By your reasoning: If the people delegate enough of their power to the government to forbid prostitution, murder, and robbery, they have delegated enough of their power to the government to do anything.
If you determine abortion up to the 9th month is not murder because the body has no soul until it takes it’s first breath, then the government which is already separating from our Judeo Christian foundation, can use atheism to make evil laws for the good of the human soul-less race and planet earth.
You’ve declared unborn babies have no soul based on your personal belief and then use that belief to justify abortion. The majority of Americans disagree. And since there is no proof of soul to satisfy un-believers the law should err on the side of the unborn baby. It is a slippery slope from first-movement, to first-breath, to first-steps, to first-words. At what point is the newborn infant fully human and deserving of protection under the law? You and Obama say first breath. In many Godless nation’s it’s after first breath.
carmody wrote:
“You’ve declared unborn babies have no soul based on your personal belief and then use that belief to justify abortion.”
I’ve done no such thing. The burden on a person using religious premises to outlaw abortion is to prove by that a soul is present. Whether or not a majority interprets their religion’s scripture or church fathers as supporting their view, those who disagree should not be subject to the tyranny of the majority. Rights are individual, not collective.
You don’t want to have an abortion you have the right not to have one. The individual conscience of someone who disagrees with you should have no less standing under any theory of human rights.
Your right to decide a fetus is human rests only with you and your life. Your opinion is binding on no one else.