KCFlyer
Veteran
Oh...but there really AREN'T restrictions on gun ownership. Sure a felon can't own a gun (although many do). How do you know he's a felon? Because he was convicted of a felony. Pretty cut and dried. But what if we want to pass a law restricting gun ownership to a person who poses a threat to himself and others (as was tried in Kansas)? Why...WHO is to determine what constitutes a threat? Better to leave no restrictions than impact a "good guy going thru a divorce" by delaying their purchase of a gun.I sincerely feel for you in that situation, and if the fetus wasn't viable, you really had no good choice to make.
That said, I'm horrified you'd use that situation to try and land a political insult. I can't imagine how that would go over if your wife read it...
And yet, euthanasia and assisted suicide are banned just about everywhere in the US. I guess some forms of choosing who lives and dies are more acceptable than others?...
Fortunately, the founding document for our form of government saw fit to preserve certain freedoms.
You're also wrong about there not being restrictions on gun ownership (which is pretty much the norm with you anytime gun rights come up as a subject...).
For example, convicted felons can't possess or purchase firearms unless they're in one of the few states who allow it (usually 10+ years after their sentence was served or after they've been pardoned). If that's not a restriction, I don't know what is...
Minors can't own them, which is a restriction.
Certain types of guns require permits and permission, which again, is a form of restriction...
Now....is an anencephalic fetus viable. Most every doctor will tell you no, it isn't viable, but pro life groups will show pictures of the cute, brainless child, swaddled in a blanket with a little cap covering it's deformed head and proclaim"it's alive". Then convince their spineless congressmen (and when it comes to abortion, most congressmen lack a spine) so "not viable" will never be determined and any woman facing the situation that my wife and I faced will be forced to carry it to term, or (since my wife was very religious), pray that God takes it soon.
And for what it's worth, we would have WELCOMED a child with Down Syndrome or a physical defect. But there is more (that pro lifers won't want their tax dollars paying for)...my ex sister in law had a microcephalic baby. Brain formed, but barely. It lived, but only because doctors inserted a feeding tube, since it could not suck to feed itself. That baby could not see, hear, feel, suck or be consoled. All he did all day long was cry. ANd it was tough. Fortunately, her husband was a successful surgeon and they could afford nursing care so his wife could have a break. Helluva life. But dang...it was viable. What would a family who was blessed with such a child do? They can't afford the nursing care. Should the government provide it since the pro lifers successfully prevented the woman from terminating the pregnancy?
Last edited: