Review of the movie “Doonby”
In the movie Doonby, Sam Doonby, a 40-something-yr-old drifter (John Schneider), aimlessly wanders into the town of Smithville, Texas, and promptly begins being in the right place at the right time.
Doonby saves his bar owner boss from robbers, stops a deranged psycho from raping and murdering his girlfriend, and pulls a little boy from a shopping cart just before a Mack truck smashes into it.
Doonby is evasive about his origins but is nevertheless an easy-on-the-eyes real nice guy who can even play guitar and sing…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp3xHh-nsAU&feature=related[/youtube]
Semi-Spoiler Alert: Read no further if you want to be kept in total suspense.
The plot begins to thicken when Doonby has a very bad reaction when meeting Laura’s father, an ob-gyn named Dr. Cyrus Reaper (Joe Estevez, younger brother of Martin Sheen).
It turns out Doonby, Reaper, and Reaper’s wife Barbara Ann (Jennifer O’Neill) all hail from the same small town of Parkerville, Louisiana.
Note all the underlined words.
In an interview on Fox News in March, Schneider said Doonby “is It’s a Wonderful Life without the wonderful part.” Pro-lifers should by now be putting the pieces together.
Pro-life heroine Norma McCorvey has an important small role in Doonby, although she’s strangely not listed in the credits. I am guessing her name would be a big red flag to liberals.
Norma and Jennifer are together in one scene, which will be touching to those who know their histories in our movement.
Doonby has a powerful, 4-star plot. That this storyline even made the big screen with major actors agreeing to participate is amazing. Schneider told the Hollywood Reporter:
It’s a real clever script that you can’t quite figure out until the final minutes of the story… But nowadays, it’s the people involved in the projects that attract me more than the projects themselves. There has to be a high level of integrity, passion and skill.”
His more recent film roles have been in Christian-themed fare….
Estevez, likewise, became involved in Doonby because of its message. From WorldNetDaily.com:
“I used to pray every day asking God to send me work,” he said. “And God sent me work. I’ve been pretty steady all my life. Then about 5 years ago, I changed that prayer.
“I thanked God for all the work He sent, but I said, ‘Would You please send work that would have some change for the good in society? So that I could do good work in good movies and make a difference?'”
Estevez believes that his roles in Doonby and other movies over the past couple of years have been godsends.
I just wish Doonby had been better directed, edited, and acted in spots.
For its choppiness and sometimes poor character and plot development, I ultimately have to give Doonby 2-1/2 stars. I still recommend seeing it, but it could have been better.
Nevertheless, despite its shortcomings, Doonby should be a huge conversation starter, and for that I am grateful to all who made it. Here’s the trailer.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSnIbu5ez00[/youtube]
According to producer Mark Joseph, who I met this morning at the Doonby screening in Chicago, the plan is to release Doonby this fall in 500 theatres. They need $4-5 million for printing and advertising to meet that goal.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
So second rate B list actors most people have never heard of in a less than inspiring performance, but it has a anti-choice message…
Anyone else notice that these anti-choice movies never seem to go anywhere… There was “Blood Money” that never went anywhere due to funding issues, The one from last week where you could send in money they needed and you would be named as a producer, and now this one that they are hoping to show in 500 theaters… I bet they never even get close to 500. Strait to DVD is my guess.
Just an observation…
I saw it in February and got to meet John Schneider! Loved the film, but agree with Jill that it could have been better.
It will be screened at the National Right to Life Convention in a couple weeks… everyone going should go see it!
Yawn. Another anti-choice movie. Hardly “Oscar” material.
Biggz – Eduardo was in Bella – a little gem of a movie. Beautifully put together. He is a wonderful actor – and others in the film have been on daytime soaps and other movies.
Juno – Ellen Page, Jennifer Gardner and others – well received, well acted and another pro-life movie.
And there are others. before you classify all pro-life movies as b-rated duds with no star power, you should really look around.
I’d classify Shindler’s list as a pro-life movie, but then again you would say it was not because of it’s a-list actors, oscar nods etc.
haven’t seen it but i can make a guess as to the plot: doonby had been aborted by the ob gyn doc, but his spirit rolls into town to show all the good that could have been brought about if he had been allowed to live.
Well, our resident trolls have dutifully weighed in to share with us their pearls of wisdom. Now that I know they are against this movie then it is surely something worth seeing.
So according to you joyfrom illinois, any movie where peoples lives are saved is pro-life?
Like ‘Die Hard’? Or ‘Inglourious Basterds’?
Not sure that the pros and cons of abortion were forefront in Schindler’s mind when he did what he did.
Nor did I find Juno to be anti-choice.
Biggz, most indie movies that aren’t pro-life in their themes have the same problems with money, distribution, etc., even when well-known actores appear in them. Life is hard without the big Hollywood budget.
So what was your point again?
CC says: June 14, 2011 at 6:28 pm
“Yawn. Another anti-choice movie. Hardly “Oscar” material.”
ChumpChange,
Let me guess.
Your favorite movie is ‘Silence of the Lambs’ or ‘Law Abiding Citizen’.
What’s your favourite ken, Passion of the Christ?
Reality – no. Any movie that helps define the human as dignified and as worth saving is pro-life. Not shoot-em-up for the thrill of it movies. While diehard is fun, it’s not the same as Schindler’s list, where the oppression of the strong oppose the weak and show their un-humane-ness; where courageous individuals fight that system to save others. It’s about valor, virtue and honor. It’s about courage to do the right thing and fight for the underdog. It’s about recognizing that every human has worth, just by being.
It is also about the ultimate sacrifice – the selfless gift of self for another.
As I usually say – love wins. things maybe difficult, gut-wrenching and practically impossible, but with God, there is a way. Love does win. Love big, love all. even in the movies.
Reality,
I saw the movie, “Juno” and it was pro-life because Juno chose life. She refused to abort her baby even though it wasn’t the ideal situation for her as a teenager. She went through the pregnancy and adoption despite its difficulties. A lot of pro-choicers/pro-aborts think “Oh I couldn’t go through pregnancy and give my baby up for adoption, so I’ll abort it so I don’t have to deal with any of that.” Juno stepped above all that and said “No, I’ll give birth and I’ll give the baby up for adoption.” It wasn’t easy for her, but she did it.
She chose life. THAT’S what makes it pro-life. Choosing the life of the baby–even though it’s not the easiest or ideal situation–makes that decision a pro-life decision.
What she did MIT, was make a choice. I applaud what she did. Others don’t want to or feel they can’t, for various reasons. It’s all about choice.
Like I said strait to DVD movies that made pennies at the box office loaded with actors you have never heard of or b-list actors nobody cares about…
I will say that my daughter loved Juno, however none of her friends had ever heard of it nor had her mother and I. My daughter saw that movie as a “what not to do” if you want to stay in school and move onto to college and become an engineer “which is what she wants to do”… not a ringing endorsement of “anti-choice” values…
I was not giving a movie review, I was just asking why all the money problems? Maybe nobody wants to finance these movies for a reason…
Reality says:
June 15, 2011 at 6:38 pm
What she did MIT, was make a choice. I applaud what she did. Others don’t want to or feel they can’t, for various reasons. It’s all about choice.
I didn’t deny she made A choice. What I said was that she chose life. “Choice” has come to mean abortion and she didn’t do that. THAT was my point about why it was pro-life. She chose life.
Biggz,
A young lady can get pregnant, go through the pregnacy, place the baby for adoption and STILL become an engineer if she wants to be an engineer. She does NOT HAVE to abort the baby to become an engineer.
“Choice” may have come to mean abortion for anti-choicers as part of their propaganda campaign MIT, but to pro-choicers it means ‘choice’, with abortion being just one of the choices. What’s important is that she was able to make a choice, she wasn’t forced to either continue the pregnancy or terminate it.
Reality says:
June 15, 2011 at 8:20 pm
“Choice” may have come to mean abortion for anti-choicers as part of their propaganda campaign MIT, but to pro-choicers it means ‘choice’, with abortion being just one of the choices. What’s important is that she was able to make a choice, she wasn’t forced to either continue the pregnancy or terminate it.
More often than not, what I see (based on society, comments, here, and comments on other websites) abortion is praised as “excercising one’s choice” but adoption is downplayed.
Why? Because the minute people hear “choice” they associate it with abortion.
Don’t believe me? There are times I’ve posted about friends and relatives I have who are adopted. The pro-lifers tell me how happy they are. The pro-choicers/pro-aborts ignore it and pretend I didn’t post anything or, if they don’t ignore the post, they rant about how imperfect the adoption system is. This is another reason why I say choice has come to mean abortion.
My post of 9:33 p.m. was a little incoherent. I apologize. I was frustrated and had edited it several times and it didn’t quite come out the way I intended.
I haven’t ever heard of someone NOT associating choice with abortion when it comes to the question of reproduction. I should’ve left it at that.
Mother in Texas – No it is the anti-choice side that equates the word choice to abortion. They also think that we are against CPC’s because they promote adoption and motherhood over abortion. This is simply not true. Our problem with CPC’s is the misleading advertizing they were doing and the incorrect medical information they give out regarding the different abortion procedures and risks.
I have made many statements about adoption and have even volunteered with the Dave Thomas Foundation. We advocate for a woman to have all of her choices protected. We do not promote abortion but rather try to counter act the negative connotation placed on this legal medical procedure by the anti-choice groups.
I truly believe it is a woman decision and the freedom to make her own decisions without restrictions is what empowers women in our society today.
As far as Juno goes, I never said a girl could not be pregnant and continue to work toward her dreams, however you cannot deny that it would be much more difficult while dealing with pregnancy, birth, and possibly parenthood. As far as my daughter goes I mean she sees Juno as a good example of why she should not get pregnant in the first place, not as a good reason to abort any pregnancies. That is a decision that needs to be made on a case by case basis by the parties involved and nobody else.
I want my daughter to have every reproductive option without the government sticking their big nose in her business. If parents do not want their young adults to have an abortion then they should talk to their own kids about it and leave my child out of it. I do not need the government to inform me that my daughter is about to have a medical procedure done… I actually talk to my daughter and give her all the guidance she needs… As a result she talks to me as well, and we trust each other’s intentions even if we do not agree on any particular subject.
So let me sum up here… If your daughter started having sex without telling you, got pregnant without your knowledge, and then went to a women’s health clinic to get an abortion without your consent… THAT IS A PARENTING FAIL!!! Not a legislation fail…
Biggz,
I don’t want to be rude or uncivil. My policy is to try and respectfully disagree with pro-choicers/pro-aborts so that it’s a dialogue rather than a war of words. (I don’t remember which post I’ve said this on, but this isn’t the first time I’ve said it). Hopefully this post still keeps with that policy. If it doesn’t, it’s not because I didn’t try my best.
Anyway, now then…my answer:
Whenever the topic comes up, it’s rare (if ever) your side has anything postive/supportive to say about CPCs or adoption. It’s always what’s WRONG with them rather than anything being RIGHT with them. And even now, your post hasn’t really said anything supportive of adoption, just that you “don’t have a problem with it” which doesn’t say very much about whether or not you think well of it. For all I know you could be one of those who’s like “Oh whatever.” instead of “Yay! Adoption, wow, someone who wants that baby so bad will love that child.” (maybe not those EXACT words, but the feeling behind them) I don’t hear stuff like that too much from the pro-choice/pro-abortion side, but I do hear it loud and clear from pro-lifers. You all have NO problem cheering for women having abortions, but what about the women who adopt? Then it’s just “Oh, well I don’t have a problem with that.” But you don’t necessarily CHEER for the success stories. Mostly I just hear a lot of harping on what’s wrong with the system, rather what’s gone right with it. That’s why I said what I said. I’d love to be wrong, honest I would, but I’m going by what I’ve read here and experienced on other sites and what I’ve seen pollitically, etcetera. I don’t have th evidence that says “Pro-choicers cheer when someone chooses adoption, whether it’s the woman putting her child up for adoption or someone adopting and loving said child.” So, can you see my dilemma? I don’t have anything from your side to counteract all the negativity I’ve heard from your side on the subject and without it, how can I be sure you all seriously DON’T have problems with adoption?
I agree, the system ain’t perfect, but it’s not going to be made perfect by just complaining. The only way a system gets better is if people see the problem and work out ways to correct said problems. Since human beings aren’t perfect it’s likely a system won’t be perfect, but that doesn’t mean we can’t work to improve said system.
In terms of “choice” in conjunction with pregnancy and reproduction: I have yet to hear pro-choicer/pro-abort say the word “choice” in a discussion and NOT mean abortion. I have yet to hear/see it. When I do, I’ll amend what I say, but until that day comes I stand by what I said. “Choice” means abortion. You and Reality may CLAIM it means “all choices’ but really it means “abortion”. The only “choice” y’all are worried about losing is the decision to choose abortion. You’re not worried about the other choices because you know we’re not taking away adoption or raising child but it’s your abortions you’re really concerned about. So let’s call a spade a spade. Don’t dress it up, we all know it’s ABORTION you all don’t want to lose because it’s the only one pro-lifers are trying to get rid of.
Biggz said: So let me sum up here… If your daughter started having sex without telling you, got pregnant without your knowledge, and then went to a women’s health clinic to get an abortion without your consent… THAT IS A PARENTING FAIL!!! Not a legislation fail…
There ARE kids of good parents who still snuck around, did things they KNEW their parents had spoken out against to them without their parents knowing about it. My parents were the type who were very attentive, loving and caring. They took the time to talk to me and each of my siblings about health, sexuality, sexual choices, religion and all the things parents are supposed to sit down and talk to their kids about. They made their positions clear and they made it clear what was right and wrong. They also said they HOPED we made the right decisions. But ultimately it was up to us to make those right decisions. All they could do is lay the ground work. It was possible, even with that good foundation for me or any of my siblings to sneak around or go directly against what they said was right and acceptable.
The point is, all parents can do is their best. If they don’t do their best, then yes, it is a reflection on their parenting, but if they do do their best, if they do sit down and talk to their kids, if they do give them loving, supportive, caring, attentive household, it’s STILL possible for the kids to do things and not tell their parents about it and not make it known. In high school I knew kids who were doing just that and they told me their parents DID sit down and talk to them about those things and everything.
What I should’ve added to my post to Reality on June 16, 2011 at 1:25 a.m. was not only to say I’m sorry for my post being incoherent (and quite possibly uncivil) but also, please forgive me.
Anyway, everyone please excuse the tangent (long story for me to explain why I posted this, so I’m just going to say, it was something I felt I needed to, thanks!)
Take the same message or point of the movie but replace the character of Doonsby (Jesus, Savior) with a character called Doomsby (Hitler, Dalmer) and well, you will see my point about the point of this movie . . . I could never decide for anyone whether or not to terminate or keep an unborn child. Some will want to label me but again….I’m not going to weigh on a woman’s very personal issue that could have come about for many tragic reasons or she could just had an instinct to get that unborn child out of her body or did not want to be kicked out of her village, etc. So, if one wants to make the argument to keep your unborn baby, he might save the world. Then someone else could go so far as to recommend termination because what if that unborn child grows up to commit mass murder or set off a nuclear explosion. We don’t know nor will we know the possibility of an unborn child. It’s dangerous to make either argument for someone else as you can see what if Doonby had been Doomsby. I give the movie some points for surprise, overall crafting and some strong performances and moments. It also had a lot of rocky moments, bad transitions, actory-acting.
“I could never decide for anyone whether or not to terminate or keep an unborn child.”
Now replace every instance of “unborn child” with “2 year old” and see why your position is absolutely wrong and shouldn’t be legal.
xalisae: Where does one draw the line? Don’t eat meat, it kills a living creatures when it’s been proven humans can live without meat? Don’t drive a car because the life of bugs pay the ultimate sacrifice? Don’t have capital punishment because that mass murderer deserves to live? Personally, if an unborn child cannot survive outside the womb and the life of the Mother is not obviously at risk, then well that’s a different issue to me. But a female who finds out she’s 2 months pregnant from having been raped by a family member or (install the individual story of the female here). This movie was not about a 2 year old but it’s a pretty good argument and as you see we can counter-argue probably until the sun sets today. I think most females who choose abortion think about it really hard, consider all the things we have considered and they want that fetus out of them and they are going to do it no matter what even if it means falling down stairs, etc. A lot of people want to use the Bible to say it’s murder and therefore wrong. If the one’s who wrote the Bible really thought that form of terminating life was wrong (and women have always done this btw), then it’s surprising that there are not verses that directly address this issue. So many live in a black and white world but there areas that are gray. Women when finding out they have a surprise pregnancy now currently have a choice: have a baby, put the baby once it’s born up for adoption, or terminate the pregnancy. Yes, I believe women should know fully about all these choices and it’s okay to weigh in on the different choices. But some people make it their life’s mission to condemn doctors providing a safe way to do this because women have always founda way to do this throughout the ages. I still think abortion should be rare yet safely available for those who for whatever individual, personal reason want to terminate a pregnancy. And how blessed we are that you can disagree with me and neither of us is silenced or sent to jail. I disagree with your assessment of my original post because I don’t see them as the same issue. The movie was about how that town wold have been had that character never been born. If Jeffrey Dahlmer had been aborted, all those young men would not have died. Wars klll too. Again, where’s the LIne??? Thanks for listening.
One could also argue that this movie reflects how some people will reject someone because they aren’t from around here or are different even with good things done by them. I mean the fantasy of the movie of how someone had they had the chance at life could have saved 3 people in that town yet that “savior” was rejected and wished away with “I don’t want you to be.” I do not believe in a lot of what is labelled “traditional” or conservative Christianity. The story of Jesus also says that he bucked the status quo at the time. He went against his Jewish faith, he ended up rejecting a lot of what his faith and ancestors had taught him because he found it cruel, not applicable to that time or just a dumb tradition. He believed in love above all else. Really modernize this character and most “Christian churches” probably would not allow him in the door or would try hard to “convert” him. Being thoughtful and considerate of all people no matter what their beliefs but seeing a brighter better way that doesn’t judge, forgiving, merciful and non-discriminatory. Follow the example of his story…question everything you were taught since birth and if it does not have love in it, then perhaps it’s time for something new. Even if that means no longer needing the label “Christian.” Perhaps he would be leading that movement since so much of what I see labelled “Christianity” would be found appalling to the one they called “Christ” I know some will find this offensive and that’s not my intent nor can I control how others will perceive me because though they know me not.
Umm…we’re talking about HUMAN rights. Basic HUMAN rights.
“ Where does one draw the line? Don’t eat meat, it kills a living creatures when it’s been proven humans can live without meat? Don’t drive a car because the life of bugs pay the ultimate sacrifice? Don’t have capital punishment because that mass murderer deserves to live? ”
The only rational argument out of the lot of those was against capital punishment. And I’d say they’re not having their basic human rights violated because they’ve forfeited them due to their actions, even though I’m personally undecided on the death penalty myself. I don’t think it’s optimal as it is though.
”Personally, if an unborn child cannot survive outside the womb and the life of the Mother is not obviously at risk, then well that’s a different issue to me.”
How so? Why?
“But a female who finds out she’s 2 months pregnant from having been raped by a family member or (install the individual story of the female here). This movie was not about a 2 year old but it’s a pretty good argument and as you see we can counter-argue probably until the sun sets today. “
What does the circumstance of the child’s conception have to do with who/what that child is, and whether or not they should have rights under the law? When my father kills someone, would they put ME to death?
Wasn’t about a 2 year old. I know. My point was, every 2 year old spent part of their time as a 2 MONTH old fetus. Same organism. Same entity. Just older. You and I did, too. I wish I would have had basic human rights back then, and I want that still for my future children and grandchildren.
Also, I don’t think we’d be arguing this until sunset. I bet I can win before then.
”I think most females who choose abortion think about it really hard, consider all the things we have considered and they want that fetus out of them and they are going to do it no matter what even if it means falling down stairs, etc.”
So? Why should the amount of thought a person puts into having a family member killed make it any more legal to kill that family member? Why should how badly a person wants a family member dead make it legal to kill that family member? You realize that in court cases, both of those factors typically have a NEGATIVE impact on the outcome for the accused after they supposedly kill someone?
”A lot of people want to use the Bible to say it’s murder and therefore wrong. If the one’s who wrote the Bible really thought that form of terminating life was wrong (and women have always done this btw), then it’s surprising that there are not verses that directly address this issue. ”
Boy, are you EVER barking up the wrong tree with all this crap. I’m not religious. At all. I DEFINITELY would NEVER use the Bible to claim that abortion is murder (it’s not, by definition after all-“murder” is by definition ILLEGAL). I claim it is homicide because that’s what it is, by definition. One person killing another. Period. And it should be prosecuted as a crime. I don’t care how long it’s been going on. Many forms of homicide and abuse are ancient. Doesn’t mean they should be legal.
”So many live in a black and white world but there areas that are gray.”
Yes. Facts, and reality, is black and white. People who say it’s not are usually those with an agenda trying to obfuscate in an attempt to excuse a given abuse.
”Women when finding out they have a surprise pregnancy now currently have a choice: have a baby, put the baby once it’s born up for adoption, or terminate the pregnancy.”
Okay. And I submit that one of those choices shouldn’t be legal, because the woman pays a hitman of sorts to kill her child (or does so herself), and typically, that behavior is illegal, and how old the child is shouldn’t be a relevant factor in whether or not that behavior is legal.
“Yes, I believe women should know fully about all these choices and it’s okay to weigh in on the different choices. But some people make it their life’s mission to condemn doctors providing a safe way to do this because women have always founda way to do this throughout the ages.”
Umm…yeah. I will continue making it my life’s mission to condemn doctors who kill children. I don’t think there should be a “safe, legal” way for one to kill one’s child. Ever. “Oh well, they’re gonna do it anyway, so let the babies have their bottles.” is a crappy attitude to have in regards to just about anything. Statutory rape (even “consensual” sex b/w minors) , bank robbery, drunk driving, other forms of child abuse, what have you.
”And how blessed we are that you can disagree with me and neither of us is silenced or sent to jail. ”
Speak for yourself. Pro-Lifers are sent to jail for reasons like this all the time.
”I disagree with your assessment of my original post because I don’t see them as the same issue. ”
And I’m trying to tell you why you’re wrong. Just like, in the movie the guy showed up as an adult, if he’s an adult, at one point he was a toddler, and before that he was gestating away inside his mother. Same continuum, one life, one entity.
So…would you say that if you could go back in time and strangle baby Dahmer in his crib, that would be acceptable? I would disagree with you there, too.
You’re welcome.
Example 1: Your 13 year old daughter is 2 months pregnant….the doctor says that there is something wrong and to terminate the fetus now or your daughter is going to die by tomorrow. Your daughter says “No, I am not going to kill my unborn child. My mom taught me that it’s a life worth saving” So, the pregnancy is not terminated. Your daughter and her unborn child die the next day. Example #2: A woman who does not even know she is pregnant decides to get a deep tissue massage. The massage causes a miscarriage (this can actually happen). Can ignorance of the “life within” be excused or should she be tried for miscariage? Also, consider that massage (especially deep tissue) is not supposed to be done in the first trimester but the therapist didn’t even know she was pregnant but I guess that makes it manslaughter because he/she was an unintentional hit man. Example #3: Or what if, the therapists asks the client if she is pregnant and she lies and says no and the massage induces a miscarriage. Is the therapist to be tried for involuntary manslaughter?
Who should be prosecuted for all the innocent lives (adult/children/unborn fetus) that were terminated because of the war on terrorism? The President, the person who ordered that individual attack, the soldier(s) who killed those innocent people? If you are going to see strictly in black and white on this issue then miscarriages should all be investigated to make sure that the mother or someone else is not culpable for taking actions that led to the miscarriage whether or not she even knew she was pregnant. Unless you have been inside the body and mind of ever person who has ever been pregnant (whether or not she even knew it), perhaps perhaps a crack of gray can been seen in this issue. Most prochoice people are not pro-abortion. Most Pro-Lifers are not cruel protecters of “what-ifs.” However, if all the people who are hardcore “pro-life” are willing to start sending the message that they are willing to adopt any unwanted pregnancy’s fruition…maybe spend some of their hard-earned dollars pushing this…we would see a down-tick in abortions which most on both sides would be glad to see. I’ve never been or gotten anyone pregnant btw. And I claim neither side as my own. I’m pro-love though.
Your 13 year old daughter is 2 months pregnant….the doctor says that there is something wrong and to terminate the fetus now or your daughter is going to die by tomorrow. Your daughter says “No, I am not going to kill my unborn child. My mom taught me that it’s a life worth saving” So, the pregnancy is not terminated. Your daughter and her unborn child die the next day.
That would be her choice to make, but you’d be hard-pressed to find one person here who wouldn’t urge my daughter to at least save her own life, myself included. That is NOT elective abortion, and that IS NOT what Pro-Life opposes.
A woman who does not even know she is pregnant decides to get a deep tissue massage. The massage causes a miscarriage (this can actually happen). Can ignorance of the “life within” be excused or should she be tried for miscariage? Also, consider that massage (especially deep tissue) is not supposed to be done in the first trimester but the therapist didn’t even know she was pregnant but I guess that makes it manslaughter because he/she was an unintentional hit man.
No woman would ever be “tried for miscarriage”, since MISCARRIAGE is something that happens naturally through accident or disease (in this case, accident). Accidents are rarely if ever prosecuted unless there was gross negligence involved. Without the mother’s advance knowledge of her pregnancy, “negligence” would be impossible.
There is no such thing as an “unintentional hitman”. The whole point of a hitman is intent, dude.
Miscarriages wouldn’t have to be investigated. Only blatant elective abortions would be prosecuted (just like Pre-Roe). Doctors can tell, usually, no investigation required, and if there’s any doubt, they typically err on the side of caution.
War-depends on the circumstances under which the war started, and if you think about it, it’d also depend on who won.
Yes. If only Pro-Lifers adopted all the babies, then no woman would ever get another abortion, and all our cars would run on wishes and good vibes.
I’m Pro-Justice.