Superstar, in the 39 lashes scene..

So, what is "the real truth"?

M-G, let me answer your question. The pro-life lobby have neatly circumvented that problem. They have introduced laws which expressly forbid the adoptive parents from revealing the identity of the kid's real parents within a given time frame. They want to normalise the relationship with the kid at the expense of, da da, the truth. Is that the "real truth", Gunslinger? LOL Seek and you shall find ;0 ;)

1) Yes but I am talking about rape victims here, not standard abortions and that's where you are going wrong.

2) There are other threads for discussing this conflict

3) So you are reduced to describing abortion as wrong and not murder. Tell me, if you are so convinced that those who conduct abortions should face the coals of hell and severe punishment, what is your answer to the fact that almost every legislator regards murder as one of the most heinous crimes (genocide is worse) known to man but that many countries have legalised abortion? How can that be??

4) "I don't know about you but part of that purpose involves a rich family life with parents who wanted me and still want me. Their love and support is invaluable and priceless to me. What sentimental feelings has that child born of rape? Does quality of life have no meaning to you?". This is what I asked you to comment on. A natural family life without the scourge of being a child spawned of rape hanging over you like a dark clowd.

5) Abortion is murder? Well, prima facie, and according to the definition you pick, it could be. That's why there is a need for consistency. As I said before, malice aforethought is not in the mind of the woman in most cases and you admitted that. Also, there is sufficient flexibility to say that, if the child is likely to have subsequent mental health problems, then that may be enough to get an abortion. Again, back to quality of life but I see your point that we can't pick and choose. We have retarded children and they have as much right to live as others. What would you say if sb went mad and went on a wild campaign to create millions of test tube babies? Would you accept the growth in population?

6) You are repeating yourself. You clearly didn't read my answer where I said that women making that choice is absolutely fine. If they can live with the various consequences then that's their call. Abortion IS restitution as you return it to the position that existed before the rape occurred, i.e the position that should be. A woman devoid of that painful memory. Forgive me if I use my sound logic to conjecture stats as opposed to yours made up by people serving agendas and who knows how such views were obtained, if at all.

7) Again, you just need the humane mind to tell you how trauma works. Nobody should profit from this and I'm not impressed with either your deflection in this way or your reference to 'harping on'. We are dealing with a 14-year old girl and she needs a curator bonis and other professional help. We can't understate that.

8) Sentience is very relevant here and you know it. You are gonna enter the nature Vs nurture debate by saying that who you are is determined at conception? Talk about taking a definitive position by only stating half of the argument. A classic pro-lifer, pent up and ready to ram their nonsense down the throats of others at the expense of rational debate. From the tabula rasa, social factors can play a major part, depending on where you were born and were subsequently raised. Let me shoot you down properly by actually exposing the weakness of your blanket statement (rather than assuming victory based on platitudes). I'll raise it as my next point.

9) You say that who we are is determined at conception, right? Our whole self isn't and that's what makes the collective 'us', the ego and the id etc etc. Without plunging into the abyss that is Nature Vs Nurture, I have 2 words for you, MIDLIFE CRISIS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midlife_crisis, some reading for you as you seem to need it. Who we ARE is determined by factors around us and wikipedia covers the main ones. Also, what about those that become schizophrenic through LSD use or other causes? Those that were normal before I mean. Was that written in the genes too or did set&setting decide it? The environment is key here, not genetics (although I agree that drugs merely trigger the onset of schizophrenia in some). See the complications? I'm prepared to delve into them rather than taking black+white positions. I suggest you start doing the same.

10) I told you that 12 weeks was the critical period and I'm not gonna go round in circles with you on it. At conception, LOL. Where is its birth certificate? Oh, that's a legal measure, sorry. OK, you are guilty of speciesism. A zygote cannot do many things that people can and thus is not personhood. We grow and evolve, it's a matter of degree and not some form of robotic coding. You are thinking of pre-personhood and not personhood.

11) You are putting words in my mouth so I suggest you put a sock in yours. For the last time, I am NOT saying that she is less of a woman for it you howling Harry hoof. I said above that her choice is what matters and is of the utmost importance. In PIFL, the welfare of the child is paramount. How can you make that assessment when the child hasn't even been born yet? That's why it falls back to the woman to decide as an unborn child cannot express a view either way. What "putrid" feelings I ask you? I see the trauma, I see her right to choose, what feelings are you referring to? You clearly don't believe in cleansing and restitution. You are the insincere one for imposing an absolute position which gives rape victims no choice. You are a hypocrite and have just proved it. Do you give the woman a choice or not? I want this answer. If you say yes, that means that you are laying bare the possibility that she will abort and you'll brand her a murderer. If not, then you are denying them a cure for their trauma. You allow them the choice to give birth but not to abort. Wow, that's not a choice from where I'm sitting.

12) Your last para is loose and bears no relation to what I wrote. Just a rant really.

Let me summarise my position, Gunslinger. I am basically anti-abortion (if I were asked to take a side) and don't approve of it because I believe, as a Christian, that life must be allowed to come to fruition. Just as we protect our own in war or against genocide of 'our kind', we must protect that which will be our kind (if all goes well). Therefore, the smooth transition from zygote to embryo to foetus is in our interests so that it becomes a loved child under God. Sometimes, along that road, we encounter death. Just look at the Balkans, the Holocaust or in Rwanda, for example. They nobly fought to preserve their kind but God's Will couldn't preserve life.

Now the clincher. Rape is a special case and you can't deny that. Just look at all the reasons I have given above and consider that she is only 14. Now I ask the most important question which you skipped before. What if your wife or partner told you, upon consummation of marriage, that her main purpose is to have a baby by you. You honour your vows and all goes swimmingly well until, boom, she is raped brutally and this shakes her up very badly. She desperately wants an abortion and prays that she can have a baby by you in the future. Her dream is still alive. What would you do? Spout your spiel or keep her hope alive by honouring her wishes and guiding her through it as an empathetic husband?

1) I disagree. It got there through a heinous crime and we can't accept that. Tell me, are you a Catholic Christian? If so, in a standard abortion case, can you forgive the woman for having an abortion and then confessing her logic to a priest? What function does penance/repentance serve in your eyes??

Here, I've just unearthed this, "It is legitimate for the church to have its dogmas, but these dogmas must not be imposed on society as a whole," he added. From http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/03/11/brazil.rape.abortion/ , a very interesting read.?

The church is but one player, Gunslinger. I could wrangle with my conscience over the issue but I'm glad that he thinks likewise as a devoted Christian. There are many vested interests in abortion and we need to take a rounded and balanced position.

2) It is easier for most to kill without seeing the victim, I agree with you on that. That doesn't make it right but I'm not talking about standard abortion now but abortion for a 14-year old rape victim. A kid if you will. 1973? I'd say that there was a thorough review of the issue and that conventional wisdom changed. Hardly rocket science!

3) Can't you get it through your head the importance of the nuclear family and for a wanted child to be conceived through wedlock? That's normal. Are you against gay marriages btw? That's perceived as a sin, as is sodomy. She didn't plan that child so why should she be forced to bear and raise it? Why should she suffer from being invaded? Iraq has and multiple deaths have resulted from the stirring of the hornet's nest. Proud of that are you? Clown! Again, no malice aforethought and the courts apply legal rules and not God's Law. Let the church condemn and punish as they see fit in accordance with their vision but let the law serves its function/purpose.

4) I can't control what those doctors do so it all boils down to trust that they follow the Hippocrates Oath and Helsinki Principles on ethical conduct. We need trust as humans, wouldn't you agree? Let those doctors be punished accordingly by whatever appropriate standards. Doctors are only human, they can be wrong. My mother often knew what was wrong with her better than her male doctor did. Still, we have entrusted them with responsibilities, one of which is to make the call on abortion. Deal with it!!?

5) I threw a hypothetical at you. If we can mass kill through AIDS (Detrick's own baby) then we can mass create through available science. You answered exactly as I thought. You'd allow all manner of social ills and horrible problems to result from the mass swelling of the population rather than avert the problem when you could. It says a lot about you.

6) My wife pointed out my inaccuracy too. I meant to say physical restitution, sorry. Of course she bears the scars emotionally and I'm fed up with you trying to trip me up on this and say otherwise. From here on in, I say unequivocally that we must always have this in mind. Her welfare is paramount. Physically removed like it never happened, no reference to the emotional aspect which we agree on.

7) As I said in the last round of posts, I DO NOT treat her as a lesser woman. You are just an ignorant buffoon who is reading invisible words as I clearly said that I respect her choice. She is not a lesser woman for choosing life. She evaluates the situation and makes a choice thereof. Oh, I'm not going to tell you again. Stop declaring my position as you see it, read what I write in future. Got it? A few weeks old child experiences trauma? What, read their testimony did you? How did you get the pen and paper in there, Sherlock?

It stands to reason that many women would get an abortion after rape if they are self respecting individuals.

8) A person starts at birth in the eyes of many. That's why we have the development of zygote-embryo-foetus building up to that. Define personhood. What are its essential features? If it not sentient, is it a real human? By the accounts of Glannon, sentience begins at 23-24 weeks,

Let's say that he is wrong and that sentience begins at 12 weeks, 89% of foetuses are aborted by then. By 23-24 weeks, virtually all in all likelihood. You cannot underestimate sentience. If an unborn child doesn't have the sensory awareness necessary to be dubbed sentient, then they are not yet a person.

9) Genetic make-up is one half of the debate and you didn't even address nurture there so what's the sense in debating with you

10) Philosophical, social, environmental and embracing cultural concerns too. What do you mean "is determined" at conception? Nice little language but what are the practical implications of this? That our life is pre-ordained? That we are all in the hands of destiny or fate? That our views will never change because we are programmed through genetic coding? That our intelligence will never develop through travelling and academic endeavour? How about language acquisition, is this another genetic miracle where we automatically speak the language of our parents? The midlife crisis is relevant here. There is "dramatic self doubt". Explain to me how this can be when, according to your developmental curve, we are making constant progress through physiological growth and character formation? When do we fully realise who we are, at conception? LOL That's absurd! Why, when we have known who we are for many years and test ourselves out in many situations, do we suddenly run into self esteem and ego difficulties come 45 or 50?

11) Because many medical practitioners acknowledge 12 weeks as being the crossover to foetus status. There is less scope for saying that it isn't a human at this stage, as opposed to a zygote. As we have seen, though, it isn't classed as sentient. Should we compromise on 18 weeks? This is the time between foetus status and sentience. Again, what is personhood, Gunslinger??

12) Cleansing is important in cases such as dealing with a 14-year old rape victim. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2004/apr/23/health.genderissues, try and see the woman's position in all of this. Women will choose as women will choose.

13) Why would it take "much consideration?" Consideration of what? Regretted and repented? Aha, so if I commit murder but, as a good actor, say 'Oh, I'm very sorry' and I just pop off to the church and say a few choice words, that makes it all ok, does it?

My wife has just called you an insensitive pig and that you should crawl back under your stone. You would do that to your own wife, after being RAPED? Wow, you have just demonstrated that it is YOU with the problem..

You are nothing more than a strict liability advocate who doesn't have the computational and analytical ability to see the bigger picture. The whole family dimension just doesn't count in your eyes, the whole Christian institution of marriage and the sanctity of choice either.

You are offensive to moderate Christians. Tell me, on what date did God 'hand' you those principles? Does repenting clear the murderer of murder? Does regret mean that you can forgive them for their aborting action? If so, why can't you forgive all women who show remorse/regret for their abortive deed? Aren't you bordering on selectivism here? What if all those Catholic Poles who got abortions in the UK asked for penance, what then? They can 'murder', then escape, no?

Does repenting clear the murderer of murder? Does regret mean that you can forgive them for their aborting action? If so, why can't you forgive all women who show remorse/regret for their abortive deed? Aren't you bordering on selectivism here? What if all those Catholic Poles who got abortions in the UK asked for penance, what then? They can 'murder', then escape, no?

Affections or good graces, love too? Isn't Love divine? Didn't God give us his grace, which is unconditional anyway? We can see much evidence of this in the Bible.

You have abandoned your principles anyway by taking a 'criminal' back, right?

The operation did not take place....

1) And what does that repentance involve as Protestants don't go to a priest for confession? To what extent is repentance a mitigating factor? It cannot assoilzie/exonerate the 'criminal' of wrongdoing largely as that would lay a dangerous precedent. ....Keep it out of the courtroom, though. It's a spiritual matter..

You should care about the views of atheists and agnostics in shaping the law. Are they any less of a human being than you or I? Is their input to the democratic process any less valid? If anything, they are less 'charged' on the issue and that could produce a greater degree of fairness rather than serving agendas as those in the abortion business do. Agreed? ....... Fine, invoke civil disobedience concerns. If they reverse injustice then I am all for it. However, you are more likely to be arrested.

The woman so that they have the choice to say only no to abortion? Elaborate please. Your right position is not others right position. There are many vested interests involved, admit it!

4) Hitler got other people to do his bidding. ...Are you gonna further punish the woman by not even offering a choice? Who should be punished and to what degree according to your Moral law of God?

Mirriam-Webster takes a different position, citing upright stance, a large brain and spoken language, none of which are possessed by your 'child'. I can cite many more refuting your case but I won't overload you. I have more strings in the bow.

5) Ok, God's Word says sodomy is an abomination, a sin. What's your word? Have you no independent thought? Do you tell everyone around you to hold on and let you check God's Word every time they have a puzzler or ethical dilemma? Didn't God impute righteousness into Man in your opinion? (are you a Lutheran, a Calvinist or what?) You said above that you would admit your wife back in after repentance. Do you then agree or disagree with the Catholic (RCC) notion of synterisis (a spark of goodness)? Cutting to the chase, Catholics value good works. Isn't confession, in and of itself, a good work in your eyes? If so, why are you a Protestant? I guess you support Total Depravity. What is your take on infused grace?

Unplanned children to be, born of rape, are often put into an invidious predicament. Mendacious is a good word where the identity of their true parents is kept from them. There are just too many counter arguments against your pro-life position.

6) The doctor doesn't compel them most of the time, he talks to them and runs them through the potential repercussions. At the end of the day, he is just a part of the process. It is the woman who seeks the abortion for whatever reason.

7) Self-respecting in the sense of freeing herself of something that she never asked for and exercising her right to do so.... Are you then going to clear up the mess and adopt this unwanted child? Maybe you should rally round your buddies and prepare for this..

8) "Stop the mad scientist?" I thought you were all for science. It is the basis of your whole case. Oh, you are the guy that hand picks scientific appointments, not based on their ability but on how much they support your line of thought. Gotcha!! It's all clear now!

9) I've given a part above about personhood and all the definitions are against you. MORAL philosophers disagree with you. Sentience is directly related to personhood and personhood tests have many prongs. Are you aware of any of them?

Here, 'If we want to go from this to saying that the fetus is also a person, this requires us to show why it it should be regarded as a person (which, as we have seen, is no easy task).' From an excellent source,

http://www.thatreligiousstudieswebsite.com/Ethics/Applied_Ethics/Abort ion/concept_of_personhood_4.php

10) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15820013, early embryos do not qualify for personhood. I suggest you get a hold of this paper. It shows the connection between sentience and personhood. We can have an individual debate on sentience if you wish.

11) 'Unfortunately, there is no consensus of when human personhood starts. People have different beliefs' often they regard their own belief as absolutely true and obvious. Even if there were, there is no agreement on the conditions under which an abortion of that new person should be allowed.' http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_when2.htm

12) http://www.thecitizen.com/node/4488, this sums my opinion up nicely. Give the benefit of the doubt to the foetus in standard abortion cases but know that personhood hasn't been defined to reach broad consensus.

13) If they have no bearing on personhood, what is the use of living? How does a status label preclude all experience which LIFE presents us with externally? Personhood is a human being? Well, I am a human being and I am living and learning different things in life. Did my code dictate that or did my choices dictate that? I was exposed to external stimuli. There are many ifs in life, not strict ways, and if I hadn't met my friend at uni, I wouldn't have gone to Japan etc etc. This was by chance, randomised and not precoded as you would have me believe.

14) Reading into what you are saying, you would never have us move off of the starting blocks. Conception is the golden moment and we should freeze in this moment and not go out into the world and develop ourselves. That's what you are saying. Of course we will always be human, that is axiomatic. Ripe for killing? What, because they doubt? Pff... Who we are can change through time.

16) I understand forgiveness, alright. You take such a firm stance against those 'murderers' and yet you accept a 'murderer' back into your house. If I murdered your wife and blew up your house but then sincerely repented, would you truly forgive me? How many heinous deeds could I get away with? Does repentance have limits? Is it only perceived sincerity and then off the hook? Is it principle or number?

17) You revere marriage yet you'd throw it all away? She's bound to say she's sorry if she wants to salvage the marriage. This is what married partners should try to avoid, 'irretrievable breakdown'. There is a 'crime' left unpunished in your eyes. A heinous one at that. What if all women did the same? In your eyes, unpunished murder across the board.

18) In your beloved Total Depravity Protestant notion, there is the belief that sin is innate to man, that he will sin again and again. You have given women an opt-out clause. A confession can wash away murder, right? Let's be clear, that's what you are saying, right? If so, that's dangerous in that you could have a murderer do his thing and then just confess it all away sincerely. Murderers are of many types, just look at Dexter. Being serious, there are humane murderers according to you. Can you deny this as you regard women who abort as being humane and with no malice aforethought, you've said as much. Still murder in your eyes.

Over to you, Mr Hypocrite :) I'll settle for hippocrate in my case.

No, I don't care to hear the opinions of Atheists and Agnostics in shaping the Law. Someone who has no fear of God and no moral law to direct them cannot be trusted to have anything to do with shaping laws of nations.