The only coherent argument at least.

The line as it stands seems to be concerned with viability of the fetus. I had an english professor once who argued that infanticide up to age 5 should be considered late-term abortion and not murder.

Also mindful something that is interesting to me about the topic is the differing language used by both sides. "Fetus" vs "baby" for example. Could at least get one paragraph out of that.

Wtf was his argument. It's not even an infant/infanticide after one year.

thanks, ill google that https://boxden.com/smilies/5QR9Q1Z.png

Probably still way dumber than a dog though and we euthanize them all the time. Castrate em too.

Her.* And yeah pretty much what elph said. And sure, technically it's filicide but that's not the point. Anyway infanticide is still practiced in cultures worldwide we're just still so obsessed with the whole sanctity of life concept that it's too icky to think about. There's a solution for every problem.

Some places kill babies that have defects or something?

yeah or vaginas

Ive only ever heard that argument used for when a fetus requires to live off thr body of the mother not post birth. Pretty stupid argument we all survive indirectly off one another