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

[MAGAman]

Watching Schumer threaten SCOTUS judges if they rule against Roe VS Wade made me wonder about my own knowledge regarding my position... abortion OK only in case of health of money, rape or incest.
I am wrong!
Even in 1981, former Surgeon General of the United States Dr. C. Everett Koop said, “The fact of the matter is that abortion as a necessity to save the life of the mother is so rare as to be nonexistent.”

But as former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino has affirmed on the record:
During my time at Albany Medical Center I managed hundreds of such cases by “terminating” pregnancies to save mother’s lives. In all those cases, the number of unborn children that I had to deliberately kill was zero.
What Percentage of Abortions Are Medically Necessary?

But the biased MSM has never shared that with us.
Consequently since 1973 over 61,781,054 lives were destroyed.
Think about that...what baby among those 62 million could have discovered cures for cancer? Or made other fantastic contributions...all because a woman wasn't responsible enough.
Number of Abortions in US & Worldwide - Number of abortions since 1973

Just consider that: 46% of all abortions were performed on women who had one or more abortions before!
Think about it... There is an excuse for first timers... but 2nd, or 3 or more previous abortions?

Planned Parenthood Turns 99 Today: Has Killed 7 Million Babies in Abortions

I agree it's rare for an abortion to be necessary for the mother's health, but I firmly believe the mother is entitled to the right of self defense. Even from her child.

 

[Faun]

You think a woman who is pregnant from being raped should be forced to give birth to her rapist's child against her will??

You're a sick fuck.

You want to kill the baby for it?? Wtf is wrong with you?

You're brain-dead, I can't help you with that. Suffice it to say, I never said I wanted to kill any babies.

Thank god people that think like you CANT WIN ELECTIONS

LOLOL

You think there are no pro-choice people in office?

Huh?

Exactly.

 

[Jitss617]

You want to kill the baby for it?? Wtf is wrong with you?

You're brain-dead, I can't help you with that. Suffice it to say, I never said I wanted to kill any babies.

Thank god people that think like you CANT WIN ELECTIONS

LOLOL

You think there are no pro-choice people in office?

Huh?

Exactly.

Didn’t think so

 

[alang1216]

Watching Schumer threaten SCOTUS judges if they rule against Roe VS Wade made me wonder about my own knowledge regarding my position... abortion OK only in case of health of money, rape or incest.
I am wrong!
Even in 1981, former Surgeon General of the United States Dr. C. Everett Koop said, “The fact of the matter is that abortion as a necessity to save the life of the mother is so rare as to be nonexistent.”

But as former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino has affirmed on the record:
During my time at Albany Medical Center I managed hundreds of such cases by “terminating” pregnancies to save mother’s lives. In all those cases, the number of unborn children that I had to deliberately kill was zero.
What Percentage of Abortions Are Medically Necessary?

But the biased MSM has never shared that with us.
Consequently since 1973 over 61,781,054 lives were destroyed.
Think about that...what baby among those 62 million could have discovered cures for cancer? Or made other fantastic contributions...all because a woman wasn't responsible enough.
Number of Abortions in US & Worldwide - Number of abortions since 1973

Just consider that: 46% of all abortions were performed on women who had one or more abortions before!
Think about it... There is an excuse for first timers... but 2nd, or 3 or more previous abortions?

Planned Parenthood Turns 99 Today: Has Killed 7 Million Babies in Abortions

Are you a male or female, I bet a male.

I was originally ok with abortions in case of mother's health, rape or incest, based on the statistics, the murder of a person
that was NOT going to affect a woman's health is wrong.
Then I find out that really DUMB women who already had a 2nd or 3rd abortion?
That is shear murder because the women couldn't say NO!
It was evidently OK for a few moments of pleasure to terminate an especially innocent baby.
That makes my sex irrelevant.
But what is more relevant is you approve of dumb women who have already had abortions? That is shear stupidity on theirs and your part!

To me a fertilized egg is not yet a human being, any more than a blueprint is a house. A baby at birth is a person and has the right to live. Somewhere between those two extremes is a line where abortions (except in very rare cases) should be banned. I'm not sure where that line is but it is our brains that make us different from any other animal, a heart is just not the same. Once that brain truly begins to function, that is a person. IMHO of course.

Biology already shows us that life begins at conception since there is a separate DNA structure from either the father or the mother. This is a scientific fact, not conjecture nor opinion. It is a separate life. That’s where the line is. Abortion is murder, plain & simple.

Unfortunately it is NOT plain and simple. I like to think we are more than a single molecule of DNA. The fact it is unique at the time of conception doesn't necessarily make it valuable. There are some questions that science can't answer, for instance, when should someone be allowed to vote?

 

[MAGAman]

It was never about a fetus' life, it's only ever been about controlling women's bodies.

BS

Its about Human Rights.

 

[pknopp]

It was never about a fetus' life, it's only ever been about controlling women's bodies.

BS

Its about Human Rights.

This is not directed at you as I do not really know all your positions but many on the pro-life side are not familiar with the idea of human rights.

 

[MAGAman]

The simple fact remains that at 20 weeks a "fetus" is a viable baby. Not seven months.

Not at 20 weeks. 24 weeks is the minimum, and even then - only 30 - 35% survive.

I understand your point, but it's moot.
.
2 year old children can't survive on their own.

 

[progressive hunter]

the scope of the discussion is when is it moral to murder an innocent child,,,

I leave morals out of it.

The Constitution is the law of the land.

Therefore the debate should be more about what abortions (if any) can be defended Constitutionally. Or not.

That's my take on it, anyway. I'm not butthurt about it when others disagree.

so if the constitution said we could kill a person up to 5 yrs old you would be OK with it


sorry but the constitution only works for a moral society,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

To me a fertilized egg is not yet a human being, any more than a blueprint is a house. A baby at birth is a person and has the right to live. Somewhere between those two extremes is a line where abortions (except in very rare cases) should be banned. I'm not sure where that line is but it is our brains that make us different from any other animal, a heart is just not the same. Once that brain truly begins to function, that is a person. IMHO of course.

As I've heard, a baby isn't viable until the 7th month when a chemical is release into the lungs so they can expand upon birth. That's the line in my opinion. Third trimester is off limits. The baby can survive on its own and is viable.

a newborn isnt viable and cant survive on its own without help from others,,,

You're being purposefully ignorant. That's the fucking worst of humanity in a civil discussion. You know I'm referring to the fetus surviving outside the mother womb. Don't be such an asshole.

whats ignorant???

a newborn cant survive outside the mother without help,,,

That's probably true. However, more than half of the people living today, at all ages couldn't survive without grocery stores, electricity, and shelter. Should they be put to death?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

OH FOR FUCKS SAKE YOURE A DUMBASS,,,,

 

[Bob Blaylock]

…many on the pro-life side are not familiar with the idea of human rights.

What human right is more essential than the right not to be arbitrarily put to death, for no better reason than that your very existence is inconvenient to someone else?

 

[pknopp]

…many on the pro-life side are not familiar with the idea of human rights.

What human right is more essential than the right not to be arbitrarily put to death, for no better reason than that your very existence is inconvenient to someone else?

That applies to all life, not just white American suburban kids.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

That applies to all life, not just white American suburban kids.

And there it is. When someone on the left wrong knows that he's irreparably lost the argument, out comes the race card, even when the argument had nothing whatsoever to do with race.

As it happens a disproportionate number of the innocent victims of abortion are minorities, primarily black, what Planned Parenthood's founder called “human weeds”. This makes your playing of the Race Card in this context particularly absurd.

 

[healthmyths]

Watching Schumer threaten SCOTUS judges if they rule against Roe VS Wade made me wonder about my own knowledge regarding my position... abortion OK only in case of health of money, rape or incest.
I am wrong!
Even in 1981, former Surgeon General of the United States Dr. C. Everett Koop said, “The fact of the matter is that abortion as a necessity to save the life of the mother is so rare as to be nonexistent.”

But as former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino has affirmed on the record:
During my time at Albany Medical Center I managed hundreds of such cases by “terminating” pregnancies to save mother’s lives. In all those cases, the number of unborn children that I had to deliberately kill was zero.
What Percentage of Abortions Are Medically Necessary?

But the biased MSM has never shared that with us.
Consequently since 1973 over 61,781,054 lives were destroyed.
Think about that...what baby among those 62 million could have discovered cures for cancer? Or made other fantastic contributions...all because a woman wasn't responsible enough.
Number of Abortions in US & Worldwide - Number of abortions since 1973

Just consider that: 46% of all abortions were performed on women who had one or more abortions before!
Think about it... There is an excuse for first timers... but 2nd, or 3 or more previous abortions?

Planned Parenthood Turns 99 Today: Has Killed 7 Million Babies in Abortions

Are you a male or female, I bet a male.

I was originally ok with abortions in case of mother's health, rape or incest, based on the statistics, the murder of a person
that was NOT going to affect a woman's health is wrong.
Then I find out that really DUMB women who already had a 2nd or 3rd abortion?
That is shear murder because the women couldn't say NO!
It was evidently OK for a few moments of pleasure to terminate an especially innocent baby.
That makes my sex irrelevant.
But what is more relevant is you approve of dumb women who have already had abortions? That is shear stupidity on theirs and your part!

To me a fertilized egg is not yet a human being, any more than a blueprint is a house. A baby at birth is a person and has the right to live. Somewhere between those two extremes is a line where abortions (except in very rare cases) should be banned. I'm not sure where that line is but it is our brains that make us different from any other animal, a heart is just not the same. Once that brain truly begins to function, that is a person. IMHO of course.

So according to the below, your position is abortion is OK until the brain begins or about the 5th week.
In just the fifth week after conception, the first synapses begin forming in a fetus’s spinal cord. By the sixth week, these early neural connections permit the first fetal movements–spontaneous arches and curls of the whole body–that researchers can detect through ultrasound imaging. Many other movements soon follow–of the limbs (around eight weeks) and fingers (ten weeks), as well as some surprisingly coordinated actions (hiccuping, stretching, yawning, sucking, swallowing, grasping, and thumb-sucking).
When Does the Fetus's Brain Begin to Work?

 

[bodecea]

I was originally ok with abortions in case of mother's health, rape or incest, based on the statistics, the murder of a person
that was NOT going to affect a woman's health is wrong.
Then I find out that really DUMB women who already had a 2nd or 3rd abortion?
That is shear murder because the women couldn't say NO!
It was evidently OK for a few moments of pleasure to terminate an especially innocent baby.
That makes my sex irrelevant.
But what is more relevant is you approve of dumb women who have already had abortions? That is shear stupidity on theirs and your part!

To me a fertilized egg is not yet a human being, any more than a blueprint is a house. A baby at birth is a person and has the right to live. Somewhere between those two extremes is a line where abortions (except in very rare cases) should be banned. I'm not sure where that line is but it is our brains that make us different from any other animal, a heart is just not the same. Once that brain truly begins to function, that is a person. IMHO of course.

As I've heard, a baby isn't viable until the 7th month when a chemical is release into the lungs so they can expand upon birth. That's the line in my opinion. Third trimester is off limits. The baby can survive on its own and is viable.

7 months? So premature babies born at 6 months aren't "viable"? What is your definition of "viable"? Should premature babies be killed?

I'm not speaking of premature births. Don't be a fucking idiot on purpose. I"m speaking of purposefully removing the fetus from the womb in a procedure which is called abortion.

You fucking people are stupid. Seriously. You think that kind of response is going to even begin to fly? Wake the fuck up.

The simple fact remains that at 20 weeks a "fetus" is a viable baby. Not seven months.

20 weeks or a heartbeat, whichever comes first.

Still not viable.

How do you know?

Google it. I posted a link earlier in the thread. 24 weeks is the extreme limit.

I'll go with the heartbeat over Google.

For you. Once your fetus has a heartbeat, don't have an abortion. Easy.

 

[Penelope]

Watching Schumer threaten SCOTUS judges if they rule against Roe VS Wade made me wonder about my own knowledge regarding my position... abortion OK only in case of health of money, rape or incest.
I am wrong!
Even in 1981, former Surgeon General of the United States Dr. C. Everett Koop said, “The fact of the matter is that abortion as a necessity to save the life of the mother is so rare as to be nonexistent.”

But as former abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino has affirmed on the record:
During my time at Albany Medical Center I managed hundreds of such cases by “terminating” pregnancies to save mother’s lives. In all those cases, the number of unborn children that I had to deliberately kill was zero.
What Percentage of Abortions Are Medically Necessary?

But the biased MSM has never shared that with us.
Consequently since 1973 over 61,781,054 lives were destroyed.
Think about that...what baby among those 62 million could have discovered cures for cancer? Or made other fantastic contributions...all because a woman wasn't responsible enough.
Number of Abortions in US & Worldwide - Number of abortions since 1973

Just consider that: 46% of all abortions were performed on women who had one or more abortions before!
Think about it... There is an excuse for first timers... but 2nd, or 3 or more previous abortions?

Planned Parenthood Turns 99 Today: Has Killed 7 Million Babies in Abortions

Are you a male or female, I bet a male.

Irrelevant

Are you gay? Are you a tranny? Are you a cop? Are you a farmer? Are you active military? Are you on welfare? Are you in the healthcare industry? Are you black? Are you Mexican? Are you a conservative? Or any other common topic on here.
If not I hope you never offer an opinion on said subjects since you seem to think you have to be a member of the subject to voice an opinion.

Males can't get pregnant last I checked, I see most males on this thread want to ban abortions, some females but mainly males.

 

[Penelope]

QUESTION for all. . .

Does the Constitution say that

1. "all persons" have a right to their life and to the EQUAL protections of our laws?

Or,

2. does the Constitution say that only "VIABLE" persons have those rights?

How many leftards will answer honestly?

HINT: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person (citizen or not) of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."-14th Amendment

You forgot the very first line: All persons born

but that remains the case, as republicans fight and kick against supporting an infant, and even go as far as calling them "welfare Moms". You have your cake and eat it as well. Make sure you are pro life and carry to term and give birth, but once you give birth , if you don't have the means to care for yourself and your infant,

TOO BAD.

 

[progressive hunter]

QUESTION for all. . .

Does the Constitution say that

1. "all persons" have a right to their life and to the EQUAL protections of our laws?

Or,

2. does the Constitution say that only "VIABLE" persons have those rights?

How many leftards will answer honestly?

HINT: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person (citizen or not) of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."-14th Amendment

You forgot the very first line: All persons born

but that remains the case, as republicans fight and kick against supporting an infant, and even go as far as calling them "welfare Moms". You have your cake and eat it as well. Make sure you are pro life and carry to term and give birth, but once you give birth , if you don't have the means to care for yourself and your infant,

TOO BAD.

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

 

[Penelope]

QUESTION for all. . .

Does the Constitution say that

1. "all persons" have a right to their life and to the EQUAL protections of our laws?

Or,

2. does the Constitution say that only "VIABLE" persons have those rights?

How many leftards will answer honestly?

HINT: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person (citizen or not) of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."-14th Amendment

You forgot the very first line: All persons born

but that remains the case, as republicans fight and kick against supporting an infant, and even go as far as calling them "welfare Moms". You have your cake and eat it as well. Make sure you are pro life and carry to term and give birth, but once you give birth , if you don't have the means to care for yourself and your infant,

TOO BAD.

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

People are endowed by their creator, even if creation is evolution.
You might want to comprehend this:

any person (citizen or not) of life,

 

[healthmyths]

QUESTION for all. . .

Does the Constitution say that

1. "all persons" have a right to their life and to the EQUAL protections of our laws?

Or,

2. does the Constitution say that only "VIABLE" persons have those rights?

How many leftards will answer honestly?

HINT: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person (citizen or not) of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."-14th Amendment

You forgot the very first line: All persons born

but that remains the case, as republicans fight and kick against supporting an infant, and even go as far as calling them "welfare Moms". You have your cake and eat it as well. Make sure you are pro life and carry to term and give birth, but once you give birth , if you don't have the means to care for yourself and your infant,

TOO BAD.

I agree with your first premise regarding helping the mother...
But you haven't answered the question as to why nearly

• The average likelihood that an abortion was a “first time” abortion (performed on a woman who had not had a prior induced termination) is 53.92%.

This means that (i) 46.08% of all abortions were performed on woman who had a previous procedure,
and (ii) the average likelihood that a woman would have a first time abortion was 0.945%.

• The average likelihood that a woman had 1 prior abortion was 25.78%.

This means that a woman who received 1 prior abortion had a 47.8% chance of having a second abortion.

• The average likelihood that a woman had 2 prior abortions was 11.03%.

This means that a woman who received 2 prior abortions had a 42% chance of having a third abortion.

• The average likelihood that a woman had 3+ prior abortions was 7.4%.

This means that a woman who received 3+ prior abortions had a 67% chance of having additional abortions.

US Abortion Statistics: An Honest Analysis | National Economics Editorial

Why are these women who evidently DIDN"T learn from the first time, continued to allow even a 3rd abortion?

 

[progressive hunter]

QUESTION for all. . .

Does the Constitution say that

1. "all persons" have a right to their life and to the EQUAL protections of our laws?

Or,

2. does the Constitution say that only "VIABLE" persons have those rights?

How many leftards will answer honestly?

HINT: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person (citizen or not) of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."-14th Amendment

You forgot the very first line: All persons born

but that remains the case, as republicans fight and kick against supporting an infant, and even go as far as calling them "welfare Moms". You have your cake and eat it as well. Make sure you are pro life and carry to term and give birth, but once you give birth , if you don't have the means to care for yourself and your infant,

TOO BAD.

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

People are endowed by their creator, even if creation is evolution.
You might want to comprehend this:

any person (citizen or not) of life,

there is no proof evolution exist or happened,,,