Just a clump of cells

When they stop freezing fertilized embryo's and using them for selective birthing and helping those who cannot conceive.
Come back and state your case.


To say the child isn't viable while in the womb is wrong, simply put.

Well, you got that right.

Premature Birth and Viability Survival Statistics

Strictly speaking, most doctors define the age of viability as being about 24 weeks of gestation. In many hospitals, 24 weeks is the cutoff point for when doctors will use intensive medical intervention to attempt to save the life of a baby born prematurely. A baby born at 24 weeks would generally require a lot of intervention, potentially including mechanical ventilation and other invasive treatments followed by a lengthy stay in aneonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

I was born 5 months premature. That's 16 weeks smartass. Was I not viable when I was born? I weighed just under 4 pounds. Was I still a fetus when I had long left the womb?

This is hilarious. My very birth completely contradicts general medicinal and gynecological thinking.
 
Unless you have proof of this, you have no leg to stand on. And not being an American, you don't have any clue the political processes that occur here. Obamacare for example, had an abortion mandate that forced people to provide contraceptive care to women against their religious beliefs. This was a MANDATE. Now, what government mandates people provide for abortions? A dictatorship, which is as of now is controlled by a Democratic president.

You have the unmitigated gall to place blame period. Your liberal policies are responsible for this lack of respect for life.

There are countless studies and surveys which prove this. 75% of the women who obtain abortions in the US, do so for financial reasons. Half are married and have children already. They abort fetuses to provide a better life for the children they already have.

Look at the abortion statistics for any country with ample access to abortion, government funded medical care, and maternity leave - Canada, Great Britain, German, the Sweden, etc. - all have lower numbers of abortion than the US. All are liberal countries. It is the US culture, where business is valued over families, where abortion is a huge business as opposed to a medical matter, where there numbers are among the highest in the world.

US conservatives have fought maternity leave, family leave, government funded health care, and other programs which help individuals and families, as not being business friendly. They continually thwart efforts to provide mandated vacations for employees, much less maternity leave for workers. Conservatives talk about family values but their programs are the most anti-family in the world.
 
Her choice!


It doesn't matter if one considers a fetus a clump of cells or a viable human infant as of yet to be birthed.

How do you rationally or ethically enforce laws the subjugate a woman's right to control her body? Abortion will happen either legally and as safely as medical practices can make it, or illegally and unsafely. Do you suggest that we strap women into beds in facilities if they maybe harbor thoughts of abortion? Put women in jail for aborting or attempting to abort? Jailing abortion doctors? It ain't gonna happen. A fertus doesn't have any legal rights and voters even in the most conservative states haven't supported measures to extend rights to the unborn.

The SCOTUS ruled on this issue 41 years ago. The fight is over. Don't like abortion? Don't get one.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. Decided simultaneously with a companion case, Doe v. Bolton, the Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that this right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting women's health. Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the third trimester of pregnancy.

The Court later rejected Roe 's trimester framework, while affirming Roe 's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roedecision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."[2]

Roe v. Wade - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
That ignores the fact that Roe allows for controls to limit abortion in later stages.

Clearly it is not always the mothers choice even if the child has not been born yet. The short answer to your question about the things we can do is yes.

Abortion law is actually rather good these days - late term abortions are largely illegal (and that should be made universal IMHO) yet the woman has the option early in her term.
That's not at issue.

No one contests the authority of the state to limit access at later stages; the issue concerns prohibiting the practice altogether.
Our secular society decided if caught early enough a woman can choose to abort a pregnancy. If they can force you to have a baby how free are you? I'd hate to be forced to carry a baby and birth it if what I really wanted was an abortion.

And how many poor single women who have 5 kids and get pregnant again? You know who's glad their mom didn't take my advice? The single mom of 5 who just won the mega lotto. I'm so happy for her 5 kids.

Aw shoot. Then let me tell you of a woman at my church who had 9 children. Not kidding. You know who is happy she didn't abort at a predeterminate number? The the last 4 children. So, I'm happy for all of them.
 
When they stop freezing fertilized embryo's and using them for selective birthing and helping those who cannot conceive.
Come back and state your case.


To say the child isn't viable while in the womb is wrong, simply put.

Well, you got that right.

Premature Birth and Viability Survival Statistics

Strictly speaking, most doctors define the age of viability as being about 24 weeks of gestation. In many hospitals, 24 weeks is the cutoff point for when doctors will use intensive medical intervention to attempt to save the life of a baby born prematurely. A baby born at 24 weeks would generally require a lot of intervention, potentially including mechanical ventilation and other invasive treatments followed by a lengthy stay in aneonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

I was born 5 months premature. That's 16 weeks smartass. Was I not viable when I was born? I weighed just under 4 pounds. Was I still a fetus when I had long left the womb?

This is hilarious. My very birth completely contradicts general medicinal and gynecological thinking.

I believe I already have stated my case.
 
Conservatives talk about family values but their programs are the most anti-family in the world.

Only someone like you would consider death as a family value. You sicken me, miss.

Her "stats" are BS also.

Yes, I noticed the lack of supplementary links and evidence.

Financial concerns are one of the reasons but there are others, she just cherry picked them to bolster herself
 
You neglected to make your stance on frozen embryos.
If live begins at conception, who in their right mind, would freeze a child.
And then with the marvels of the supernatural, thaw them out and have a "child" live.

When they stop freezing fertilized embryo's and using them for selective birthing and helping those who cannot conceive.
Come back and state your case.


To say the child isn't viable while in the womb is wrong, simply put.

Well, you got that right.

Premature Birth and Viability Survival Statistics

Strictly speaking, most doctors define the age of viability as being about 24 weeks of gestation. In many hospitals, 24 weeks is the cutoff point for when doctors will use intensive medical intervention to attempt to save the life of a baby born prematurely. A baby born at 24 weeks would generally require a lot of intervention, potentially including mechanical ventilation and other invasive treatments followed by a lengthy stay in aneonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

I was born 5 months premature. That's 16 weeks smartass. Was I not viable when I was born? I weighed just under 4 pounds. Was I still a fetus when I had long left the womb?

This is hilarious. My very birth completely contradicts general medicinal and gynecological thinking.

I believe I already have stated my case.
 
You neglected to make your stance on frozen embryos.
If live begins at conception, who in their right mind, would freeze a child.
And then with the marvels of the supernatural, thaw them out and have a "child" live.

When they stop freezing fertilized embryo's and using them for selective birthing and helping those who cannot conceive.
Come back and state your case.


To say the child isn't viable while in the womb is wrong, simply put.

Well, you got that right.

Premature Birth and Viability Survival Statistics

Strictly speaking, most doctors define the age of viability as being about 24 weeks of gestation. In many hospitals, 24 weeks is the cutoff point for when doctors will use intensive medical intervention to attempt to save the life of a baby born prematurely. A baby born at 24 weeks would generally require a lot of intervention, potentially including mechanical ventilation and other invasive treatments followed by a lengthy stay in aneonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

I was born 5 months premature. That's 16 weeks smartass. Was I not viable when I was born? I weighed just under 4 pounds. Was I still a fetus when I had long left the womb?

This is hilarious. My very birth completely contradicts general medicinal and gynecological thinking.

I believe I already have stated my case.

Frozen embryos are a red herring.
 
Pick and choose, typical right wing conservative.
It doesn't fit into your argument, so, get rid of it.
That weakens your argument considerably.
Nice try.

You neglected to make your stance on frozen embryos.
If live begins at conception, who in their right mind, would freeze a child.
And then with the marvels of the supernatural, thaw them out and have a "child" live.

When they stop freezing fertilized embryo's and using them for selective birthing and helping those who cannot conceive.
Come back and state your case.


Well, you got that right.

Premature Birth and Viability Survival Statistics

Strictly speaking, most doctors define the age of viability as being about 24 weeks of gestation. In many hospitals, 24 weeks is the cutoff point for when doctors will use intensive medical intervention to attempt to save the life of a baby born prematurely. A baby born at 24 weeks would generally require a lot of intervention, potentially including mechanical ventilation and other invasive treatments followed by a lengthy stay in aneonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

I was born 5 months premature. That's 16 weeks smartass. Was I not viable when I was born? I weighed just under 4 pounds. Was I still a fetus when I had long left the womb?

This is hilarious. My very birth completely contradicts general medicinal and gynecological thinking.

I believe I already have stated my case.

Frozen embryos are a red herring.
 
You claim they are "people", (life begins at conception), try that when you babysit for someone. Freeze their child.
Then thaw them when they return.
You still cannot dispute the fact that you pick and choose to make your argument believable.


And then with the marvels of the supernatural, thaw them out and have a "child" live.

The marvels of modern medicine actually. A lot of embryos survive the thawing process and are successfully implanted via IVF. Now, if you have anything else...
 
Dude. You can't go the science route with these people. They don't give a shit about science. They give a shit about what their ideology and peers say is ethical and taking the position most likely to earn them praise from their peers. You have to appeal to their own values if you want to reach them at all. Anything else is going to provoke a sneering contest at best.

The Ideological Left is animated by their own self interests and that alone. There is no 'appeal' which can 'reach' them... as they've no means to actually reason. The Ideological Left is comprised of people who lack any discernible means to reason objectively.

As a result, where you find them, you find decay; the rot common to that which lingers in darkness.
 
Unless you have proof of this, you have no leg to stand on. And not being an American, you don't have any clue the political processes that occur here. Obamacare for example, had an abortion mandate that forced people to provide contraceptive care to women against their religious beliefs. This was a MANDATE. Now, what government mandates people provide for abortions? A dictatorship, which is as of now is controlled by a Democratic president.

You have the unmitigated gall to place blame period. Your liberal policies are responsible for this lack of respect for life.

There are countless studies and surveys which prove this. 75% of the women who obtain abortions in the US, do so for financial reasons. Half are married and have children already. They abort fetuses to provide a better life for the children they already have.

Look at the abortion statistics for any country with ample access to abortion, government funded medical care, and maternity leave - Canada, Great Britain, German, the Sweden, etc. - all have lower numbers of abortion than the US. All are liberal countries. It is the US culture, where business is valued over families, where abortion is a huge business as opposed to a medical matter, where there numbers are among the highest in the world.

US conservatives have fought maternity leave, family leave, government funded health care, and other programs which help individuals and families, as not being business friendly. They continually thwart efforts to provide mandated vacations for employees, much less maternity leave for workers. Conservatives talk about family values but their programs are the most anti-family in the world.
 
Unless you have proof of this, you have no leg to stand on. And not being an American, you don't have any clue the political processes that occur here. Obamacare for example, had an abortion mandate that forced people to provide contraceptive care to women against their religious beliefs. This was a MANDATE. Now, what government mandates people provide for abortions? A dictatorship, which is as of now is controlled by a Democratic president.

You have the unmitigated gall to place blame period. Your liberal policies are responsible for this lack of respect for life.

There are countless studies and surveys which prove this. 75% of the women who obtain abortions in the US, do so for financial reasons. Half are married and have children already. They abort fetuses to provide a better life for the children they already have.

Look at the abortion statistics for any country with ample access to abortion, government funded medical care, and maternity leave - Canada, Great Britain, German, the Sweden, etc. - all have lower numbers of abortion than the US. All are liberal countries. It is the US culture, where business is valued over families, where abortion is a huge business as opposed to a medical matter, where there numbers are among the highest in the world.

US conservatives have fought maternity leave, family leave, government funded health care, and other programs which help individuals and families, as not being business friendly. They continually thwart efforts to provide mandated vacations for employees, much less maternity leave for workers. Conservatives talk about family values but their programs are the most anti-family in the world.

Lets see at least ONE of those surveys, miss. Until then, your argument is nothing but well placed words, smoke, and mirrors.
 
To say the child isn't viable while in the womb is wrong, simply put. To say the child is not a real person until after birth is also wrong, this one seems real enough to me.

Just for the record...No one has ever said that to mean every baby no matter the stage they are in. But when you are trying to appeal to emotion things like that get left out
 
To say the child isn't viable while in the womb is wrong, simply put.

Well, you got that right.

Premature Birth and Viability Survival Statistics

Strictly speaking, most doctors define the age of viability as being about 24 weeks of gestation. In many hospitals, 24 weeks is the cutoff point for when doctors will use intensive medical intervention to attempt to save the life of a baby born prematurely. A baby born at 24 weeks would generally require a lot of intervention, potentially including mechanical ventilation and other invasive treatments followed by a lengthy stay in aneonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

Viability?

ROFLMNAO!

VIABILITY?

YOU are an advocate of NOT ONLY Men engaging in sex with other men, but men MARRYING other men...

There's absolutely NOTHING 'viable' about THAT... yet here she is standing upon 'viability' as the very foundation of her would-be argument.

The history of culture's which have accepted that nonsense is that those culture's were conquered by hordes of illiterates.

Does that 'feel' VIABLE to anyone?

LOL!

You can NOT make this crap up!
 

Forum List

Back
Top