Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nope.
But the right wing would deny millions and millions of health care if they could, yet they call themselves pro-life. What a fraud
Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
I don’t even think you can make sense of what you just said.Dependency for basic human function IE survival is more than location.Havent you posted this before?Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
The woman who killed her child murdered it. The one who had an abortion removed a fetus.
When you eat scrambled eggs from a fertilized chicken egg, do you say you are eating scrambled eggs or scrambled chicken?
A. So a fetus only differs from a child based on location with respect to the mother? And when it is a “fetus” there is no death involved, only removal?
B. No one ever eats fertilized chicken eggs. Or I should say a large majority never eat fertilized chicken eggs. Maybe if you own chickens with a rooster...but then there’s also no moral quandary there because your also probably the type of person who will eat the chickens when they start slowing with their egg production. So yes it would be scrambled chicken, and that’s not a moral problem when you eat chicken in the first place.
This rhetoric is not only worn out, it is idiotic.
Eight pages of replies and no one has answered the question yet. About par for the course, wouldn't you say?
So, does that mean it's dead before it is born?Once the kid is born, he or she is a living, breathing person apart from the mother. He or she is also a citizen with full constitutional rights and protections.They aren't at the same stage of development. One was born, the other was not.Both babies were at the same stage of development. So why is one murder and the other not murder?Havent you posted this before?Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
The woman who killed her child murdered it. The one who had an abortion removed a fetus.
When you eat scrambled eggs from a fertilized chicken egg, do you say you are eating scrambled eggs or scrambled chicken?
That doesn’t mean they aren’t at the same stage of development. That’s why we have the term pre-mature, because the baby comes before it has reached standard maturity. They are both at the same stages. One with medical complications as in the premature birth, and one with no medical complications.
A unborn fetus cant breath. Cant consume nutrition. Cant do a lot fo things. It is more than "location" It is its life support. Without her doing everythign for it, it will die. In order to do those things on its own, it must be born.I don’t even think you can make sense of what you just said.Dependency for basic human function IE survival is more than location.Havent you posted this before?Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
The woman who killed her child murdered it. The one who had an abortion removed a fetus.
When you eat scrambled eggs from a fertilized chicken egg, do you say you are eating scrambled eggs or scrambled chicken?
A. So a fetus only differs from a child based on location with respect to the mother? And when it is a “fetus” there is no death involved, only removal?
B. No one ever eats fertilized chicken eggs. Or I should say a large majority never eat fertilized chicken eggs. Maybe if you own chickens with a rooster...but then there’s also no moral quandary there because your also probably the type of person who will eat the chickens when they start slowing with their egg production. So yes it would be scrambled chicken, and that’s not a moral problem when you eat chicken in the first place.
This rhetoric is not only worn out, it is idiotic.
I would rather outlaw liberals at 1 week gestation, that way the world would be a better place as the miserable wretches wouldn't be around to FORCE the rest of Us with their misery and poverty...91.5% of abortions were performed at ≤13 weeks’ gestation; a smaller number of abortions (7.2%) were performed at 14–20 weeks’ gestation, and even fewer (1.3%) were performed at ≥21 weeks’ gestation.
Abortion | Data and Statistics | Reproductive Health | CDC
And your ridiculous scenario is about 28 weeks. What is your point? Want to advocate outlawing abortions after 28 weeks? Go for it.
View attachment 169403
Why are you avoiding the question? This is not a matter of scale. It is a simple question. Is there a difference between babies at the same stage of development whether they are inside the womb or not? Is there a difference in killing it inside or outside the womb? Answer the question.Here is a link to a photo of an aborted 28 week old fetus. Take a good look and tell me it is not a person. I dare you.I know. Thats not the same thing, though. The mother alone has the right to decide whether to rid herself of the unborn. Not someone else.A fetus isnt capable until it comes out. Until then, it isnt capable of the most basic human functions. Such as consumption, breathing etc
You can say basic biology defies logic if you want. It makes you look illogical.
Seems most states consider it murder if you kill the 'fetus' when you kill the mother.
man arrested for killing unborn babies - Yahoo Search Results
Redirect Notice
Do you have any idea how many abortions are happening at 28 weeks?
Hint: VERY little.
Give them a break. Basic biology probably stole their girlfriend.Why are you avoiding the question? This is not a matter of scale. It is a simple question. Is there a difference between babies at the same stage of development whether they are inside the womb or not? Is there a difference in killing it inside or outside the womb? Answer the question.Here is a link to a photo of an aborted 28 week old fetus. Take a good look and tell me it is not a person. I dare you.I know. Thats not the same thing, though. The mother alone has the right to decide whether to rid herself of the unborn. Not someone else.Seems most states consider it murder if you kill the 'fetus' when you kill the mother.
man arrested for killing unborn babies - Yahoo Search Results
Redirect Notice
Do you have any idea how many abortions are happening at 28 weeks?
Hint: VERY little.
They are not at the same stage. One is born and can biologically function independently. The other has not and can not.
It could do all of that if it was outside the womb. Which makes it no different than the one that was born. Like I said, your only defense is location. Pathetic.A unborn fetus cant breath. Cant consume nutrition. Cant do a lot fo things. It is more than "location" It is its life support. Without her doing everythign for it, it will die. In order to do those things on its own, it must be born.I don’t even think you can make sense of what you just said.Dependency for basic human function IE survival is more than location.Havent you posted this before?Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
The woman who killed her child murdered it. The one who had an abortion removed a fetus.
When you eat scrambled eggs from a fertilized chicken egg, do you say you are eating scrambled eggs or scrambled chicken?
A. So a fetus only differs from a child based on location with respect to the mother? And when it is a “fetus” there is no death involved, only removal?
B. No one ever eats fertilized chicken eggs. Or I should say a large majority never eat fertilized chicken eggs. Maybe if you own chickens with a rooster...but then there’s also no moral quandary there because your also probably the type of person who will eat the chickens when they start slowing with their egg production. So yes it would be scrambled chicken, and that’s not a moral problem when you eat chicken in the first place.
This rhetoric is not only worn out, it is idiotic.
Its not a "location" that is so stupid.
That’s not at all what our law states, there is a limit to abortion on demand. That would mean you could get an abortion on your due date. If they weren’t protected and afforded rights while in utero, I could go around punching women in the stomach or slipping them abortion pills and only be charged with assault, not murder.Once the kid is born, he or she is a living, breathing person apart from the mother. He or she is also a citizen with full constitutional rights and protections.They aren't at the same stage of development. One was born, the other was not.Both babies were at the same stage of development. So why is one murder and the other not murder?Havent you posted this before?Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
The woman who killed her child murdered it. The one who had an abortion removed a fetus.
When you eat scrambled eggs from a fertilized chicken egg, do you say you are eating scrambled eggs or scrambled chicken?
That doesn’t mean they aren’t at the same stage of development. That’s why we have the term pre-mature, because the baby comes before it has reached standard maturity. They are both at the same stages. One with medical complications as in the premature birth, and one with no medical complications.
Wrong. You just contradicted yourself. The other has not but could, would be more accurate.Why are you avoiding the question? This is not a matter of scale. It is a simple question. Is there a difference between babies at the same stage of development whether they are inside the womb or not? Is there a difference in killing it inside or outside the womb? Answer the question.Here is a link to a photo of an aborted 28 week old fetus. Take a good look and tell me it is not a person. I dare you.I know. Thats not the same thing, though. The mother alone has the right to decide whether to rid herself of the unborn. Not someone else.Seems most states consider it murder if you kill the 'fetus' when you kill the mother.
man arrested for killing unborn babies - Yahoo Search Results
Redirect Notice
Do you have any idea how many abortions are happening at 28 weeks?
Hint: VERY little.
They are not at the same stage. One is born and can biologically function independently. The other has not and can not.
If you're asking a legal question the state where the abortion takes place is critical. In some states it is illegal to have a 28-week abortion. It that makes it murder (I doubt it) or manslaughter or something less I don't know.Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
By the arguments I've seen from the left, an adult on life support is not a person because they cannot live without it. Perhaps we should simply disconnect every one of them.That’s not at all what our law states, there is a limit to abortion on demand. That would mean you could get an abortion on your due date. If they weren’t protected and afforded rights while in utero, I could go around punching women in the stomach or slipping them abortion pills and only be charged with assault, not murder.Once the kid is born, he or she is a living, breathing person apart from the mother. He or she is also a citizen with full constitutional rights and protections.They aren't at the same stage of development. One was born, the other was not.Both babies were at the same stage of development. So why is one murder and the other not murder?Havent you posted this before?
The woman who killed her child murdered it. The one who had an abortion removed a fetus.
When you eat scrambled eggs from a fertilized chicken egg, do you say you are eating scrambled eggs or scrambled chicken?
That doesn’t mean they aren’t at the same stage of development. That’s why we have the term pre-mature, because the baby comes before it has reached standard maturity. They are both at the same stages. One with medical complications as in the premature birth, and one with no medical complications.
Fetuses also breath, a 28 week YO fetus has the ability to breath, though it’s not as capable as a baby carried to term at breathing on its own. Plenty of babies carried to term still have difficulty breathing on the their own. ALL babies are dependent on someone for life, they cannot feed themselves, cannot keep themselves warm, need human contact, do not have a developed immune system, etc.
It could do all of that if it was outside the womb. Which makes it no different than the one that was born. Like I said, your only defense is location. Pathetic.A unborn fetus cant breath. Cant consume nutrition. Cant do a lot fo things. It is more than "location" It is its life support. Without her doing everythign for it, it will die. In order to do those things on its own, it must be born.I don’t even think you can make sense of what you just said.Dependency for basic human function IE survival is more than location.Havent you posted this before?
The woman who killed her child murdered it. The one who had an abortion removed a fetus.
When you eat scrambled eggs from a fertilized chicken egg, do you say you are eating scrambled eggs or scrambled chicken?
A. So a fetus only differs from a child based on location with respect to the mother? And when it is a “fetus” there is no death involved, only removal?
B. No one ever eats fertilized chicken eggs. Or I should say a large majority never eat fertilized chicken eggs. Maybe if you own chickens with a rooster...but then there’s also no moral quandary there because your also probably the type of person who will eat the chickens when they start slowing with their egg production. So yes it would be scrambled chicken, and that’s not a moral problem when you eat chicken in the first place.
This rhetoric is not only worn out, it is idiotic.
Its not a "location" that is so stupid.
It's not a scenario. It actually happened.If you're asking a legal question the state where the abortion takes place is critical. In some states it is illegal to have a 28-week abortion. It that makes it murder (I doubt it) or manslaughter or something less I don't know.Two women get pregnant at the same time. At 28 weeks, one woman has a premature birth. She then kills her baby and goes to prison for murder. The other women kills her baby at 28 weeks, while it's still in the womb. No one says anything about it. No charges are filed. Once again, the babies are the same age. Should the woman who had the abortion also be charged with murder?
I require a simple yes or no answer. There are no alternatives. They are both guilty of murder, or neither one is.
If you're asking a moral comparison that is very different. If the life of the mother is in peril or if the mother judges the child's quality of life too painful then abortion is OK IMHO. Otherwise I don't see why abortion should be an option. It is hard to fathom a women carrying a child/fetus for 28 weeks but doesn't really want it so you scenario doesn't seem realistic.
Let me ask you, are there any circumstances when you'd think an abortion is acceptable?
Life is stranger than fiction but doesn't change my opinion.It's not a scenario. It actually happened.