Abortion: A Sad Reality

[PoliticalChic]

It is possible for a fetus to die while the mother lives, and it is possible for the mother to die while the fetus lives. This could not be true if the mother and child were simply one person.

"The essential question becomes: 'What does it mean to be an individual?" For only by being an individual can the fetus possess individual rights. When defining a thing, it is necessary to discover the core characteristics-the characteristics without which it would be something else. With human beings, you subtract accidental characteristics such as race, sex, and hair color until you are left with the things which cannot be subtracted without destroying humanness itself. One such characteristic is a rational faculty.

An essential characteristic--indeed, a prerequisite--of considering something to be individual is that it be a discreet entity, a thing in and of itself. Until the point of birth, however, the fetus is not a separate entity; it is a biological aspect of the pregnant woman which possesses the capacity to become discrete. At birth, the fetus is biologically autonomous and is a self-owner with full individual rights. Although it cannot survive without assistance, this does not affect its biological independence; it is simply the dependence that any helpless individual experiences."

Wendy McElroy

.

Poor Wendy.....as wrong as you are.


Still nothing to say about the differences that I've enumerated?




Well then you've earned another spanking:



When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body.

Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.



WHACK!!!

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

A fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks.

But it's still not a 'life'?

This is your dimocrap mentality, people. This is why we had to kill over a quarter million of the motherfuckers in the Civil War.

Same mentality. Same, exact mentality. Nee-groes ain't human like you and me. They're property.

Few women are having abortions at week 20, and when they do, it's usually for a damned good medical reason.

So that argument really doesn't fly with me.

Less than 2% occur after 20 weeks.

 

[NYcarbineer]

At what age does a child outside the womb remain "viable" without the need of another human being? 4,5,6?

Up to what age may we kill them for being in need of another for sustenance?

Oh maybe you mean "breathing" on its own- not actual viability-viability- but independent breathing. But that's just silly -every human being goes through the fetal stage and you do know that in this stage you don't breathe... The fetus is exchanging gases and is very viable and capable of doing this. It has set up its own circulatory system to be compatible with its mother's. They both involuntarily, but are scientifically destined to- exchange gases via diffusion.

The fetus becomes viable the moment it attaches to the uterus. At this point the fetal human IS viable- it is alive. Medical abortions can kill it- But location should never be an excuse to kill another human being.

Fetuses aren't people. Sorry.

But this is a pretty silly argument. If you could take the fetus out of the woman it's in and put it inside a dumb-ass bible thumping moron who can't mind his own fucking business, then you might have an argument.

It's one thing to say you should take care of a child, it's another to say, YOU MUST take care of this child whether you want to or not.

You see, this is what you guys never get to. Exactly how do you enforce your policy once you make it? Are you going to send pregnant women to jail for having abortions? Or even thinking about having one?

I posted on page 17 a recounting of how the dictator of Romania tried to do exactly that, and failed miserably. Birth rates actually DROPPED.

This is not Romania. Try again.

Prior to Roe v. Wade, the abortionist was jailed, not the mother. This has already been explained, so I don't know where you got the idea it has not been.

Why wouldn't the mother be jailed?

 

[NYcarbineer]

At what age does a child outside the womb remain "viable" without the need of another human being? 4,5,6?

Up to what age may we kill them for being in need of another for sustenance?

Oh maybe you mean "breathing" on its own- not actual viability-viability- but independent breathing. But that's just silly -every human being goes through the fetal stage and you do know that in this stage you don't breathe... The fetus is exchanging gases and is very viable and capable of doing this. It has set up its own circulatory system to be compatible with its mother's. They both involuntarily, but are scientifically destined to- exchange gases via diffusion.

The fetus becomes viable the moment it attaches to the uterus. At this point the fetal human IS viable- it is alive. Medical abortions can kill it- But location should never be an excuse to kill another human being.

Fetuses aren't people. Sorry.

But this is a pretty silly argument. If you could take the fetus out of the woman it's in and put it inside a dumb-ass bible thumping moron who can't mind his own fucking business, then you might have an argument.

It's one thing to say you should take care of a child, it's another to say, YOU MUST take care of this child whether you want to or not.

You see, this is what you guys never get to. Exactly how do you enforce your policy once you make it? Are you going to send pregnant women to jail for having abortions? Or even thinking about having one?

I posted on page 17 a recounting of how the dictator of Romania tried to do exactly that, and failed miserably. Birth rates actually DROPPED.

This is not Romania. Try again.

Prior to Roe v. Wade, the abortionist was jailed, not the mother. This has already been explained, so I don't know where you got the idea it has not been.

France's last execution of a woman for having an abortion occurred in the 1940's.

 

[Contumacious]

When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body.

Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.

Neurokinin B is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes in order to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.

HIV uses the same principle.

Is the woman a criminal for killing parasites and viruses?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

 

[JoeB131]

[quo

This is not Romania. Try again.

Prior to Roe v. Wade, the abortionist was jailed, not the mother. This has already been explained, so I don't know where you got the idea it has not been.

The only time that abortionists got jailed is when they screwed up and injured or killed a patient.

The ones who knew what they were doing never did.

For instance, Dr. Ruth Barnett performed 41,000 abortions between 1919 and 1969. She didn't get her first conviction for it until the 1950's, and even then, it was a slap on the wrist.

And this was before you had 40 years of abortion being an accepted practice.

 

[TemplarKormac]

When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body.

Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.

Neurokinin B is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes in order to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.

HIV uses the same principle.

Is the woman a criminal for killing parasites and viruses?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

Seriously? Is that it? That is a big fat red herring, a non sequitur. The fetus is not a parasite. It is a human being in the process of development. The fact that the developing fetus must emit such a chemical to avoid rejection means that it isn't part of the woman's body. That is biologically impossible. The fact that cell division is initiated by the male spermatozoa means that the woman is the ignition, not the key. The fact that her immune system reacts by killing the majority of the sperm before they get to the uterine wall explains why the embryo emits Neurokinin B to avoid rejection by the same process.

 

[Contumacious]

When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body.

Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.

Neurokinin B is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes in order to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.

HIV uses the same principle.

Is the woman a criminal for killing parasites and viruses?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

Seriously? Is that it? That is a big fat red herring, a non sequitur. The fetus is not a parasite. Deal with it.

Parasite

Definition Biology

noun, plural: parasites

An organism that obtains nourishment and shelter on another organism.

.

 

[Dragonlady]

I've simply proven that abortions take another human being's life.

You've haven't proven anything other than your unfailing belief in your own importance.

A fetus is not a human being, it is a potential human being. A lot can happen to a fetus on the way to becoming a human being which is why women have so many miscarriages. There is basis in religion or at law for considering a fetus to be a human being. This is a construct on the part of those who wish to curtail women's freedom to determine her own path in life and make her a slave to her biology.

Those with any intellectual capacity can see that fetal rights are being used by those with an agenda to control women's sexuality. Countries which genuine care about the babies being aborted, don't restrict abortion, they assist women in chosing to carry those babies to term. As a result, they have lower rates of abortion than the US.

The American way is to make it difficult to obtain abortion, but not to provide maternity leave, or to prevent women who become pregnant, from being fired.

 

[Contumacious]

I've simply proven that abortions take another human being's life.

You've haven't proven anything other than your unfailing belief in your own importance.

A fetus is not a human being, it is a potential human being. A lot can happen to a fetus on the way to becoming a human being which is why women have so many miscarriages. There is basis in religion or at law for considering a fetus to be a human being. This is a construct on the part of those who wish to curtail women's freedom to determine her own path in life and make her a slave to her biology.

Those with any intellectual capacity can see that fetal rights are being used by those with an agenda to control women's sexuality. Countries which genuine care about the babies being aborted, don't restrict abortion, they assist women in chosing to carry those babies to term. As a result, they have lower rates of abortion than the US.

The American way is to make it difficult to obtain abortion, but not to provide maternity leave, or to prevent women who become pregnant, from being fired.

Bingo.

BTW, what do you think about Rob Ford? Are the citizens of Toronto going to abort him?

.

.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Neurokinin B is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes in order to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.

HIV uses the same principle.

Is the woman a criminal for killing parasites and viruses?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

Seriously? Is that it? That is a big fat red herring, a non sequitur. The fetus is not a parasite. Deal with it.

Parasite

Definition Biology

noun, plural: parasites

An organism that obtains nourishment and shelter on another organism.

.

Some parasites derive nutrition from the host at the host's expense, in some cases, killing the host. And right now, you are acknowledging that the fetus is an organism. You're killing your own argument.

This is how a biologist would put it:

A parasite is anything that receives a benefit by causing harm to its host. So we really need to ask if the mother is being harmed. Well, she needs to eat more, which can be a problem when resources are limited. She gets heavy, which means that she's less likely to be able to run from danger.

However, she is dedicating her own body to the health of her baby. Because the baby shares 50% of its genes with its mother, by having a healthy baby, the mother is really increasing her fitness in the long run. Before there was the baby, the mother had 100% of her genes in the environment. After the baby, there will be 150%. And a healthy baby will go on to produce its own babies, in theory.

So, evolution has favored this high level of parental care because in the long run, mothers increase their own fitness even through pregnancy might be tough.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I've simply proven that abortions take another human being's life.

You've haven't proven anything other than your unfailing belief in your own importance.

A fetus is not a human being, it is a potential human being. A lot can happen to a fetus on the way to becoming a human being which is why women have so many miscarriages. There is basis in religion or at law for considering a fetus to be a human being. This is a construct on the part of those who wish to curtail women's freedom to determine her own path in life and make her a slave to her biology.

Those with any intellectual capacity can see that fetal rights are being used by those with an agenda to control women's sexuality. Countries which genuine care about the babies being aborted, don't restrict abortion, they assist women in chosing to carry those babies to term. As a result, they have lower rates of abortion than the US.

The American way is to make it difficult to obtain abortion, but not to provide maternity leave, or to prevent women who become pregnant, from being fired.

Oh so suddenly now the fetus has rights? Do I hear a contradiction coming on?

 

[Mac1958]

Nope.

Life would indicate viability outside the woman's body.

Which in most cases, is simply not the case, at least not until the third trimester.

Well, I'll give you credit, that's the first time I've gotten an answer to that question.

So, just to be sure, you're saying that a fetus, arms and legs moving, brain functioning, DNA-specific, is not human life.

Is that correct?

.

Can't live outside a woman's body, it's not "life". This is the standard the Court applied in Roe, and it's a pretty good one.

Well, ya got me, I don't know how to respond. A fetus, arms and legs moving, brain functioning, DNA-specific, is not life. I was expecting some kind of spin, but I must admit I wasn't expecting abject denial.

Okay, thanks, nowhere else to take this one.

.

 

[Contumacious]

Seriously? Is that it? That is a big fat red herring, a non sequitur. The fetus is not a parasite. Deal with it.

Parasite

Definition Biology

noun, plural: parasites

An organism that obtains nourishment and shelter on another organism.

.

Some parasites derive nutrition from the host at the host's expense, in some cases, killing the host. A parasite is anything that receives a benefit by causing harm to its host. So we really need to ask if the mother is being harmed.]

OK Vernon

The causing harm to the fetus is not in the biological definition so its not a necessity.

But the woman wants the parasitic relationship ended. So your question has been answered.

'nuff said.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Nope.

Life would indicate viability outside the woman's body.

Which in most cases, is simply not the case, at least not until the third trimester.

At what age does a child outside the womb remain "viable" without the need of another human being? 4,5,6?

Up to what age may we kill them for being in need of another for sustenance?

Oh maybe you mean "breathing" on its own- not actual viability-viability- but independent breathing. But that's just silly -every human being goes through the fetal stage and you do know that in this stage you don't breathe... The fetus is exchanging gases and is very viable and capable of doing this. It has set up its own circulatory system to be compatible with its mother's. They both involuntarily, but are scientifically destined to- exchange gases via diffusion.

The fetus becomes viable the moment it attaches to the uterus. At this point the fetal human IS viable- it is alive. Medical abortions can kill it- But location should never be an excuse to kill another human being.

Fetuses aren't people. Sorry.

But this is a pretty silly argument. If you could take the fetus out of the woman it's in and put it inside a dumb-ass bible thumping moron who can't mind his own fucking business, then you might have an argument.

It's one thing to say you should take care of a child, it's another to say, YOU MUST take care of this child whether you want to or not.

You see, this is what you guys never get to. Exactly how do you enforce your policy once you make it? Are you going to send pregnant women to jail for having abortions? Or even thinking about having one?

I posted on page 17 a recounting of how the dictator of Romania tried to do exactly that, and failed miserably. Birth rates actually DROPPED.

They never get to it for a reason: because they have no desire to end abortion, they have only the desire to make it illegal, and by doing so enhance the authority of the state to what they perceive to be their political advantage. It’s about the social conservative obsession with legislating morality, to seek to impose the social right’s subjective religious beliefs on society as a whole in order to make those beliefs seem legitimate.

Indeed, as some bizarre consequence of their perverted moral dogma, the social right actually believes that to ‘stand by’ and ‘do nothing’ with regard to abortion is to ‘condone’ the practice, and those who stand by and do nothing are just as ‘guilty’ as the woman ‘killing her baby.’

Hence the errant demagoguery by the social right, the hyperbole about embryos being ‘persons,’ while always refusing to acknowledge the civil liberties of the pregnant woman who alone is subject to the intrusive power of the state.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Parasite

Definition Biology

noun, plural: parasites

An organism that obtains nourishment and shelter on another organism.

.

Some parasites derive nutrition from the host at the host's expense, in some cases, killing the host. A parasite is anything that receives a benefit by causing harm to its host. So we really need to ask if the mother is being harmed.]

OK Vernon

The causing harm to the fetus is not in the biological definition so its not a necessity.

But the woman wants the parasitic relationship ended. So your question has been answered.

'nuff said.

You're a mess man, absolutely hilarious. You have no way to argue me, yet you insist on doing so. You're meandering. First, "the fetus is part of her body" then when that was debunked, you said "Rob Ford needs to be aborted!" Now you say "the woman wants this parasitic relationship ended." First, it isn't a relationship, it's a biological process brought on by complex mechanisms and chemical interactions, second, you don't know what the woman wants. So stop acting like you do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body.

Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.

Neurokinin B is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes in order to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.

HIV uses the same principle.

Is the woman a criminal for killing parasites and viruses?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

So....your dumb answer is that a human baby is equivalent to a virus?



Before you post like this again, you should consider asking yourself: Do I really want the word ‘moron’ in my obituary?”

 

[Contumacious]

Some parasites derive nutrition from the host at the host's expense, in some cases, killing the host. A parasite is anything that receives a benefit by causing harm to its host. So we really need to ask if the mother is being harmed.]

OK Vernon

The causing harm to the fetus is not in the biological definition so its not a necessity.

But the woman wants the parasitic relationship ended. So your question has been answered.

'nuff said.

You're a mess man, absolutely hilarious. You have no way to argue me, yet you insist on doing so. You're meandering. First, "the fetus is part of her body" then when that was debunked, you said "Rob Ford needs to be aborted!" Now you say "the woman wants this parasitic relationship ended." First, it isn't a relationship, it's a biological process brought on by complex mechanisms and chemical interactions, second, you don't know what the woman wants. So stop acting like you do.

The woman is at an A-B-O-R-T-I-O-N clinic paying $500.00 dollars to have the clump of cells removed but no one at the Clinic knows what the woman wants.

So what are they supposed to do?

A) perform the abortion

or

B) call a member of the American Taliban to change her mind


decisions, decisions, decisions..............

.

 

[Contumacious]

When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body.

Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.

Neurokinin B is the same mechanism used by parasitic nematodes in order to avoid detection by the immune system of their host.

HIV uses the same principle.

Is the woman a criminal for killing parasites and viruses?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

So....your dumb answer is that a human baby is equivalent to a virus?”

By golly you gotit.

I can not believe that some one said earlier that you couldn't handle the truth.


"Here Lies The Pillsbury Dough Boy. He will rise again."

.

.

 

[Vandalshandle]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk]Every Sperm is Sacred - YouTube[/ame]