Dismemberment abortion ban sent to WV Governors desk

[Weatherman2020]

Oh, and another thing: you do not legally own your body.

You can't sell your body organs.

You can't ask a doctor to amputate a limb if there is no medical reason.

It is illegal to commit suicide.

In most states, you can't ask a doctor to kill you or assist in your suicide.

Assisted suicide is legal, you also have the right to refuse life saving treatment or medicine.
Suicide is only illegal when a healthy person fail, but mental health is a considering factor, so is drug over dose

I'm not going to argue with ignorance. The only accurate statement you said was that patients have a right to refuse life saving treatment or medicine.

Assisted suicide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Leftist love death.

 

[Blackrook]

Assisted suicide is legal in four states.

 

[Coyote]

Go back to school, 24 weeks is nt 9 months.

You are trying to put words in my mouth. At nine months she can give birth

If you are choosing an abortion for personal reason, you have up to 24 weeks in some states.
Anything after is for medical reason.
By six month of considering the future, she should have made up her mind.

You can decide on time and jumping all over the place. Each situation and each individual woman is different, no one shoe fits all. This is why it should not be legislated, but a private decision between doctor and patient.

The reason they abort after 24 weeks is because the treatment would kill the fetus, and toxins of the dead fetus would compromise her system and effect the treatment. Removed or aborted will be discussed by the doctor. There would be may factors to consider.

Sorry we are no lego people that one part can be removed, put on the side and put back later, or not.

One size, one rule, one options does not fit all.

It is her right, her body, her decision. Each woman has to consider her own life and live her own life, alone or with someone.
Not every woman would fit what you think she should be any more than all women could follow sharia or other beliefs.

Freedom to choose, where you live, how you live, where you work, what you do, even when to have a family. No one should take these away.

OH, SO NOW YOU WANT TO TELL WOMEN THEY DONT OWN THEIR OWN WOMBS!
Hypocrite evildoer.

??????????????????????????????
You have reading problem or just like creating your fiction?
Her body her choice. Why would I want to take any ones womb unless she had a problem or reason to have a doctor remove it?

She has the right to decide, not you.
I'm not taking anything away from her. I'm against letting anyone take her freedom of choice or to choose her options for a medical procedure. She has the choice not to share her womb with an unwanted fetus, if she wants to.

There you go again, supporting tearing off the limbs of a 9 month old fetus before its born.

You're a sick freak.

If you are getting a D&C the fetus already is dead. The procedure just removes the dead tissue.

after 24 weeks if you have a procedure, the fetus is still born

Pick a position. Either a woman has total control of her womb or she does not.
Does it thrill you to murder babies? Make you sexually excited?

They have names for people like you.

Kind strange that you find abortion sexually exciting but to each their own I suppose.

 

[Coyote]

Assisted suicide is legal in four states.

Legal being the pertinant term.

 

[Weatherman2020]

If the child is wanted, the parents can press charges. If it's not, then no...it's not murder.

Great. The value of human beings is based upon the mood of a mother at the moment.

Pure evil.

 

[Coyote]

If the child is wanted, the parents can press charges. If it's not, then no...it's not murder.

Great. The value of human beings is based upon the mood of a mother at the moment.

Pure evil.

It's the way the law works - you are the one quoting law.

Your only interest seems to be in forcing the mother to carry the pregnancy.

 

[Weatherman2020]

If the child is wanted, the parents can press charges. If it's not, then no...it's not murder.

Great. The value of human beings is based upon the mood of a mother at the moment.

Pure evil.

It's the way the law works - you are the one quoting law.

Your only interest seems to be in forcing the mother to carry the pregnancy.

Says the freak who says a fetus has no status at 9 months and can be murdered.

 

[aris2chat]

I'm supporting a womans right to control her body and make her own choices.
Legally it is her body. The fetus does not have a status till it is actually born, in some cases there are "limited" recognition after six months but it is not yet a person/citizen.

You're the one all over the place. I said you were for abortions at 9 months, you called me a liar, then bingo here you are again supporting abortions at 9 months.

You are a liar. A fetus is a human being BEFORE it is born. Law and morality say so.

No. She's totally honest.

A fetus has no STATUS until it's born. Read what she wrote.

9 months, it's a birth.

Oh really. So people are in prison for murder for killing a child before it is born is what in your alternate universe?

If she is in prison, it is court matter. You think if she wanted she could not abort?
Even if she was to give birth the might be removed immediately or she might have a few month before it to removed from the jail.

Desperation has made you come up with wild hypothetical?

If she is earlier than 24 weeks she probably has the right to abort. There could be many extenuating factors including the prison and the state and what their policies are.

The subject was still a D&C at 24 weeks, not murders in prison

Abortion under the law is not murder, if the child is alive after birth and she kills it, it can be murder, but also has extenuating circumstances.

 

[Blackrook]

The two sides of this debate aren't even talking about the same things.

 

[Coyote]

If the child is wanted, the parents can press charges. If it's not, then no...it's not murder.

Great. The value of human beings is based upon the mood of a mother at the moment.

Pure evil.

It's the way the law works - you are the one quoting law.

Your only interest seems to be in forcing the mother to carry the pregnancy.

Says the freak who says a fetus has no status at 9 months and can be murdered.

You're good at making shit up

 

[aris2chat]

If the child is wanted, the parents can press charges. If it's not, then no...it's not murder.

Great. The value of human beings is based upon the mood of a mother at the moment.

Pure evil.

It's the way the law works - you are the one quoting law.

Your only interest seems to be in forcing the mother to carry the pregnancy.

Says the freak who says a fetus has no status at 9 months and can be murdered.

Go for a walk or have a cup of tea, get your eyes checked. Your spring is wound to tight. You reading things into the post that is not there.

Assuming facts not in evidence.

 

[aris2chat]

So....is a woman on bc pills going to be sent to prison for murder in your universe?

People can try in vitro and if they want they can have the frozen egg or embryos destroyed.
Eggs and sperm can also be donated.

 

[aris2chat]

Oh, and another thing: you do not legally own your body.

You can't sell your body organs.

You can't ask a doctor to amputate a limb if there is no medical reason.

It is illegal to commit suicide.

In most states, you can't ask a doctor to kill you or assist in your suicide.

Assisted suicide is legal, you also have the right to refuse life saving treatment or medicine.
Suicide is only illegal when a healthy person fail, but mental health is a considering factor, so is drug over dose

I'm not going to argue with ignorance. The only accurate statement you said was that patients have a right to refuse life saving treatment or medicine.

Assisted suicide is legal.

 

[aris2chat]

If the child is wanted, the parents can press charges. If it's not, then no...it's not murder.

Great. The value of human beings is based upon the mood of a mother at the moment.

Pure evil.

You imposing a religion judgement on what is legal. Not everyone shares your faith.
Religion should have no place in the law.

You are not god, so you don't get the right to judge now or in the next life, if there is such a thing

 

[aris2chat]

So....is a woman on bc pills going to be sent to prison for murder in your universe?

Your the moonbat saying you can kill a fetus at 9 months.

You just fell of your rocker.
You need a break to get some perspective. You're having a separate conversation in your head.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear aris2chat
A. I agree with keeping beliefs out of govt.
B. Normally, "prochoice' if kept NEUTRAL would be the equivalent of letting all beliefs be treated equally and kept out of govt

C. HOWEVER because govt funding and protection is given to abortion then this is NOT NEUTRAL.

You can try to separate the funding, but the fact that govt endorses it makes it ESTABLISHING A BELIEF.

So you are contradicting your own argument by only protecting PROCHOICE beliefs from PROLIFE,
but not vice versa and not protecting PROLIFE beliefs from PROCHOICE being endorsed by govt.

Same with gay marriage

Same with health care through govt.

Those aren't neutral either when govt starts endorsing and protecting these as institutions.

Again, I AGREE with you that religious beliefs should be kept out of govt.

The problem is the secular beliefs and political beliefs are not treated the same
way and kept out of govt as religious beliefs should be.

So that isn't NEUTRAL and it isn't EQUAL.

==========================

o

So the fetus is alive? They should charge the fake doctors and the so called mothers with murder.

It is a woman's right and they simply make sure there is not heart beat so their is no pain or sensation.
The removal is basically the same idea and a D&C, which is common enough when the body does not release all waste each month. There are a few options but the lining is removed.
The idea of ripping a living fetus apart is incorrect. Nor can something already dead bleed to death.

Religion should not be apart of anti-abortion reason since not every one is of the same faith or more particularly of the same church or synagogue. Some women might be atheist and don't believe in the religious that attempt to impose their faith on other people. They have no right to take a woman's right or free choice from her.
For home abortions all those interfering people have no right to even know what happens.

As far as government funding, government down not pay for abortions except in time of rape. It is not yours, any church or organization and the governments business. It is a matter between the patient and the doctor. Now it is a matter of a phone call or email order and not hands of any doctor is involved. After the first week, she requires only a blood test and ultra sound or place the order which she takes herself at home.

In the case of deformed of brain damaged, it is a mercy rather than make an infant die a horrible death. In the case of mother's medical treatment, always, always the doctor will work to save the mother first if possible. The fetus is removed while so she can be treated. To remove after treatment begins risk infection and other complication while the immune system is compromised which could mean her death.

No one should be forced to carry and give birth against their will or if it mean endangering their health.

The woman's body, the woman's choice.

Ending a pregnancy is permitted in the religious text. The know herbs used to brew the potions are for the most part bitter, the text refers to them as bitter water which is given to the women.

In most cases the woman can give birth later on. Women who get chemo are often given the option to save their eggs in case they are all killed.

If someone objects on moral ground, they should not get an abortion, but they have no right to force their beliefs on others.

All types of exaggerations and lies used to make those not involved that somehow the fetus has any feeling at all in the process. They create imagery of butchery and brutality when that is not the case. A D&C is not a pleasant procedure, but the discomfort goes away quickly enough. It is just tissue and blood that would otherwise become toxic to the woman if not removed. If the body does not expel it naturally then the doctor needs to remove it with one of a few procedures.

If a woman does not want to be pregnant she has shitloads of options to deal with it by natural means or the day after pill. No one else has to be involved or help pay for another person to destroy a child in her womb. Its barbaric what abortion doctors do and even more barbaric to use aborted fetus cells that have been cloned in food products without ever fully identifying that is what they are doing.

She has a legal right for an abortion if she so choose. It is her body.

Her medical and life choices should never be open to you or anyone else.

You have no right to judge her or force her to follow your will

You should never even be aware of her choice.

Dear aris2chat
by the same token,
neither should you nor I impose a public policy that conflicts with the sacred beliefs of others.

There is harm caused on both sides, of either abortion that causes harm and is a compromise,
and harm in forcing anyone to do something against their will or beliefs, either way.

There is no way to get around this without violating someone's beliefs, because
induced abortion is not natural.

So the only way to agree is to PREVENT abortion, so we never have to debate that.
By preventing pregnancy, this issue does not have to come up.

And if you think pregnancy can't be prevented, think again.
The acts of sex leading to pregnancy are either forced by a person by rape,
or it is consensual.

There is no such thing as an accidental pregnancy unless
the sex is truly accidental and not the conscious choice of either party.

That is where we might reach agreement on focusing on prevention.

Because people's beliefs about right to life and right to choose cannot be forced to change
by govt, this issue is not going to be resolved by outvoted, outnumbering, or overruling one side by the other.

Only by preventing unwanted pregnancy and abortion 100% by free choice
are you going to end the debate, by preventing abortion from ever having to be considered in the first place.
Then we can agree, by free choice, and not get into endless arguments
about which side is imposing their beliefs politically -- they both are.

So for there to be equal representation and protection of both sides' viewpoints,
it is clear that abortion must be prevented. otherwise the people will never agree.
The prochoice people will never agree to laws that ban abortion and force women
already in compromised situations to suffer disproportionately after the fact, when
it affects the women more than the men. The prolife people who believe that abortion
is deliberate killing and murder will never agree that
abortion is an acceptable compromise.

both sides agree the ideal is to prevent abortion in the first place.
If we agree to focus there, we can eventually eliminate this entire problem.

one person's church or god has no part in the life of someone else with their beliefs.

I'm not forcing anyone what to choose. But no one should take that choice away from them. They are free to decide their life and their body, but not mine, yours, the kid down the street or the woman across the country.

A woman has a legal right to be free and make her choices. She is not someone's property to control. I've been making my choices since I was small. I was not restricted or told what to do. Maybe not all my choice were the best in hind sight, but they were mine. It was my life. There were many things I had no choice over. I don't control nature and I cant prevent or stop a war on my own. If I don't know there is danger I can't make the decision to avoid it.

I can't or want to control the decisions of other and I damn well don't want them making mine.

If I choose to play wit snakes or alligators no one gets to tell me I can't because I might get bit.

Everyone is free to make their choices for them, not the rest of the population.

I don't get to know the medical records of anyone without writes permission. I don't get to make choices if they are capable of understanding and saying no in some way.

I'm not telling them what to do, nor am I trying to take their rights away from them. I'm not going to let others decide or take the rights and freedoms away from other if I can help it.

I've lives in repressive societies where woman have few if any right. I've also seen what happens to woman after rape and abuse. I seen woman die in childbirth and know woman who kill themselves because they are pregnant, and seen woman killed.

I've tried to help and empower them when I could and just been a shoulder at others time.

A woman should have an absolute right to control her own body and life.

 

[Coyote]

So....is a woman on bc pills going to be sent to prison for murder in your universe?

People can try in vitro and if they want they can have the frozen egg or embryos destroyed.
Eggs and sperm can also be donated.

And there too is another dilemma - the inherent hypocrisy of many pro-lifers. Thousands, if not millions of unwanted embryos from invitro clinics are destroyed or donated to research. If it is "murder" then we have mass murder going on at a very high level there, yet where are the protests?

Planned Parenthoold is attacked and demonized for donating fetal tissue to research yet the same thing goes on in invitro clinics. Where are the "investigative journalists"?

I think the anti-abortion movement, concentrating on the individual woman's choice, is more about choosing to limit that woman's choice than it is about being "pro-life". It's about WHO controls a woman's fertility and family planning.

 

[Coyote]

Dear aris2chat
A. I agree with keeping beliefs out of govt.
B. Normally, "prochoice' if kept NEUTRAL would be the equivalent of letting all beliefs be treated equally and kept out of govt

C. HOWEVER because govt funding and protection is given to abortion then this is NOT NEUTRAL.

You can try to separate the funding, but the fact that govt endorses it makes it ESTABLISHING A BELIEF.

So you are contradicting your own argument by only protecting PROCHOICE beliefs from PROLIFE,
but not vice versa and not protecting PROLIFE beliefs from PROCHOICE being endorsed by govt.

Same with gay marriage

Same with health care through govt.

Those aren't neutral either when govt starts endorsing and protecting these as institutions.

Again, I AGREE with you that religious beliefs should be kept out of govt.

The problem is the secular beliefs and political beliefs are not treated the same
way and kept out of govt as religious beliefs should be.

So that isn't NEUTRAL and it isn't EQUAL.

==========================

o

It is a woman's right and they simply make sure there is not heart beat so their is no pain or sensation.
The removal is basically the same idea and a D&C, which is common enough when the body does not release all waste each month. There are a few options but the lining is removed.
The idea of ripping a living fetus apart is incorrect. Nor can something already dead bleed to death.

Religion should not be apart of anti-abortion reason since not every one is of the same faith or more particularly of the same church or synagogue. Some women might be atheist and don't believe in the religious that attempt to impose their faith on other people. They have no right to take a woman's right or free choice from her.
For home abortions all those interfering people have no right to even know what happens.

As far as government funding, government down not pay for abortions except in time of rape. It is not yours, any church or organization and the governments business. It is a matter between the patient and the doctor. Now it is a matter of a phone call or email order and not hands of any doctor is involved. After the first week, she requires only a blood test and ultra sound or place the order which she takes herself at home.

In the case of deformed of brain damaged, it is a mercy rather than make an infant die a horrible death. In the case of mother's medical treatment, always, always the doctor will work to save the mother first if possible. The fetus is removed while so she can be treated. To remove after treatment begins risk infection and other complication while the immune system is compromised which could mean her death.

No one should be forced to carry and give birth against their will or if it mean endangering their health.

The woman's body, the woman's choice.

Ending a pregnancy is permitted in the religious text. The know herbs used to brew the potions are for the most part bitter, the text refers to them as bitter water which is given to the women.

In most cases the woman can give birth later on. Women who get chemo are often given the option to save their eggs in case they are all killed.

If someone objects on moral ground, they should not get an abortion, but they have no right to force their beliefs on others.

All types of exaggerations and lies used to make those not involved that somehow the fetus has any feeling at all in the process. They create imagery of butchery and brutality when that is not the case. A D&C is not a pleasant procedure, but the discomfort goes away quickly enough. It is just tissue and blood that would otherwise become toxic to the woman if not removed. If the body does not expel it naturally then the doctor needs to remove it with one of a few procedures.

If a woman does not want to be pregnant she has shitloads of options to deal with it by natural means or the day after pill. No one else has to be involved or help pay for another person to destroy a child in her womb. Its barbaric what abortion doctors do and even more barbaric to use aborted fetus cells that have been cloned in food products without ever fully identifying that is what they are doing.

She has a legal right for an abortion if she so choose. It is her body.

Her medical and life choices should never be open to you or anyone else.

You have no right to judge her or force her to follow your will

You should never even be aware of her choice.

Dear aris2chat
by the same token,
neither should you nor I impose a public policy that conflicts with the sacred beliefs of others.

There is harm caused on both sides, of either abortion that causes harm and is a compromise,
and harm in forcing anyone to do something against their will or beliefs, either way.

There is no way to get around this without violating someone's beliefs, because
induced abortion is not natural.

So the only way to agree is to PREVENT abortion, so we never have to debate that.
By preventing pregnancy, this issue does not have to come up.

And if you think pregnancy can't be prevented, think again.
The acts of sex leading to pregnancy are either forced by a person by rape,
or it is consensual.

There is no such thing as an accidental pregnancy unless
the sex is truly accidental and not the conscious choice of either party.

That is where we might reach agreement on focusing on prevention.

Because people's beliefs about right to life and right to choose cannot be forced to change
by govt, this issue is not going to be resolved by outvoted, outnumbering, or overruling one side by the other.

Only by preventing unwanted pregnancy and abortion 100% by free choice
are you going to end the debate, by preventing abortion from ever having to be considered in the first place.
Then we can agree, by free choice, and not get into endless arguments
about which side is imposing their beliefs politically -- they both are.

So for there to be equal representation and protection of both sides' viewpoints,
it is clear that abortion must be prevented. otherwise the people will never agree.
The prochoice people will never agree to laws that ban abortion and force women
already in compromised situations to suffer disproportionately after the fact, when
it affects the women more than the men. The prolife people who believe that abortion
is deliberate killing and murder will never agree that
abortion is an acceptable compromise.

both sides agree the ideal is to prevent abortion in the first place.
If we agree to focus there, we can eventually eliminate this entire problem.

one person's church or god has no part in the life of someone else with their beliefs.

I'm not forcing anyone what to choose. But no one should take that choice away from them. They are free to decide their life and their body, but not mine, yours, the kid down the street or the woman across the country.

A woman has a legal right to be free and make her choices. She is not someone's property to control. I've been making my choices since I was small. I was not restricted or told what to do. Maybe not all my choice were the best in hind sight, but they were mine. It was my life. There were many things I had no choice over. I don't control nature and I cant prevent or stop a war on my own. If I don't know there is danger I can't make the decision to avoid it.

I can't or want to control the decisions of other and I damn well don't want them making mine.

If I choose to play wit snakes or alligators no one gets to tell me I can't because I might get bit.

Everyone is free to make their choices for them, not the rest of the population.

I don't get to know the medical records of anyone without writes permission. I don't get to make choices if they are capable of understanding and saying no in some way.

I'm not telling them what to do, nor am I trying to take their rights away from them. I'm not going to let others decide or take the rights and freedoms away from other if I can help it.

I've lives in repressive societies where woman have few if any right. I've also seen what happens to woman after rape and abuse. I seen woman die in childbirth and know woman who kill themselves because they are pregnant, and seen woman killed.

I've tried to help and empower them when I could and just been a shoulder at others time.

A woman should have an absolute right to control her own body and life.

Pro-choice is not a religious belief. Secular isn't religion (and it's not athiesm).

 

[aris2chat]

Dear aris2chat
A. I agree with keeping beliefs out of govt.
B. Normally, "prochoice' if kept NEUTRAL would be the equivalent of letting all beliefs be treated equally and kept out of govt

C. HOWEVER because govt funding and protection is given to abortion then this is NOT NEUTRAL.

You can try to separate the funding, but the fact that govt endorses it makes it ESTABLISHING A BELIEF.

So you are contradicting your own argument by only protecting PROCHOICE beliefs from PROLIFE,
but not vice versa and not protecting PROLIFE beliefs from PROCHOICE being endorsed by govt.

Same with gay marriage

Same with health care through govt.

Those aren't neutral either when govt starts endorsing and protecting these as institutions.

Again, I AGREE with you that religious beliefs should be kept out of govt.

The problem is the secular beliefs and political beliefs are not treated the same
way and kept out of govt as religious beliefs should be.

So that isn't NEUTRAL and it isn't EQUAL.

==========================

o

It is a woman's right and they simply make sure there is not heart beat so their is no pain or sensation.
The removal is basically the same idea and a D&C, which is common enough when the body does not release all waste each month. There are a few options but the lining is removed.
The idea of ripping a living fetus apart is incorrect. Nor can something already dead bleed to death.

Religion should not be apart of anti-abortion reason since not every one is of the same faith or more particularly of the same church or synagogue. Some women might be atheist and don't believe in the religious that attempt to impose their faith on other people. They have no right to take a woman's right or free choice from her.
For home abortions all those interfering people have no right to even know what happens.

As far as government funding, government down not pay for abortions except in time of rape. It is not yours, any church or organization and the governments business. It is a matter between the patient and the doctor. Now it is a matter of a phone call or email order and not hands of any doctor is involved. After the first week, she requires only a blood test and ultra sound or place the order which she takes herself at home.

In the case of deformed of brain damaged, it is a mercy rather than make an infant die a horrible death. In the case of mother's medical treatment, always, always the doctor will work to save the mother first if possible. The fetus is removed while so she can be treated. To remove after treatment begins risk infection and other complication while the immune system is compromised which could mean her death.

No one should be forced to carry and give birth against their will or if it mean endangering their health.

The woman's body, the woman's choice.

Ending a pregnancy is permitted in the religious text. The know herbs used to brew the potions are for the most part bitter, the text refers to them as bitter water which is given to the women.

In most cases the woman can give birth later on. Women who get chemo are often given the option to save their eggs in case they are all killed.

If someone objects on moral ground, they should not get an abortion, but they have no right to force their beliefs on others.

All types of exaggerations and lies used to make those not involved that somehow the fetus has any feeling at all in the process. They create imagery of butchery and brutality when that is not the case. A D&C is not a pleasant procedure, but the discomfort goes away quickly enough. It is just tissue and blood that would otherwise become toxic to the woman if not removed. If the body does not expel it naturally then the doctor needs to remove it with one of a few procedures.

If a woman does not want to be pregnant she has shitloads of options to deal with it by natural means or the day after pill. No one else has to be involved or help pay for another person to destroy a child in her womb. Its barbaric what abortion doctors do and even more barbaric to use aborted fetus cells that have been cloned in food products without ever fully identifying that is what they are doing.

She has a legal right for an abortion if she so choose. It is her body.

Her medical and life choices should never be open to you or anyone else.

You have no right to judge her or force her to follow your will

You should never even be aware of her choice.

Dear aris2chat
by the same token,
neither should you nor I impose a public policy that conflicts with the sacred beliefs of others.

There is harm caused on both sides, of either abortion that causes harm and is a compromise,
and harm in forcing anyone to do something against their will or beliefs, either way.

There is no way to get around this without violating someone's beliefs, because
induced abortion is not natural.

So the only way to agree is to PREVENT abortion, so we never have to debate that.
By preventing pregnancy, this issue does not have to come up.

And if you think pregnancy can't be prevented, think again.
The acts of sex leading to pregnancy are either forced by a person by rape,
or it is consensual.

There is no such thing as an accidental pregnancy unless
the sex is truly accidental and not the conscious choice of either party.

That is where we might reach agreement on focusing on prevention.

Because people's beliefs about right to life and right to choose cannot be forced to change
by govt, this issue is not going to be resolved by outvoted, outnumbering, or overruling one side by the other.

Only by preventing unwanted pregnancy and abortion 100% by free choice
are you going to end the debate, by preventing abortion from ever having to be considered in the first place.
Then we can agree, by free choice, and not get into endless arguments
about which side is imposing their beliefs politically -- they both are.

So for there to be equal representation and protection of both sides' viewpoints,
it is clear that abortion must be prevented. otherwise the people will never agree.
The prochoice people will never agree to laws that ban abortion and force women
already in compromised situations to suffer disproportionately after the fact, when
it affects the women more than the men. The prolife people who believe that abortion
is deliberate killing and murder will never agree that
abortion is an acceptable compromise.

both sides agree the ideal is to prevent abortion in the first place.
If we agree to focus there, we can eventually eliminate this entire problem.

one person's church or god has no part in the life of someone else with their beliefs.

I'm not forcing anyone what to choose. But no one should take that choice away from them. They are free to decide their life and their body, but not mine, yours, the kid down the street or the woman across the country.

A woman has a legal right to be free and make her choices. She is not someone's property to control. I've been making my choices since I was small. I was not restricted or told what to do. Maybe not all my choice were the best in hind sight, but they were mine. It was my life. There were many things I had no choice over. I don't control nature and I cant prevent or stop a war on my own. If I don't know there is danger I can't make the decision to avoid it.

I can't or want to control the decisions of other and I damn well don't want them making mine.

If I choose to play wit snakes or alligators no one gets to tell me I can't because I might get bit.

Everyone is free to make their choices for them, not the rest of the population.

I don't get to know the medical records of anyone without writes permission. I don't get to make choices if they are capable of understanding and saying no in some way.

I'm not telling them what to do, nor am I trying to take their rights away from them. I'm not going to let others decide or take the rights and freedoms away from other if I can help it.

I've lives in repressive societies where woman have few if any right. I've also seen what happens to woman after rape and abuse. I seen woman die in childbirth and know woman who kill themselves because they are pregnant, and seen woman killed.

I've tried to help and empower them when I could and just been a shoulder at others time.

A woman should have an absolute right to control her own body and life.

It is about person freedoms. Pro life have a freedom to believe, but not to interfere with someone else's choice who does not.
Same with gay
No one is saying they can't believe it is wrong. So they don't get an abortion or marry a gay. They is there right. When they try to take the right and freedoms of other, it becomes a problem.
We should not have to involved government, but when the protection of free choice is threatened, the courts step in.

If they think it is sinful, it is sinful for "them", not all the other people who do not share their church.
Women have a legal right to privacy and a legal right to control their body.
She has a legal right to seek an abortion, if that is her choice.

Government funds clinics that deal with reproductive issues and a woman's health. They do not fund or pay for abortions. The doctors just happen to be the same both. Abortions are a tiny percent of what those clinics provide. A safe abortion that preserves a woman's ability to reproduce at a later time.

Clinics abortions are down with better knowledge and access to birth control and day-after, but many are also opting for home abortions up to 24weeks, so the government figures are not accurate. Home kits might be ordered, but there are no figures of how may actually use, or complete, them. Maybe they changed their mind. Maybe they miscarried before taking.

In the case of a woman's health, it becomes an insurance issue. If rape, the government covers the cost, but that also involves police reports and hospital rape kits, even if the woman will not testify.

Religion should not be used to interfere with an individuals freedom, life liberty happiness

Till a fetus is born, able to live outside the womb, the woman's body is hers and she has the right to choose what happens. Medically the woman is the patient, not the fetus.

morally people should worry about themselves and not try to control the lives of others who do not ask for their interference. Try to help orphans and the poor, those we are already breathing, not a woman's legal right to control her life and her womb.

 

[aris2chat]

So....is a woman on bc pills going to be sent to prison for murder in your universe?

People can try in vitro and if they want they can have the frozen egg or embryos destroyed.
Eggs and sperm can also be donated.

And there too is another dilemma - the inherent hypocrisy of many pro-lifers. Thousands, if not millions of unwanted embryos from invitro clinics are destroyed or donated to research. If it is "murder" then we have mass murder going on at a very high level there, yet where are the protests?

Planned Parenthoold is attacked and demonized for donating fetal tissue to research yet the same thing goes on in invitro clinics. Where are the "investigative journalists"?

I think the anti-abortion movement, concentrating on the individual woman's choice, is more about choosing to limit that woman's choice than it is about being "pro-life". It's about WHO controls a woman's fertility and family planning.

There are some protest, but not so many. Usually when a storage engages in a mass dump of unused embryos no longer wanted or no longer paid for and claimed.

Perhaps it is time to not think of a heartbeat being artificially pumped by the mother/machine, but by a baby breathing on it's own outside the womb as "life". The woman provides the oxygen in the womb through the blood, not the lungs. When a baby is breathing on it own then is can be thought of a an individual with certain rights and protections. Take it off life support, it either dies or the brain and organs are developed enough to sustains it's own body.