It is certainly true that those who support abortion are monsters...

[jc456]

 

[buttercup]

Just to add… Throughout history, whenever one group wanted to kill another group, they first had to dehumanize them. It happened with blacks, it happened with Jews, disabled people, and of course it happens with babies in the womb.

 

[bodecea]

Just to add… Throughout history, whenever one group wanted to kill another group, they first had to dehumanize them. It happened with blacks, it happened with Jews, disabled people, and of course it happens with babies in the womb.

De-humanize "babies" in the womb? So....women who are pregnant get to drive in the car pool lane because they have a "baby"....in fact, they should get a moving violation ticket for having two people behind the wheel of the car....in fact, they should be charged for two people at buffets...and airlines...and movies......

 

[TNHarley]

They probably just think you are fucking retarded. Like most of us do..

When I am in heaven and you are in hell, I will ask God to send me down to give you a drop of water, and God will say no.

So I'm sending you water now. Repent, or be damned.

How much money do you give to your kid raping org, mr. pure spirit?
People like you make me sick. You probably make your god sick, too.

There is a god?
I thought there was a few thousands

I clearly stated it was his god.
If you are going to be an asshole, at least not sound like an idiot.

 

[buttercup]

Just to add… Throughout history, whenever one group wanted to kill another group, they first had to dehumanize them. It happened with blacks, it happened with Jews, disabled people, and of course it happens with babies in the womb.

De-humanize "babies" in the womb? So....women who are pregnant get to drive in the car pool lane because they have a "baby"....in fact, they should get a moving violation ticket for having two people behind the wheel of the car....in fact, they should be charged for two people at buffets...and airlines...and movies......

I never said that pre-borns were exactly like other human beings, obviously they are not. So it is either silly or disingenuous to come up with examples having to do with practical, everyday matters, as opposed to life or death matters.

What we should be talking about is how in many states, when a pregnant woman is murdered, the perpetrator is charged with double homicide (or manslaughter.) Or, how certain doctors, when treating a pregnant woman, state that they are treating two patients, not one.

The interesting (but sad) thing is that when a baby is wanted, everyone recognizes that baby as a person...but when a baby is unwanted, even at the same exact age as the wanted baby, all of a sudden it's an entirely different story, the baby is just a lifeless blob, a disposable piece of garbage. The two babies are exactly the same, the only difference is one is wanted and the other is not wanted.

Our humanity should not be dependent on whether or not we are wanted. We are either human, or not. And all human beings have the most basic human right, to life.

 

[sakinago]

No, this is the central question to the abortion debate. Is a fetus life, and does it have a right to life. That question was not addressed by Row V wade, doesn’t even apply to the 4th amendment since it rights do not extend to the infringing on other rights, if that’s still in question, and also doesn’t apply since it doesn’t have anything to do with privacy since it’s an incredibly unprivate act that both the medical community and the government both keep extensive records on. Unless of course you believe government has no right to get involved in anything pertaining to medicine, which I’m taking an educated guess you don’t. RVW, is also a violation of both the 9th and 10th amendments. Which I’m taking an educated guess you were all for the 10th when the SCOTUS stuck down DOMA and said it was a states right issue since the fed did not have those powers granted in the enumerated rights. And then 2 years later cited the 9th saying stated have no say in the matter. You could argue the 9th, but then again the government was given the responsibility to protect life. So that’s out of the question for RVW.

Stop avoiding the actual question behind abortion. You should’nt have to avoid it like you are if you have all the answers. Is a fetus life, and does fall under the protection of life.

The question is not when does life begin. Life begins at birth. That is the legal definition of life since the dawn of time.

You wish to ascribe some other definition to the beginning of life in order that you can enforce your definition of morality on pregnant women.

Your sole purpose in this is to strip a woman of her privacy rights and her right to security of person. There is no way that you can frame an abortion law that doesn’t say that women aren’t allowed to make their own decisions in these matters, in which case, the Handmaids Tale is becoming reality.

Abortion laws don’t affect the rich. They will either find a doctor who will accommodate their wishes, or go to a jurisdiction where abortion is legal. It is the poor who suffer under these laws.

Society suffers too because unwanted children are lower in IQ, higher in delinquency levels, and generally don’t become as productive.

Well shit, didn’t know that IQ levels relied on whether or not the child was wanted, that’s some pretty interesting science. Almost said something way too mean, I’ll abstain. Is that some new epigenetics stuff coming fresh out of the world of science that you so clearly inhabit?

And no that is not even close to the definition of the beginning of life, not by law, not even by science.

And handmaidens tale, wow...Amazon comes out with one show and all of a sudden, people like me who believe in the importance of using birth control so they don’t pregnant, is the exact same as justifying raping women because that’s all their good for. Forgive me if I think birth control is vastly more important and vastly less morally wrong (birth control isn’t morally wrong) than killing you’re own offspring.

So if life begins at birth, why is it we have time limits on abortion? That doesn’t make a whole lotta sense. Why is it it’s a double homicide when a pregnant women is murdered, even if she’s on her way to get an abortion? That’s also weird. Why is it a fetus meets all the requirements of life as defined by science? I’m not understanding any of this, please explain. How is it life all of a sudden just happens once a fully formed friggen baby passes through the birth canal, in the words of Ron Burgendy makes me think “boy that escalated quickly.”

Why is a double homicide when a pg woman is killed, because she apparently has not had an abortion and maybe didn't want one, that is why. Its a well know fact you GOP are pro birth , not pro life.

It's still a somewhat hypocritical stance, legally speaking. If the fetus is not a person and can be aborted at any time without repercussion, how can it be murdered? If it is a person; or if any human being, whether a person or not, has a legal right to life; how can abortion on demand be legal? Or how can abortion be about simply a woman's control over her own body, if legally she is making the decision to kill another protected human life?

Are there any other situations in which a person might be killed on demand, yet killing that person is still murder? The closest examples that come to mind would be someone on life support or on death row, and neither of those examples quite fits. Someone who is being kept alive through mechanical ventilation, who is in a vegetative state, still would not be killed. Instead, such a person might be removed from life support; a fine distinction, perhaps, but an important one. The death row inmate will be killed, true, but as a punishment by the state.

The idea that it's just a woman's body, that the fetus is merely 'a clump of cells', does not make a lot of sense alongside the idea that killing a pregnant woman's fetus (before a viable stage) constitutes murder.

Because she did not want an abortion and probably would of carried to term. Murder is killing the women and so the fetus has no chance of becoming a viable infant.

Your suppositions have no basis in reality. Women don’t carry a child for six or seven months and then “change their minds” about carrying it to term. It is pointless to base responses on idiot scenarios that have no basis in reality.

You attribute a level of casualness and inhumanity to these decisions that has no basis in reality, while ignoring the very real issues of poverty and lack of worker protections that drive the abortion rate in the US.

You ignore the poverty and the lack of health care or job protections for low income workers and instead paint these women as selfish who have no morals.

You go with these ridiculous conservative anti-abortion talking points that don’t address any of the real issues driving the reasons for abortions.

oh my god, just answer the question. I pretty much cited the reasons you gave about your friend getting her abortion. And so far your only answer has been, “well that’ll never happen.” Uh, yes that absolutely could happen. And stop avoiding the question. Trump is president, any fucking thing can happen at this point.

 

[Montrovant]

Well shit, didn’t know that IQ levels relied on whether or not the child was wanted, that’s some pretty interesting science. Almost said something way too mean, I’ll abstain. Is that some new epigenetics stuff coming fresh out of the world of science that you so clearly inhabit?

And no that is not even close to the definition of the beginning of life, not by law, not even by science.

And handmaidens tale, wow...Amazon comes out with one show and all of a sudden, people like me who believe in the importance of using birth control so they don’t pregnant, is the exact same as justifying raping women because that’s all their good for. Forgive me if I think birth control is vastly more important and vastly less morally wrong (birth control isn’t morally wrong) than killing you’re own offspring.

So if life begins at birth, why is it we have time limits on abortion? That doesn’t make a whole lotta sense. Why is it it’s a double homicide when a pregnant women is murdered, even if she’s on her way to get an abortion? That’s also weird. Why is it a fetus meets all the requirements of life as defined by science? I’m not understanding any of this, please explain. How is it life all of a sudden just happens once a fully formed friggen baby passes through the birth canal, in the words of Ron Burgendy makes me think “boy that escalated quickly.”

Why is a double homicide when a pg woman is killed, because she apparently has not had an abortion and maybe didn't want one, that is why. Its a well know fact you GOP are pro birth , not pro life.

It's still a somewhat hypocritical stance, legally speaking. If the fetus is not a person and can be aborted at any time without repercussion, how can it be murdered? If it is a person; or if any human being, whether a person or not, has a legal right to life; how can abortion on demand be legal? Or how can abortion be about simply a woman's control over her own body, if legally she is making the decision to kill another protected human life?

Are there any other situations in which a person might be killed on demand, yet killing that person is still murder? The closest examples that come to mind would be someone on life support or on death row, and neither of those examples quite fits. Someone who is being kept alive through mechanical ventilation, who is in a vegetative state, still would not be killed. Instead, such a person might be removed from life support; a fine distinction, perhaps, but an important one. The death row inmate will be killed, true, but as a punishment by the state.

The idea that it's just a woman's body, that the fetus is merely 'a clump of cells', does not make a lot of sense alongside the idea that killing a pregnant woman's fetus (before a viable stage) constitutes murder.

Because she did not want an abortion and probably would of carried to term. Murder is killing the women and so the fetus has no chance of becoming a viable infant.

What may or may not have happened in the future doesn't matter, though. If a fetus, before a certain stage of development, is not a person, is in fact an extension of the mother's body, how can the fetus be murdered?

People it is simple, there is but one question, is a fetus alive?

All kinds of things are alive without us granting them the sort of protection and value we do with people.

 

[jc456]

Just to add… Throughout history, whenever one group wanted to kill another group, they first had to dehumanize them. It happened with blacks, it happened with Jews, disabled people, and of course it happens with babies in the womb.

De-humanize "babies" in the womb? So....women who are pregnant get to drive in the car pool lane because they have a "baby"....in fact, they should get a moving violation ticket for having two people behind the wheel of the car....in fact, they should be charged for two people at buffets...and airlines...and movies......

If a pregnant woman is murdered it’s a double murder. Correct? Thank you fk

 

[jc456]

Why is a double homicide when a pg woman is killed, because she apparently has not had an abortion and maybe didn't want one, that is why. Its a well know fact you GOP are pro birth , not pro life.

It's still a somewhat hypocritical stance, legally speaking. If the fetus is not a person and can be aborted at any time without repercussion, how can it be murdered? If it is a person; or if any human being, whether a person or not, has a legal right to life; how can abortion on demand be legal? Or how can abortion be about simply a woman's control over her own body, if legally she is making the decision to kill another protected human life?

Are there any other situations in which a person might be killed on demand, yet killing that person is still murder? The closest examples that come to mind would be someone on life support or on death row, and neither of those examples quite fits. Someone who is being kept alive through mechanical ventilation, who is in a vegetative state, still would not be killed. Instead, such a person might be removed from life support; a fine distinction, perhaps, but an important one. The death row inmate will be killed, true, but as a punishment by the state.

The idea that it's just a woman's body, that the fetus is merely 'a clump of cells', does not make a lot of sense alongside the idea that killing a pregnant woman's fetus (before a viable stage) constitutes murder.

Because she did not want an abortion and probably would of carried to term. Murder is killing the women and so the fetus has no chance of becoming a viable infant.

What may or may not have happened in the future doesn't matter, though. If a fetus, before a certain stage of development, is not a person, is in fact an extension of the mother's body, how can the fetus be murdered?

People it is simple, there is but one question, is a fetus alive?

All kinds of things are alive without us granting them the sort of protection and value we do with people.

Do we protect trees? How about plants. But we don’t protect babies! Shamefkingful

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Empowering women to make their own choices about abortion is absolutely the ethical and moral thing to do.

 

[Dragonlady]

The question is not when does life begin. Life begins at birth. That is the legal definition of life since the dawn of time.

You wish to ascribe some other definition to the beginning of life in order that you can enforce your definition of morality on pregnant women.

Your sole purpose in this is to strip a woman of her privacy rights and her right to security of person. There is no way that you can frame an abortion law that doesn’t say that women aren’t allowed to make their own decisions in these matters, in which case, the Handmaids Tale is becoming reality.

Abortion laws don’t affect the rich. They will either find a doctor who will accommodate their wishes, or go to a jurisdiction where abortion is legal. It is the poor who suffer under these laws.

Society suffers too because unwanted children are lower in IQ, higher in delinquency levels, and generally don’t become as productive.

Well shit, didn’t know that IQ levels relied on whether or not the child was wanted, that’s some pretty interesting science. Almost said something way too mean, I’ll abstain. Is that some new epigenetics stuff coming fresh out of the world of science that you so clearly inhabit?

And no that is not even close to the definition of the beginning of life, not by law, not even by science.

And handmaidens tale, wow...Amazon comes out with one show and all of a sudden, people like me who believe in the importance of using birth control so they don’t pregnant, is the exact same as justifying raping women because that’s all their good for. Forgive me if I think birth control is vastly more important and vastly less morally wrong (birth control isn’t morally wrong) than killing you’re own offspring.

So if life begins at birth, why is it we have time limits on abortion? That doesn’t make a whole lotta sense. Why is it it’s a double homicide when a pregnant women is murdered, even if she’s on her way to get an abortion? That’s also weird. Why is it a fetus meets all the requirements of life as defined by science? I’m not understanding any of this, please explain. How is it life all of a sudden just happens once a fully formed friggen baby passes through the birth canal, in the words of Ron Burgendy makes me think “boy that escalated quickly.”

Why is a double homicide when a pg woman is killed, because she apparently has not had an abortion and maybe didn't want one, that is why. Its a well know fact you GOP are pro birth , not pro life.

It's still a somewhat hypocritical stance, legally speaking. If the fetus is not a person and can be aborted at any time without repercussion, how can it be murdered? If it is a person; or if any human being, whether a person or not, has a legal right to life; how can abortion on demand be legal? Or how can abortion be about simply a woman's control over her own body, if legally she is making the decision to kill another protected human life?

Are there any other situations in which a person might be killed on demand, yet killing that person is still murder? The closest examples that come to mind would be someone on life support or on death row, and neither of those examples quite fits. Someone who is being kept alive through mechanical ventilation, who is in a vegetative state, still would not be killed. Instead, such a person might be removed from life support; a fine distinction, perhaps, but an important one. The death row inmate will be killed, true, but as a punishment by the state.

The idea that it's just a woman's body, that the fetus is merely 'a clump of cells', does not make a lot of sense alongside the idea that killing a pregnant woman's fetus (before a viable stage) constitutes murder.

Because she did not want an abortion and probably would of carried to term. Murder is killing the women and so the fetus has no chance of becoming a viable infant.

Your suppositions have no basis in reality. Women don’t carry a child for six or seven months and then “change their minds” about carrying it to term. It is pointless to base responses on idiot scenarios that have no basis in reality.

You attribute a level of casualness and inhumanity to these decisions that has no basis in reality, while ignoring the very real issues of poverty and lack of worker protections that drive the abortion rate in the US.

You ignore the poverty and the lack of health care or job protections for low income workers and instead paint these women as selfish who have no morals.

You go with these ridiculous conservative anti-abortion talking points that don’t address any of the real issues driving the reasons for abortions.

oh my god, just answer the question. I pretty much cited the reasons you gave about your friend getting her abortion. And so far your only answer has been, “well that’ll never happen.” Uh, yes that absolutely could happen. And stop avoiding the question. Trump is president, any fucking thing can happen at this point.

No it absolutely couldn’t. And you can’t find a single example where it did. No doctor would perform such a procedure and no woman would ask for an abortion at such a late date. These are just campfire tales to rile up stupid conservatives against abortion.

Even the late term babies born without brains are delivered normally so that their organs can be harvested for transplants. So that the parents have at comfort of knowing that other families will have a happy ending from their loss.

But not one of you anti-abortion types have given a single reason why women should be stripped of their rights to make decisions about whether or not to have a baby.

 

[buttercup]

Just to add… Throughout history, whenever one group wanted to kill another group, they first had to dehumanize them. It happened with blacks, it happened with Jews, disabled people, and of course it happens with babies in the womb.

De-humanize "babies" in the womb? So....women who are pregnant get to drive in the car pool lane because they have a "baby"....in fact, they should get a moving violation ticket for having two people behind the wheel of the car....in fact, they should be charged for two people at buffets...and airlines...and movies......

If a pregnant woman is murdered it’s a double murder. Correct? Thank you fk

If you're asking about the law, it depends on the state.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But not one of you anti-abortion types have given a single reason why women should be stripped of their rights to make decisions about whether or not to have a baby.

Because they know their argument rests on religion, and they know it is not a compelling argument in a secular society to take away the rights of others, "Because my favorite god says so, just ask him!"

So, instead, we get treated to this dog and pony show.

 

[jc456]

Just to add… Throughout history, whenever one group wanted to kill another group, they first had to dehumanize them. It happened with blacks, it happened with Jews, disabled people, and of course it happens with babies in the womb.

De-humanize "babies" in the womb? So....women who are pregnant get to drive in the car pool lane because they have a "baby"....in fact, they should get a moving violation ticket for having two people behind the wheel of the car....in fact, they should be charged for two people at buffets...and airlines...and movies......

If a pregnant woman is murdered it’s a double murder. Correct? Thank you fk

If you're asking about the law, it depends on the state.

I know of no state, post one!

 

[jc456]

But not one of you anti-abortion types have given a single reason why women should be stripped of their rights to make decisions about whether or not to have a baby.

Because they know their argument rests on religion, and they know it is not a compelling argument in a secular society to take away the rights of others, "Because my favorite god says so, just ask him!"

So, instead, we get treated to this dog and pony show.

It’s based on morality

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But not one of you anti-abortion types have given a single reason why women should be stripped of their rights to make decisions about whether or not to have a baby.

Because they know their argument rests on religion, and they know it is not a compelling argument in a secular society to take away the rights of others, "Because my favorite god says so, just ask him!"

So, instead, we get treated to this dog and pony show.

It’s based on morality

No, it's based on religious belief. Almost exclusively. You think fetuses have "souls", so you think abortion is murder. You can call that morality, but, if that's morality (based on magical hoo-ha), then so is blowing yourself up at a bus stop because your god says to do it.

 

[buttercup]

Just to add… Throughout history, whenever one group wanted to kill another group, they first had to dehumanize them. It happened with blacks, it happened with Jews, disabled people, and of course it happens with babies in the womb.

De-humanize "babies" in the womb? So....women who are pregnant get to drive in the car pool lane because they have a "baby"....in fact, they should get a moving violation ticket for having two people behind the wheel of the car....in fact, they should be charged for two people at buffets...and airlines...and movies......

If a pregnant woman is murdered it’s a double murder. Correct? Thank you fk

If you're asking about the law, it depends on the state.

I know of no state, post one!

State Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Victims | National Right to Life

 

[jc456]

But not one of you anti-abortion types have given a single reason why women should be stripped of their rights to make decisions about whether or not to have a baby.

Because they know their argument rests on religion, and they know it is not a compelling argument in a secular society to take away the rights of others, "Because my favorite god says so, just ask him!"

So, instead, we get treated to this dog and pony show.

It’s based on morality

No, it's based on religious belief. Almost exclusively. You think fetuses have "souls", so you think abortion is murder. You can call that morality, but, if that's morality (based on magical hoo-ha), then so is blowing yourself up at a bus stop because your god says to do it.

No morality

 

[WEATHER53]

Nobody “supports” abortion. Some do support allowing the woman to make the decision the law allows her to make. We understand that law is fact and does not fit well with emotion driven feelings

 

[jc456]

Just to add… Throughout history, whenever one group wanted to kill another group, they first had to dehumanize them. It happened with blacks, it happened with Jews, disabled people, and of course it happens with babies in the womb.

De-humanize "babies" in the womb? So....women who are pregnant get to drive in the car pool lane because they have a "baby"....in fact, they should get a moving violation ticket for having two people behind the wheel of the car....in fact, they should be charged for two people at buffets...and airlines...and movies......

If a pregnant woman is murdered it’s a double murder. Correct? Thank you fk

If you're asking about the law, it depends on the state.

I know of no state, post one!

State Homicide Laws That Recognize Unborn Victims | National Right to Life

I want to know where a pregnant woman was killed and the perp wasn’t charged for the baby as well!