I was wrong... the health of the mother is not valid for an abortion.

[pknopp]

No. It is the truth. We are talking about maternity mortality rates. They have been been going up in this country and are much higher than for abortions.

Every successful abortion results in the death of an innocent child. That's a 100% mortality rate. Under the very worst conditions, live births don't come anywhere close to that.

And maternal mortality?

Does the mother's life mean NOTHING to you?

So you're a supporter of making sure abortionists have admitting privileges to hospitals, in order to get the woman medical help as quickly as possible if something goes wrong?

I'm pro-life but since abortion is legal I absolutely support that.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Contraceptions and abortions should be as easy as males getting vasectomies.

Yes, we should definitely draw false comparisons between unrelated and completely different situations for the purpose of condemning pregnancy as an evil curse on women.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Again, anyone who sincerely felt abortion were murder would confront the situation directly and accept the consequences. Go lie down in front of a clinic where abortions are performed, for example. Those who do not feel that sincerely will not confront the situation and will not accept the consequences of running off at the mouth.
It does not appear true that anyone is for abortion. It is clear that most of us are for education, avoiding unwanted pregnancies, maximum in care for children (such as universal healthcare), not dropping bombs on civilians, not dispensing tiny landmines, ceasing to pollute air, water, soil and, especially, minds.

You're still talking about a topic you said only women should weigh in on.

Your penis-influenced opinion is discounted and ignored based on your own standard. Begone.

 

[Cecilie1200]

. What is next for this infant, created by a male who doesn't want to to care for and raise up his child

Whatever it is, it's gotta be better than being killed and tossed in the trash, your bitter hatred of men notwithstanding.

 

[Dana7360]

Everyone knows what happens in a late term abortion. The baby is rotated inside the mother's womb to cause a "breach birth" where the feet emerge first. It has to be painful and dangerous and there is no medical reason for it. When Clinton vetoed the late term abortion bill he paraded a lineup of women who claimed that their health was in jeopardy but that can't be true. You don't need to have a medical degree to determine that a "normal" birth would have saved the baby's life and would have been easier and less dangerous for the mother. How can anyone defend the late term abortion procedure from a medical standpoint?

Late term abortions are rare, strictly regulated and almost always for the mother's life, serious health issues, or severe fetal deformities.



What is indefensible about that?

13000 a year? Sure thing, who decided they were medically needed? Why the abortion doctors did of course.

Who should decide? A bunch of strange men who know nothing about them?

A certified Doctor that has no business associated with abortions.

Why would having "no business associated with abortions" be a better candidate? Why would this person be more trusted by a woman? The doctors in Ireland let a woman die. The loss of her life led to the change of law in Ireland.

in the case of late term abortion a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already told the woman she needs an abortion.

Her obstetrician has told her. That doctor has nothing to do with abortion.

The demand that a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already been met.

No woman who is that far along goes to an abortion doctor without being referred to one by an obstetrician first.

No woman goes to an abortion doctor in her last trimester unless there is very detailed documentation of the life threatening condition or the extremely serious problem with the fetus. No abortion doctor does that. That has already been factually documented by an obstetrician.

 

[pknopp]

Late term abortions are rare, strictly regulated and almost always for the mother's life, serious health issues, or severe fetal deformities.



What is indefensible about that?

13000 a year? Sure thing, who decided they were medically needed? Why the abortion doctors did of course.

Who should decide? A bunch of strange men who know nothing about them?

A certified Doctor that has no business associated with abortions.

Why would having "no business associated with abortions" be a better candidate? Why would this person be more trusted by a woman? The doctors in Ireland let a woman die. The loss of her life led to the change of law in Ireland.

in the case of late term abortion a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already told the woman she needs an abortion.

Her obstetrician has told her. That doctor has nothing to do with abortion.

The demand that a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already been met.

No woman who is that far along goes to an abortion doctor without being referred to one by an obstetrician first.

No woman goes to an abortion doctor in her last trimester unless there is very detailed documentation of the life threatening condition or the extremely serious problem with the fetus. No abortion doctor does that. That has already been factually documented by an obstetrician.

What condition might this be?

 

[progressive hunter]

Late term abortions are rare, strictly regulated and almost always for the mother's life, serious health issues, or severe fetal deformities.



What is indefensible about that?

13000 a year? Sure thing, who decided they were medically needed? Why the abortion doctors did of course.

Who should decide? A bunch of strange men who know nothing about them?

A certified Doctor that has no business associated with abortions.

Why would having "no business associated with abortions" be a better candidate? Why would this person be more trusted by a woman? The doctors in Ireland let a woman die. The loss of her life led to the change of law in Ireland.

in the case of late term abortion a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already told the woman she needs an abortion.

Her obstetrician has told her. That doctor has nothing to do with abortion.

The demand that a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already been met.

No woman who is that far along goes to an abortion doctor without being referred to one by an obstetrician first.

No woman goes to an abortion doctor in her last trimester unless there is very detailed documentation of the life threatening condition or the extremely serious problem with the fetus. No abortion doctor does that. That has already been factually documented by an obstetrician.

if that were only true,,,

 

[Coyote]

13000 a year? Sure thing, who decided they were medically needed? Why the abortion doctors did of course.

Who should decide? A bunch of strange men who know nothing about them?

A certified Doctor that has no business associated with abortions.

Why would having "no business associated with abortions" be a better candidate? Why would this person be more trusted by a woman? The doctors in Ireland let a woman die. The loss of her life led to the change of law in Ireland.

in the case of late term abortion a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already told the woman she needs an abortion.

Her obstetrician has told her. That doctor has nothing to do with abortion.

The demand that a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already been met.

No woman who is that far along goes to an abortion doctor without being referred to one by an obstetrician first.

No woman goes to an abortion doctor in her last trimester unless there is very detailed documentation of the life threatening condition or the extremely serious problem with the fetus. No abortion doctor does that. That has already been factually documented by an obstetrician.

if that were only true,,,

It is.

 

[progressive hunter]

Who should decide? A bunch of strange men who know nothing about them?

A certified Doctor that has no business associated with abortions.

Why would having "no business associated with abortions" be a better candidate? Why would this person be more trusted by a woman? The doctors in Ireland let a woman die. The loss of her life led to the change of law in Ireland.

in the case of late term abortion a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already told the woman she needs an abortion.

Her obstetrician has told her. That doctor has nothing to do with abortion.

The demand that a doctor who has nothing to do with abortion has already been met.

No woman who is that far along goes to an abortion doctor without being referred to one by an obstetrician first.

No woman goes to an abortion doctor in her last trimester unless there is very detailed documentation of the life threatening condition or the extremely serious problem with the fetus. No abortion doctor does that. That has already been factually documented by an obstetrician.

if that were only true,,,

It is.

the facts say different,,,

 

[Coyote]

Again, anyone who sincerely felt abortion were murder would confront the situation directly and accept the consequences. Go lie down in front of a clinic where abortions are performed, for example. Those who do not feel that sincerely will not confront the situation and will not accept the consequences of running off at the mouth.
It does not appear true that anyone is for abortion. It is clear that most of us are for education, avoiding unwanted pregnancies, maximum in care for children (such as universal healthcare), not dropping bombs on civilians, not dispensing tiny landmines, ceasing to pollute air, water, soil and, especially, minds.

You're still talking about a topic you said only women should weigh in on.

Your penis-influenced opinion is discounted and ignored based on your own standard. Begone.

It is a woman’s body, life, and risks. Why on earth should a man be allowed to control that?

 

[progressive hunter]

Again, anyone who sincerely felt abortion were murder would confront the situation directly and accept the consequences. Go lie down in front of a clinic where abortions are performed, for example. Those who do not feel that sincerely will not confront the situation and will not accept the consequences of running off at the mouth.
It does not appear true that anyone is for abortion. It is clear that most of us are for education, avoiding unwanted pregnancies, maximum in care for children (such as universal healthcare), not dropping bombs on civilians, not dispensing tiny landmines, ceasing to pollute air, water, soil and, especially, minds.

You're still talking about a topic you said only women should weigh in on.

Your penis-influenced opinion is discounted and ignored based on your own standard. Begone.

It is a woman’s body, life, and risks. Why on earth should a man be allowed to control that?

because men have always defended the defenseless,,,and its not the womens body shes killing,,,

 

[Coyote]

Abortion is the killing of innocent human beings. And it was you who suggested that “overpopulation” is a valid excuse for putting innocent people to death. I do not think that any sane person could possibly agree with you that innocent people should be killed to mitigate “overpopulation”. But if you think people should be killed for this purpose, then what is so special about you, that you shouldn't be at the front of the line, setting the example to support your position?

Fetuses arent people. That misunderstanding right there is the basis of faulty and stagnant logic.

At 24 weeks a "fetus" IS a person by all medical definitions.

Most people dont get an abortion after 24 weeks dingle berry.

Exactly. It counts for 1% of all abortions.

tad higher and you know it. Tells how many abortions there were last year

Not likely “a tad higher” since abortions after 24 weeks are highly regulated in almost all states, and are often done in a hospital. It’s not like she can just take a pill. The stats for late term abortions are probably more accurate than for early ones.

 

[Coyote]

Again, anyone who sincerely felt abortion were murder would confront the situation directly and accept the consequences. Go lie down in front of a clinic where abortions are performed, for example. Those who do not feel that sincerely will not confront the situation and will not accept the consequences of running off at the mouth.
It does not appear true that anyone is for abortion. It is clear that most of us are for education, avoiding unwanted pregnancies, maximum in care for children (such as universal healthcare), not dropping bombs on civilians, not dispensing tiny landmines, ceasing to pollute air, water, soil and, especially, minds.

You're still talking about a topic you said only women should weigh in on.

Your penis-influenced opinion is discounted and ignored based on your own standard. Begone.

It is a woman’s body, life, and risks. Why on earth should a man be allowed to control that?

because men have always defended the defenseless,,,and its not the womens body shes killing,,,

More likely because men have always felt they had a right to control a woman’s body, whether it is virginity, out of wedlock sex, or wherher or not to have a child.

 

[progressive hunter]

Again, anyone who sincerely felt abortion were murder would confront the situation directly and accept the consequences. Go lie down in front of a clinic where abortions are performed, for example. Those who do not feel that sincerely will not confront the situation and will not accept the consequences of running off at the mouth.
It does not appear true that anyone is for abortion. It is clear that most of us are for education, avoiding unwanted pregnancies, maximum in care for children (such as universal healthcare), not dropping bombs on civilians, not dispensing tiny landmines, ceasing to pollute air, water, soil and, especially, minds.

You're still talking about a topic you said only women should weigh in on.

Your penis-influenced opinion is discounted and ignored based on your own standard. Begone.

It is a woman’s body, life, and risks. Why on earth should a man be allowed to control that?

because men have always defended the defenseless,,,and its not the womens body shes killing,,,

More likely because men have always felt they had a right to control a woman’s body, whether it is virginity, out of wedlock sex, or wherher or not to have a child.

at least you admit its a child you want to kill,,,

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It is a woman’s body, life, and risks. Why on earth should a man be allowed to control that?

It's not the woman who dies, when an abortion is performed. It's an innocent child.

If this was just about the woman's body, then she'd be the one who dies from the procedure.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

More likely because men have always felt they had a right to control a woman’s body, whether it is virginity, out of wedlock sex, or wherher [sic] or not to have a child.

I have never known of any man who thought that. That's out there in the same batshit crazy territory as [b]LIE[/b]-sistrata's crazy claims about conservatives/Christians grooming young girls to be sold to older men as sexual slaves. Maybe not quite as far out, but definitely in that direction.

 

[Rigby5]

Legality is what defines if something is murder or not. I agree life begins at conception. The point is when does the wishes of the host become less important than the fetus (which cant live without that host)?

when you say the host you mean the mother,,right???

did you know the guy that helped write obamacare thinks that you should be able to abort up to 3 yrs old,,so if it was legal would that be OK???

sorry all life has a right to exist no matter what you think,,,

Correct the mother is the host for any child.

No I didnt know that. Just because he has an opinion or something is legal doesnt make it ok. What makes it ok or not is the opinion of the person considering the matter. If you think its OK to dishonor the mothers body by forcing her to have a child to you thats ok. I dont think thats ok.

No life has the right to exist. If it did Raid wouldnt exist nor would people hunt deer for sport.

look up zeke emmanual complete lives system,,,

she dishonored herself by getting pregnant when she didnt want a child,,
science says human life begins at conception,,,case closed

sorry I should have said human life,,,I figured you knew the context of our conversation,,,my bad

And it is wrong to claim human life begins at conception.
A blood cell is alive and has the full DNA of a person, but is not a human being.

You can't change definitions mid sentence. It's still human life.

That is because it has no capability of self awareness.
Neither does a fetus, and it is just tissue.
Only at some point does it grow a brain and later some sort of consciousness.
But we kill all the time, or else we would not have a military and weapons of war, so we have nothing against killing.

Personally I do not support what we do there either.

No, a fetus can not possibly be a human life, not only because it is unconscious and unaware, but because it is not yet complete. If it were complete, then it would not need a womb for survival.

You had better support killing of humans, not only because it is essential in order to defend freedoms, but also because if we allow the population to continue growing, the whole human race will clearly go extinct.

 

[there4eyeM]

Again, anyone who sincerely felt abortion were murder would confront the situation directly and accept the consequences. Go lie down in front of a clinic where abortions are performed, for example. Those who do not feel that sincerely will not confront the situation and will not accept the consequences of running off at the mouth.
It does not appear true that anyone is for abortion. It is clear that most of us are for education, avoiding unwanted pregnancies, maximum in care for children (such as universal healthcare), not dropping bombs on civilians, not dispensing tiny landmines, ceasing to pollute air, water, soil and, especially, minds.

You're still talking about a topic you said only women should weigh in on.

Your penis-influenced opinion is discounted and ignored based on your own standard. Begone.

You intentionally misquote, thus revealing intellectual failings.

 

[progressive hunter]

when you say the host you mean the mother,,right???

did you know the guy that helped write obamacare thinks that you should be able to abort up to 3 yrs old,,so if it was legal would that be OK???

sorry all life has a right to exist no matter what you think,,,

Correct the mother is the host for any child.

No I didnt know that. Just because he has an opinion or something is legal doesnt make it ok. What makes it ok or not is the opinion of the person considering the matter. If you think its OK to dishonor the mothers body by forcing her to have a child to you thats ok. I dont think thats ok.

No life has the right to exist. If it did Raid wouldnt exist nor would people hunt deer for sport.

look up zeke emmanual complete lives system,,,

she dishonored herself by getting pregnant when she didnt want a child,,
science says human life begins at conception,,,case closed

sorry I should have said human life,,,I figured you knew the context of our conversation,,,my bad

And it is wrong to claim human life begins at conception.
A blood cell is alive and has the full DNA of a person, but is not a human being.

You can't change definitions mid sentence. It's still human life.

That is because it has no capability of self awareness.
Neither does a fetus, and it is just tissue.
Only at some point does it grow a brain and later some sort of consciousness.
But we kill all the time, or else we would not have a military and weapons of war, so we have nothing against killing.

Personally I do not support what we do there either.

No, a fetus can not possibly be a human life, not only because it is unconscious and unaware, but because it is not yet complete. If it were complete, then it would not need a womb for survival.

You had better support killing of humans, not only because it is essential in order to defend freedoms, but also because if we allow the population to continue growing, the whole human race will clearly go extinct.

if its not a human then what is it,,,a duck???

 

[pknopp]

when you say the host you mean the mother,,right???

did you know the guy that helped write obamacare thinks that you should be able to abort up to 3 yrs old,,so if it was legal would that be OK???

sorry all life has a right to exist no matter what you think,,,

Correct the mother is the host for any child.

No I didnt know that. Just because he has an opinion or something is legal doesnt make it ok. What makes it ok or not is the opinion of the person considering the matter. If you think its OK to dishonor the mothers body by forcing her to have a child to you thats ok. I dont think thats ok.

No life has the right to exist. If it did Raid wouldnt exist nor would people hunt deer for sport.

look up zeke emmanual complete lives system,,,

she dishonored herself by getting pregnant when she didnt want a child,,
science says human life begins at conception,,,case closed

sorry I should have said human life,,,I figured you knew the context of our conversation,,,my bad

And it is wrong to claim human life begins at conception.
A blood cell is alive and has the full DNA of a person, but is not a human being.

You can't change definitions mid sentence. It's still human life.

That is because it has no capability of self awareness.
Neither does a fetus, and it is just tissue.
Only at some point does it grow a brain and later some sort of consciousness.
But we kill all the time, or else we would not have a military and weapons of war, so we have nothing against killing.

Personally I do not support what we do there either.

No, a fetus can not possibly be a human life, not only because it is unconscious and unaware, but because it is not yet complete. If it were complete, then it would not need a womb for survival.

It can be nothing but human life.

You had better support killing of humans, not only because it is essential in order to defend freedoms, but also because if we allow the population to continue growing, the whole human race will clearly go extinct.

I'll accept the risk.