"My Body, My Choice": The Worst Abortion Talking Points

[PoliticalChic]

Whether you call the unborn in the womb a fetus or a baby it is still an alive being that has the right to life as all of us even those born with disabilities and the elderly past the age of viability. "Right to LIfe" is a GOD given right whether you believe in GOD or not does not prove he does not exist. Conception is the beginning of life.

BIRTH is the beginning of life. A fetus no rights, and is incapable of making decisions as to whether its family is capable of adding another member. The rights of its mother, and her decisions are final.

The ONLY way you can give rights to the fetus is to take them away from the mother. This way lies madness.

"BIRTH is the beginning of life. "

Another dunce who failed high school biology.



1. “The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual. The penetration of the ovum by the spermatozoon, and the coming together and pooling of their respective nuclei, constitutes the process of fertilization.”
Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Miller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.



2. “Although life is a continuous process, fertilization… is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.”

“[All] organisms, however large and complex they might be as full grown, begin life as a single cell. This is true for the human being, for instance, who begins life as a fertilized ovum.”

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again. The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point." - Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland



Turns out Democrats are the party of death.

Less that half of the fertilized eggs ataach to the womb wall & are aborted.

SO you think God is this stupid & inefficient that the would reach down & place a soul in that zygote & then take it back in a couple of days when half are flushed out.

What happened to the "breath of life"?

What else do you know about God?


How many of the unborn are you allowed to kill in addition to whatever God decides?

Given that 1/3 of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion, aka as "miscarriage", all of which was ordained by God when He created women, it appears that God has no problem with abortion. There's also that passage that if a man injures a pregnant woman and she loses the baby she was carrying, the man should pay her husband for the "loss of property". Not for the murder of a baby, but for the "loss of property".

Quoting the Bible or religious reasons for banning abortion is a non-starter. God gave women free will on abortion. You would take away what God gave us.

Abortion is the killing of another human being.
98.5% of all abortions don't involve rape or incest.
Nearly all abortions are for convenience.
The unborn is not part of her body any more than a 6-month old breast feeding is.
There is no way to separate late term abortion from infanticide.
Government funding for abortion...Planned Parenthood gets over half a billion dollars....is illegal.


At the heart of Liberalism is the view that they, Democrats/Liberals/Progressives, are God.

Killing another human being is, it appears, their prerogative.


Here's what Virginia [Democrat] Gov. Ralph Northam said: “I can tell you exactly what happens: If a mother is in labor…the infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and mother.”


So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.




Oh...and this fact: you are a savage.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

God gave women free will on abortion. You would take away what God gave us.

You have free will to murder, steal and kidnap and keep slaves too.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

God gave women free will on abortion. You would take away what God gave us.

You have free will to murder, steal and kidnap and keep slaves too.

God will judge us on our use of free will.

 

[night_son]

God gave women free will on abortion. You would take away what God gave us.

You have free will to murder, steal and kidnap and keep slaves too.

Pro-death(ers) suffer from a disorder known as belief in selective-freewill. For example, all women (according to them) must have the free will to murder their developing or born child. However, other women . . . those who hold different beliefs . . . must not have the free will to "misgender" the mentally ill or utter without social punishment slang words describing segments of the American population. Further, still other mothers must not have the free will to prevent the state from mutilating their young children into abominations they call "changed sexes". Funny how that whole free will argument thing only works in their favor, selectively of course.

 

[BlueGin]

What other abortion talking points do you find stupid, laughable, both or other?

~S~

Yeah, George Carlin, comedian, surely knows all about it, doesn't he?

I'm against abortion...but he is right...the conservatives are hypocrites....they care about the fetus but they dont care about it after it is born. Infact they dont care for the desperate, the refugees, the poor it is confusing because that's what they preach all year long.

Liberals always believe if they are for murdering babies in the womb that exempts them from helping the needy. It doesn’t.

Liberals want to help those in need, you asshats fight it & bitch about poor people every fricken day.

Stealing other people’s money to give the needy free stuff ...only makes the upper, middle and lower class needy.

Democrats need to step up and actually help not demand others do all the heavy lifting.

Liberals think if they demand you take care of the babies they are killing...that’s the same thing as giving to charity. Again...it’s not.

Idiots.

 

[night_son]

~S~

Yeah, George Carlin, comedian, surely knows all about it, doesn't he?

I'm against abortion...but he is right...the conservatives are hypocrites....they care about the fetus but they dont care about it after it is born. Infact they dont care for the desperate, the refugees, the poor it is confusing because that's what they preach all year long.

Liberals always believe if they are for murdering babies in the womb that exempts them from helping the needy. It doesn’t.

Liberals want to help those in need, you asshats fight it & bitch about poor people every fricken day.

Stealing other people’s money to give the needy free stuff ...only makes the upper, middle and lower class needy.

Democrats need to step up and actually help not demand others do all the heavy lifting.

Liberals think if they demand you take care of the babies they are killing...that’s the same thing as giving to charity. Again...it’s not.

Idiots.

Thanks. I agree. Taking care of one's child and/or all children in society is a fundamental matter of personal responsibility. The American Left cannot fit the ethos of personal responsibility into it's ideological narrative. Literally, physically and metaphysically, taking responsibility for one's own actions cannot fit into the postmodern bag of ideas. The concept is just too heavy for it.

Because if people at large begin to take responsibility for their actions it is much more difficult to call them victims . . .

 

[PoliticalChic]

~S~

Yeah, George Carlin, comedian, surely knows all about it, doesn't he?

I'm against abortion...but he is right...the conservatives are hypocrites....they care about the fetus but they dont care about it after it is born. Infact they dont care for the desperate, the refugees, the poor it is confusing because that's what they preach all year long.

Liberals always believe if they are for murdering babies in the womb that exempts them from helping the needy. It doesn’t.

Liberals want to help those in need, you asshats fight it & bitch about poor people every fricken day.

Stealing other people’s money to give the needy free stuff ...only makes the upper, middle and lower class needy.

Democrats need to step up and actually help not demand others do all the heavy lifting.

Liberals think if they demand you take care of the babies they are killing...that’s the same thing as giving to charity. Again...it’s not.

Idiots.

Speaking of 'stepping up'....



"Another Narrative Busted: Record Number of Foster Care Children Adopted in Permanent Families in Alabama


Posted by Kemberlee Kaye Wednesday, May 22, 2019 at 7:00am
Little, if anything the media and the outrage brigade are saying about Alabama’s bill or Alabama or the pro-life movement is true.

Alabama, who recently passed stringent abortion restrictions, fully intending to provoke a court battle, recently set a record for the number of foster care children adopted out of the system and into permanent homes.

From AL.com:

There were 710 foster children adopted during the year that ended Sept. 30, up from 509 in fiscal year 2017 and 502 in 2016. The previous record was 676 foster children adopted in fiscal year 2009, according to the Alabama Department of Human Resources, which oversees the foster care system.

“It sends a strong, wonderful message to all the foster care children in our state,” Ivey said at a news conference at the Capitol, where she posed for photos with children and their families.

There are about 6,375 children in foster care in Alabama. DHR Commissioner Nancy Buckner said about 70 percent of foster children return to their biological families.

“But those that don’t, they need their own loving caring, permanent family and that’s what it’s all about,” Buckner said.

Buckner said there were probably about 250 children in the system in need of adoption for whom DHR has not found an adoptive resource. Those are children whose parents have lost their parental rights. The number of children in that situation has been fairly stable — 234 at the end of fiscal 2016 and 236 at the end of 2015.

Buckner said the increase in adoptions in 2018 is the result of a joint effort that involves juvenile courts, probate judges, DHR and other partners.

“We recognize that children need permanency,” Buckner said. “We all need family. We need family connection. And we’ve all gotten together. We’re doing some partnership things together. So, we’re all on the same page and we’re trying to push permanency through.”
Another Narrative Busted: Record Number of Foster Care Children Adopted in Permanent Families in Alabama

 

[Cecilie1200]

Are we to infer that children die in red states out of pure neglect? Or malice?
Because we know that in states like Virginia, New York, Vermont children are left to die
or aborted just prior to delivery thanks to official state law.

I guess we feel different. I consider care for children is more important than a fetus. Obviously, neither of our opinions is going change so there is no point continuing this discussion.

I just heard, "I can't address your points, so I'm going to try to pretend that my running away from them is actually just agreeing to disagree . . . and then restate how my position of supporting abortion is somehow morally superior and compassionate."

Here's a thought. Maybe you could sack up and answer the questions about whatever-the-fuck point you were trying to make without really making it.

"Conservatives seem to care a lot more about unborn babies than those born. 9 out of 10 states that have highest infant mortality are red states and 8 out of 10 of the states with lowest infant mortality are blue states."

Explain, in detail, what causality you're implying with this, or admit that you were bullshitting to deflect. Your choice.

You could try being less condescending and snotty with people who are providing far more thoughtful responses to defend their positions that you're capable of writing.

These states are willing to spend money to pursue, charge, and incarcerate women who have abortions but are unwilling to spend money on children's health, nutrition, pre or post-natal care or follow-up.

Programs banning abortion are expensive to implement. You have to investigate women who were pregnant and now aren't. You have to chase down abortion providers. Investigations and trials are expensive, as are incarcerating the guilty. These laws are being passed in states which spend no money on maternal care, infant care, and as a result, both have high rates of mortality. These states would rather spend money pursuing women who don't want to have children, than using that money and those resources saving the lives of women who choose to have their babies, and ensuring those babies have adequate post-natal care.

Similarly, these are the states with the worst education records in the USA. They're not providing proper services for the pregnant women and their babies that they do have, much less having excess resources chasing down and prosecuting women who have abortions.

Can't imagine what "thoughtful responses" have to do with you. I am as respectful to people as they deserve, so instead of whining and demanding that you be taken seriously, perhaps you should consider doing something to earn the respect you want.

Take, for example, your assertion that "these states" want to pursue, charge, and incarcerate women who have abortions, or for that matter, that they're "unwilling to spend money" on your beloved social programs, which you appear certain will make society perfect if we just hand people enough money. I note that you offer no proof of any of this; you merely state it as established fact and expect people to accept it because you say so. How is parroting assumptions you've been told to believe with no evidence "thoughtful response defending your position"?

I invite you to cite me the points in law where they indicate that women can be or will be prosecuted for getting abortions.

Furthermore, I invite you to provide proof - perhaps from the state budget - of a state which "spends no money" on maternal care, infant care, blah blah blah de blah. Show me which state in the US does not have Medicaid, WIC, and a variety of other programs for pregnant women and infants. Demonstrate for me that this fictional nightmare world of women and children dying in the streets while the state government ignores them.

In short, EARN the right to be viewed as a "thoughtful" person instead of a melodramatic lunatic who believes everything she reads on leftist blogs.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I guess we feel different. I consider care for children is more important than a fetus. Obviously, neither of our opinions is going change so there is no point continuing this discussion.

I agree we hold opposite views that probably won't change. But when you point out infant mortality rates in red states
I don't feel like you are taking into account the mortality rate of children in late term abortions in New York, Vermont, etc.

No need to argue. I just want that viewpoint considered too.

Again we have very different opinions. I don't equate the loss of a fetus or an embryo with a child. My wife miscarried during her first pregnancy. Later she gave birth to our first son. There is no comparison. An embryo or fetus is not a child. If you really care about children, work to improve infant mortality, providing better healthcare for children and better education, and a better family life.

Again, you are talking like your personal emotions define reality. I feel a lot less upset over the child of a total stranger dying than I do over one of my own dying, God forbid. Does that make the stranger's child less of a child, less alive, than mine?

Do not attempt to tell us what we should consider important, and definitely don't attempt to do it by telling us how "morally superior" you consider yourself to be, and how we're supposed to try to be more like you. I for one do not aspire to be a person who expects human beings to "earn" relevance and value by way of my feelings about them. I also do not aspire to be a person who congratulates myself on how "compassionate" I am based on voting tax money to fund a bureaucracy to deal with people so I don't have to. If YOU really care about children, rather than about your own self-image, put some skin in the game by doing something personal to help them.

Oh, and FYI, one of the biggest obstacles to improving infant mortality is leftist PC bullshit. Blacks, just for example, have a much higher incidence of infant mortality than white people do, but researchers are hindered in exploring reasons why by the pervasiveness of leftist ideas that it's "racist" to even consider that there might be any physiological difference in racial and ethnic groups beyond skin pigment.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Again we have very different opinions. I don't equate the loss of a fetus or an embryo with a child. My wife miscarried during her first pregnancy. Later she gave birth to our first son. There is no comparison. An embryo or fetus is not a child. If you really care about children, work to improve infant mortality, providing better healthcare for children and better education, and a better family life.

What is a child in utero then? A cheese grater? A banana? A billiards nine ball?

If you really care about children don't kill them. And if you do, make sure it's as early as possible
before that child develops it's central nervous system and brain stem.

There is no child before birth. It is first an embryo, then a fetus, then a child after birth. Saying abortion is killing a child is like saying scrambling eggs is killing chickens.

You leftists are poster children for the cliche "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." You learn to mouth medical terms like "embryo" and "fetus", but you're too pig-stupid and agenda-driven to bother learning what they mean, so you just ASSume that because they're different words, they mean different things.

In actual fact, "embryo" and "fetus" are terms denoting STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT, not completely different objects.

And don't even get me started on the level of biological ignorance necessary to try to draw analogies between utterly different life forms which don't even belong to the same taxonomical KINGDOM. I'd be embarrassed to bring up birds in a discussion of mammals, personally; but then, I have an actual education.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

In actual fact, "embryo" and "fetus" are terms denoting STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT, not completely different objects

Very insightful. Thank you. And yes, despite what they say, they use those terms to dehumanize the child and justify their idiotology

 

[LilOlLady]

~S~

Yeah, George Carlin, comedian, surely knows all about it, doesn't he?

I'm against abortion...but he is right...the conservatives are hypocrites....they care about the fetus but they dont care about it after it is born. Infact they dont care for the desperate, the refugees, the poor it is confusing because that's what they preach all year long.

Liberals always believe if they are for murdering babies in the womb that exempts them from helping the needy. It doesn’t.

Liberals want to help those in need, you asshats fight it & bitch about poor people every fricken day.

Yout president, Donald Trump, has done more to help the "needy" than the left EVER will.

Like what? More than 750,000 could lose food stamps under Trump proposal, many the poorest of the poor

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Yeah, George Carlin, comedian, surely knows all about it, doesn't he?

I'm against abortion...but he is right...the conservatives are hypocrites....they care about the fetus but they dont care about it after it is born. Infact they dont care for the desperate, the refugees, the poor it is confusing because that's what they preach all year long.

Liberals always believe if they are for murdering babies in the womb that exempts them from helping the needy. It doesn’t.

Liberals want to help those in need, you asshats fight it & bitch about poor people every fricken day.

Yout president, Donald Trump, has done more to help the "needy" than the left EVER will.

Like what?

Brought more blacks, hispanics and injuns back to the workforce than any other president

 

[Cecilie1200]

There is no child before birth. It is first an embryo, then a fetus, then a child after birth.

You say you don't want to argue then you keep making these sophist's arguments.
A child is fully developed and capable of life outside the womb long before actual delivery. It would be better brought to full term but many children are born prematurely and wind up perfectly fine.
If you don't want to argue stop with the non-scientific nonsense.

Right? To say there’s no child before birth is the most idiotic thing I’ve heard, in a long time.

Didn't you know that it magically transforms into a child from whatever object it was before while passing through the birth canal?

 

[LilOlLady]

I'm against abortion...but he is right...the conservatives are hypocrites....they care about the fetus but they dont care about it after it is born. Infact they dont care for the desperate, the refugees, the poor it is confusing because that's what they preach all year long.

Liberals always believe if they are for murdering babies in the womb that exempts them from helping the needy. It doesn’t.

Liberals want to help those in need, you asshats fight it & bitch about poor people every fricken day.

Yout president, Donald Trump, has done more to help the "needy" than the left EVER will.

Like what?

Brought more blacks, hispanics and injuns back to the workforce than any other president

Yeah, working on jobs that throw them way under the poverty line. The jobs he says he created were minimum wage that did not pay the rent and buy food so they ended up getting subsidies like housing, food stamps, Medicaid, etc paid for by the taxpayers and raising the deficit.
At least one-fourth of Native Americans live in poverty, the highest poverty rate of any racial group in the United States. On many reservations, unemployment exceeds 40 percent. Tens of thousands of Native Americans, both on and off the reservation, were having difficulty obtaining adequate food, shelter, clothing, and medical care before the shutdown. These problems have only gotten worse as the shutdown prevents federal funding — a major source of resources — from reaching the reservation.

 

[Cecilie1200]

There is no child before birth. It is first an embryo, then a fetus, then a child after birth.

You say you don't want to argue then you keep making these sophist's arguments.
A child is fully developed and capable of life outside the womb long before actual delivery. It would be better brought to full term but many children are born prematurely and wind up perfectly fine.
If you don't want to argue stop with the non-scientific nonsense.

Right? To say there’s no child before birth is the most idiotic thing I’ve heard, in a long time.

Childbirth is demarcation line between development of the fetus and the child. The fetus is a potential person and as such has certain protections under the law. It certainly does not have full rights of a person.

There's no such thing as a "potential person". That is a made-up fiction of people who have little scientific education and an agenda to push. And legal protections have nothing to do with whether or not a human is a human. I seem to recall leftists loving to talk about a time when black people did not have legal protections and rights under the law; I'm sure you'd agree that didn't make them any less human beings and people.

Childbirth IS the demarcation line between fetus and newborn; however, that's not the same thing as saying "line between object and person", because "fetus" doesn't mean "non-person" or any of the other things you think it means. It actually means "offspring at the development stage of eight weeks of gestation to birth", just as "neonatal" means "offspring from birth to 4 weeks after birth". You wouldn't consider a 3-week-old baby to not be a person simply because there's a medical term for that stage which is different from "baby", would you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Birth control work but they have to be used. Birth control pills are very effective. They're most effective when taken correctly. Less than 1 out of 100 women will get pregnant each year if they always take the pill each day as directed. So why are there so many unwanted pregnancies resulting in abortions? Because the majority of women are stupid, reckless and irresponsible knowing if they are pregnant there is "abortions on demand" If abortions were illegal there would be less unwanted pregnancies. The first rubber condom was produced in 1855, and by the late 1850s several major rubber companies were mass-producing, among other items, rubber condoms. Condoms also cut down on STDs, etc.

This may be controversial but I don’t think people should look to birth control as the solution. I’m not against birth-control, but 1) many young people are irresponsible and don’t use it properly and 2) It’s not foolproof and often becomes a false sense of security. It’s like playing Russian roulette.

I think everyone has to have a complete mindset shift on these topics (sex, pregnancy, abortion ) The problem is that in today’s society, young people are brainwashed to believe that sex can be completely severed from its life-giving potential, which goes against reality. They are encouraged to have sex, they’re told it’s no big deal, that it doesn’t have life-changing consequences, which goes against the reality. The way they are taught (brainwashed) about sex is a recipe for disaster. And I think that’s by design, BTW, but I digress.

So I think the entire approach needs to change, people need to never forget that sex is the act that creates babies. And it has other potential consequences. Cause and effect. People need to stop ignoring reality. And if they know that, then willingly having sex KNOWING the consequences, is tacitly consenting to the consequences, including pregnancy.

Also, speaking of birth control, please watch this video. If even half of what she saying is true, then this is criminal and pure evil. And explains a lot!

And that would be nice along with people respecting others. Parents becoming good role models and everyone treating others as they would like to be treated. Now, back to the real world...

Well one thing’s for sure, the way things have been does not work. They throw condoms at kids and say have fun! Then when something goes wrong just kill your baby! It doesn’t work. Look at all the young people who have STDs, look at all the unwanted pregnancies or babies out of wedlock. It just doesn’t work. A different approach is needed and I don’t see why you would be against that.

They don’t just throw condoms at them and say have fun, they educate them to act responsibly and part of that means understanding that they may have sex anyway so at least be protected.

The rise in STD’s is noteworthy. Guess which states are experiencing the highest rates?

U.S. States With High STD Rates Have One Thing In Common

Yeah, and how's that "educate them to be responsible while assuming they won't be and there's nothing to do about it" working out? How about the whole "making it all about Preidential voting" agenda? That helping any?

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Given that 1/3 of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion, aka as "miscarriage", all of which was ordained by God when He created women, it appears that God has no problem with abortion. There's also that passage that if a man injures a pregnant woman and she loses the baby she was carrying, the man should pay her husband for the "loss of property". Not for the murder of a baby, but for the "loss of property".

Quoting the Bible or religious reasons for banning abortion is a non-starter. God gave women free will on abortion. You would take away what God gave us.

Abortion is legal in all fifty states...some states more restrictive, some not restrictive at all (in fact it amounts to legalized infanticide in a few states)
I'm not sure what you are complaining about.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Nothing like hearing Pro-choicers invoke historical geno-cides like slavery and the Holocaust to rally their cause as if harassing women at clinics is the same thing as running the Underground Railroad.

View attachment 262043

And oddly enough, they're applying the same "logic" and de-humanization to unborn children that slave-owners and Nazis did to their victims.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

There's no such thing as a "potential person". That is a made-up fiction of people who have little scientific education and an agenda to push

Calling a child in utero a "potential person" is like calling a slave a "potential human being".