Inconsistency of US Law

[loseyourname]

I still think the ?action? taken is what matters and not just in human fetus case, in many other cases as well. For example, you can humanely euthanize an aggressive dog and that?s absolutely fine; however, beating and abusing the same aggressive dog till it dies is a crime and gets both jail time and penalty. And in your case, when husbands/men cause the fetus to die, they do so by physically hurting the mother.

You're talking about a dog here. Odd to note that a dog is not legally considered a person and yet is granted more rights than a human fetus. Either way, the dog you're talking about commited an act that warranted his killing. What has a fetus done to deserve death? In either case, the life being ended is innocent, only in one case, it has rights, in another, it does not.

By the way, stop going off on tangents about stem-cell research and the political debate between pro-lifers and pro-choicers (not talking to CatWoman here). That isn't the point of this thread. Just discuss the inconsistency of legal consideration.