[Oblivion437]

Then again, why should anyone be forced to give their skilled labor away for free, or the food they grew/raised and slaughtered out? If you want some, you can pay for it, or someone else can pay for you, but I better not be biting on this thing too (I'm talking about tax dollars) when you come to "Pay" for my food. If you want to take it as revolutionary* thinkers and actors did in the past, you'd damn well better be willing to get past the resistance I'm going to put up.

No one should go hungry. I don't think my position or his advocates starvation or death, but what you have to understand is food doesn't just magically appear, we aren't plants that can just photo-synthesize whatever we need.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone is always paying, the ultimate failure of the Socialist system has been the failure to understand this principle, and it is why every last attempt has fallen apart over the years.

Also, in terms of physique, a fetus doesn't even resemble a baby of human form (or human physiology) until later. The difference between a fetus and a 55-year-old man are numerous. I believe you were saying I had trouble understanding differences (I was being silly in assuming humans are inherently similar on very broad strokes of principle, need and desire) between various things, but you seem to fail to understand quite a bit about the development of the Fetus, the fact that it doesn't even have a human brain until after the point most abortions are performed, yadda yadda yadda...

However, I'm almost entirely against partial birth abortions on principle, but I feel that if it were totally illegalized including extenuating circumstances, minus the serious problem of certain individuals dying because they are forced to give birth, there's the problem that women who want abortions will FIND a way to get one. I'd rather they did it in the sanitary and safe conditions of a clinic than a back-alley abortionist's 'laboratory' or somesuch seedy location. You seriously fail to grasp the concept that illegalization doesn't stop something, all it does is lay out a systematic standard for punishment if you catch someone doing it, and convict them of it. Considering that less than 1/14 of all arrests result in convictions, somebody must be getting away with something they definitely did do.

It's like drug laws, did you know a large portion of the US prison population (enough to swing us above or below most nation's per capita prison populations) is there for nonviolent drug offenses? Considering that all drug users can at most be said to harm themselves in any given situation (barring abuse of others while loaded/stoned/fried/blotto) I see no good reason to outlaw drugs. Repudiate the sentences of nonviolent offenders, legalize the drugs, and BANG a huge problem is fixed.