At that far along in development, it is, without a doubt, life. The baby was a learning, thinking being. A "Woman's Right to Choose" is a bullshit arguement, especially here. She chose to have sex, an act that every 28 year-old knows can lead to pregnancy. And if it comes down to her being so self serving as to not want a scar to save the life/lives of her own children, then that is depraved indifference to life. It's the same as not trying to save someone from drowning because you don't want to get your feet wet.

As far as this "it's only a mass of cell" crap that some of you are spilling out, as Animalman said, so were you at one point. When everyone of you came into this world, all you could do was eat, cry, piss, and shit. Maybe you should have been thrown in a dumpster to see if you could crawl out of it and forage for your own food. After all, if you can't survive on your own then what good are you, right?



And before anyone gets their panties in a bunch, I am only using the logic that has been put out in the opposing arguements here to show the faults in them. I, unlike some on this board, wish no malice against anyone.

whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules.
It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness.
This is true both in politics and on the internet."

Our Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said: "no, the doctor's right. besides, he has seniority."