[SampleMan]

I don't make the laws; I don't make the court rulings. I was simply explaining that the logic (about bird eggs) is valid--but you merely disagree with the basic assumptions.

If I own the Bald Eagle, its still a crime to destroy its egg, so I guess I don't agree with the basic assumptions you've made.

If your point is that the law currently views the death of a child by crushing its skull and ripping apart its body as a nonevent if done at the direction of the mother, but a homicide if done against her will, then yes, I follow the analogy, but still not the logic.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

Ethics 101

1)Intention
2)Means
3)*Structure of the Act*
4)End

No one can describe the structure of the act and claim that killing (the taking of life) has not occurred in such situations. The essential nature of what is involved is precisely what liberals like Michael J. are enshrouding in dishonest obscurantism.