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

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe the Right should give alcohol prohibition another shot, instead. It went over so well last time.

The 18th Amendment was proposed by the US Senate on December 18th, 1917 and it was ratified on January 16th, 1919. Democrats held both chambers of Congress and the Presidency at that time. History is your friend.

...and yet, the republicans seem to have learned nothing from it~!

Well, other than the basic facts which seem to elude YOU.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"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.

When is it a human being? Is something that cannot live outside of the womb a human being? You are playing God. Picking a arbitrary time is playing God. Using the power of the state to enforce YOUR beliefs is playing God. The fact is that Northam was talking about a bill to make 3rd trimester abortions easier to get. If you want to use God then quite lying.

The definition of "life", or of "human being" for that matter, does not in any way include location.

Also, I don't see the post you're responding to mentioning God at all. That would be the pro-abort SHE responded to, trying to create a straw man to attack.

 

[Dana7360]

Maybe the Right should give alcohol prohibition another shot, instead. It went over so well last time.

The 18th Amendment was proposed by the US Senate on December 18th, 1917 and it was ratified on January 16th, 1919. Democrats held both chambers of Congress and the Presidency at that time. History is your friend.

Wow another far right wing extremist who doesn't know how to amend the constitution. Have you ever read that document? If you had then you wouldn't have tried to blame that amendment on democrats.

The congress can pass all the amendments and the president can sign them all they want. They are no more amendments to the constitution than wallpaper.

For your information the constitution clearly states that at least three quarters of the states need to pass it before it can become an amendment.

So are you saying that all of those three quarters of states were all democratic controlled?

Plus up until around the middle of the 20th century, democrats were the conservatives. It was in the 60s that when things flipped. It was the civll rights and voting rights laws that did it. nixon took advantage of it with his southern strategy and all of the south turned republican red. Most have remained conservative republican red since,

I will also point out that in 1933 it was repealed. That amendment was only in place for 14 years.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Maybe the Right should give alcohol prohibition another shot, instead. It went over so well last time.

The 18th Amendment was proposed by the US Senate on December 18th, 1917 and it was ratified on January 16th, 1919. Democrats held both chambers of Congress and the Presidency at that time. History is your friend.

Wow another far right wing extremist who doesn't know how to amend the constitution. Have you ever read that document? If you had then you wouldn't have tried to blame that amendment on democrats.

The congress can pass all the amendments and the president can sign them all they want. They are no more amendments to the constitution than wallpaper.

For your information the constitution clearly states that at least three quarters of the states need to pass it before it can become an amendment.

So are you saying that all of those three quarters of states were all democratic controlled?

Plus up until around the middle of the 20th century, democrats were the conservatives. It was in the 60s that when things flipped. It was the civll rights and voting rights laws that did it. nixon took advantage of it with his southern strategy and all of the south turned republican red. Most have remained conservative republican red since,

I will also point out that in 1933 it was repealed. That amendment was only in place for 14 years.

Good grief

 

[LilOlLady]

And there is no developed brain or fully developed human body that can Biologically experience consciousness or the experience of life.

There will be if you leave it alone and allow nature to take its course.

Exactly, "there will be." In the mean time why the impregnated woman contemplates a "there will be", she has a right to her own body, and you do not have the right to tell her otherwise. And your radicalism is not invited into her body. You have received no invitations. Get it.

First of all, what gave you the idea that I’m a radical? It was a simple observation that you even acknowledged to be true. I said nothing about the woman’s rights.

Having said that, I don’t claim to have the answers as to how to reconcile a woman’s rights with the taking of a life.

How do you know it is life? Did God tell you it was?

However, I think pro-choice advocates should stop playing semantics with prenatal terms like “fetus” and “zygote” and whatnot and stop pretending that they are not essentially interrupting the course of nature and taking the life of a child.

Got it. Again, so when did you have thi9s conversation with God that someone was taking a life? Because, I know of no known definition in the womb, other than one's own philosophical or religious views. Life - Wikipedia

The pro-choice argument is akin to ripping a sapling out of the ground and saying it’s not a tree.

Is it? I seem to recall the sapling was already out of the ground? I'm not sure you can say the same for a fetus? There is currently no consensus regarding the definition of life.

Did you say 'fetus'?



fetus (n.)
late 14c., "the young while in the womb or egg" (tending to mean vaguely the embryo in the later stage of development), from Latin fetus (often, incorrectly, foetus) "the bearing or hatching of young, a bringing forth, pregnancy, childbearing, offspring,"
fetus | Origin and meaning of fetus by Online Etymology Dictionary



Next time, take your shoe off before you put your foot in your mouth, dunce.

Every living thing has a beginning. A seed produces a plant, a plant produces a vegetable or fruit, etc The beginning of a baby is a sperm and an egg, then an embryo, a fetus and then a baby but it is life in it's beginning state. Only humans that did not originate from an egg and sperm were Adam and Eve. Life begins when the seed sprouts and life begins when an egg is fertilized at conception. There are different stages of life. Human life does not begin with a fetus and turns into a baby at birth. A fetus is part of the process of life.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A fetus is not a baby until birth and it takes its first beath? Science debunks that. The unborn baby is taking in life-sustaining oxygen and nutrient early in development and is a LIVING BEING. After 5-6 weeks of pregnancy, the umbilical cord develops to deliver oxygen directly to the developing fetus's body.
For the first 11 weeks of pregnancy, before the mother’s nutrient-rich blood supply is plumbed in, all the materials and energy for building a baby are supplied by secretions from glands in the uterus lining. Life begins at conception. The embryo protection law in force as of January 1, 1991, defines the beginning of life in a medical sense, to wit, the embryo is the fertilized egg cell capable of development already from the time of fertilization. ... No other law explicitly provides a similar definition of the appearance of early human life.

The fifth-grade textbook stated "Human life begins when the sperm cells of the father and the egg cells of the mother unite. This union is referred to as fertilization. For fertilization to take place and a baby to begin growing, the sperm cell must come in direct contact with the egg cell."

No one is disputing the fetus is alive.

An entity that is technically living and has human DNA is not equivalent to an entity that we should consider a person with all the rights, values and protections therein. In short, there is a difference between a living human entity at the cellular level and a person.

LOTS of people are disputing that the fetus is alive. What message board are YOU reading?! Do you want a damned list?!

"An entity"? Really? You can admit that the fetus is alive, but you just can't bring yourself to call him "a human" or "a person" or "a baby"? 'Cause that IS what "an entity which [I fixed your grammar] is 'technically living' (sorry, but that's just a pathetic attempt at face-saving for your beliefs) and has human DNA" would be called . . . if one wasn't twisting oneself into a pretzel to acknowledge reality while still holding evil positions.

Personhood - to the extent I even believe that's a real thing - is not conveyed by laws. Recognized, perhaps, but not conveyed. Yes, there is a difference between a person who is protected by the law and whose rights are recognized by the law, and one who is not: the same difference between a slave and a free man. Once again, do you think a slave is less of a person?

There is a difference between a human at the beginning of his existence and an adult, as well; that difference is NOT "person" and "non-person", though. It is merely the difference between young and old.

Common sense and any education about biology and the reproductive cycle know that the "fetus" is alive. It contains blood, bone, a skeleton, respiratory, digestive and nervous system. Trakes in oxygen and nourishment from the mother. And if you want to call it a cell it is still alive. Of course it is human. It is not an alien, plant or animal.
There was a time when a slave was by law legally not considered a person. A newborn is not viable just because it can breathe and eat on its own it still depends on the mother to survive. Is a person on a ventilator and force tube fed not a person. Use an oxygen machine. So a law that says a fetus is not a human until it is born and take its first breath of oxygen on it own is not true just because it is law. Science differs. That fetus is taking in oxygen from its mother and nutrition from its mother.

Is a person who depends on a machine really alive? In most states you can take such a person off of a machine and allow them to die. Is that murder? Is a fetus that depends on a woman's body really a person? The fact is we should be using persuasion to reduce the number of abortions. The number of abortions have dropped in this country even with no strict abortion laws.

It depends on the machine, and the medical condition of the person. A fetus, however, is not a grievously injured person in a coma. He is simply small, fragile, developing, and - this is important - designed by nature to live in the environment of a womb. Lack of strength does not make you "not a person" or "not alive". Lack of size does not. And, as I've said before, location does not.

 

[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.

If they could think better, they wouldn't be Leftists.

Good point.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

When is it a human being? Is something that cannot live outside of the womb a human being? You are playing God. Picking a arbitrary time is playing God. Using the power of the state to enforce YOUR beliefs is playing God. The fact is that Northam was talking about a bill to make 3rd trimester abortions easier to get. If you want to use God then quite lying.

How about we concentrate on 'when is it a living thing'?


Then we can move on to whether you have a right to kill it.

When is that?

As has been pointed out so many freaking times that it staggers the mind, medical sciences tells that the beginning of life is conception.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe the Right should give alcohol prohibition another shot, instead. It went over so well last time.

The 18th Amendment was proposed by the US Senate on December 18th, 1917 and it was ratified on January 16th, 1919. Democrats held both chambers of Congress and the Presidency at that time. History is your friend.

Huh. Then you'd really think Republicans would know better. Guess they are following the Democrats' lead.

Would know better than what?

You'd think they might have learned the folly of trying to force widespread change on society without a consensus.

Sorry, but of the two sides - pro-life and pro-abort - it's not the pro-lifers who did an end run around "the consensus".

These laws are being passed by the people the voters elected to create laws, and I'm relatively certain that the representatives passing these laws were open with the voters about where they stood on this issue. If the voters decide they don't like the laws being passed, they retain the power to replace those lawmakers and demand that the laws be changed. That is how the system is supposed to work, and is the opposite of "forcing widespread change on society without a consensus."

Pro-aborts, by contrast, looked at a nation which had laws reflecting the wishes of the voters of different states, said "That's not how I think it should be", and then bypassed the voters entirely to have a group of nine lawyers-in-robes tell hundreds of millions of people that they were wrong and this was how it was going to be and they were no longer going to have input into it. THAT is "forcing widespread change on society without a consensus."

 

[Dana7360]

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.

When is it a human being? Is something that cannot live outside of the womb a human being? You are playing God. Picking a arbitrary time is playing God. Using the power of the state to enforce YOUR beliefs is playing God. The fact is that Northam was talking about a bill to make 3rd trimester abortions easier to get. If you want to use God then quite lying.

How about we concentrate on 'when is it a living thing'?


Then we can move on to whether you have a right to kill it.

ttps://www.wired.com/2015/10/science-cant-say-babys-life-begins/ We did, and there is no precedence to prove it is killing it, because "life" cannot be established. We are not God. Only your religious beliefs tell you that. I don't practice your religion, "THANK GOD."


Life - Wikipedia

The bible does say when life begins. It's right there in the book of genesis.

That's when the first breath of life is taken through the nose.

Not while it's in gestation but after it's born and takes it's first breath of air through the nose.

The so called christians use the bible to say life starts at conception but they are lying. The bible most certainly doesn't say that at all.

They use the Bible to excuse their radical extremist views on abortion but if they had actually read that book they would find that their god gives them instructions on how to perform an abortion in the book of numbers.

So it's all nothing but a very sick and twisted lie by far right wing radical extremists.

 

[Coyote]

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

Neat.

Now how about we factor race into your stats, shall we?

View attachment 262039

View attachment 262040

View attachment 262042


Just to name a few. Source: STDs in Racial and Ethnic Minorities - 2016 STD Surveillance Report

And race has what to with it?

Other than the fact that the states you want to wave around like a flag because "they're red states, so that means POLITICS are responsible!" often also have higher percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in their populations?

It is easy to show a correlation and causal effect as a result of politics and subsequent policy. And increased teen pregnancy and STD rates. Not so easy to with race.

For example the effects of shutting down Planned Parenthood Clinics in poor rural red states means a loss of available services that provided STD screening and treatment and education in areas where evidence based sexual education is frowned upon. Red state politicians still spout the old canards about how abortion causes cancer and a woman who is raped can't get pregnant because "the juices aren't flowing".

I suspect it makes you feel better to blame it on race though.

 

[Fang]

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

~S~

George Carlin. LOL That is perhaps the worst talking point yet. Conservatives are for personal responsibility, not asking someone else to flip the bill for your actions.

 

[satrebil]

The bible does say when life begins. It's right there in the book of genesis.

That's when the first breath of life is taken through the nose.

Not while it's in gestation but after it's born and takes it's first breath of air through the nose.

The so called christians use the bible to say life starts at conception but they are lying. The bible most certainly doesn't say that at all.

Complete and utter bullshit. You are referencing the creation of Adam, the FIRST human being ever to exist - who was also a full grown man. Would you also claim that life does not begin until a human being reaches adulthood?

I love it when you morons attempt to tell us Christians what our Bible really says.

Try this passage on for size:

Jeremiah 1:5 - Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

 

[SAYIT]

When we desensitize ourselves to be able to legally murdering of unborn babies, it desensitizes people to murder children. ... Parents were responsible for 61-percent of child murders under the age of five. ... statistics, 450 children are murdered by their parents each year in the United States. ....The sanctity of life no longer exists.

When we desensitize ourselves to the redefined definitions of words, like, "abortion" is "murder", and so many other redefinitions that can be found in the novel, "Animal Farm", like, "everyone is created equal" means that, "everyone is created equal, but some are more equal than others", then, authoritarian Big Brother (from "1984") becomes our dictatorial leader. As much as he may think that is true, it is not, and we are not sheep of the RW.

When we play semantics to justify the taking of human life we have lost our way. Nothing teaches our children - the ones we allow to be born - the value of life like abortion.

 

[satrebil]

Maybe the Right should give alcohol prohibition another shot, instead. It went over so well last time.

The 18th Amendment was proposed by the US Senate on December 18th, 1917 and it was ratified on January 16th, 1919. Democrats held both chambers of Congress and the Presidency at that time. History is your friend.

Wow another far right wing extremist who doesn't know how to amend the constitution. Have you ever read that document? If you had then you wouldn't have tried to blame that amendment on democrats.

The congress can pass all the amendments and the president can sign them all they want. They are no more amendments to the constitution than wallpaper.

For your information the constitution clearly states that at least three quarters of the states need to pass it before it can become an amendment.

So are you saying that all of those three quarters of states were all democratic controlled?

Plus up until around the middle of the 20th century, democrats were the conservatives. It was in the 60s that when things flipped. It was the civll rights and voting rights laws that did it. nixon took advantage of it with his southern strategy and all of the south turned republican red. Most have remained conservative republican red since,

I will also point out that in 1933 it was repealed. That amendment was only in place for 14 years.

What part of "The 18th Amendment was proposed by the US Senate on December 18th, 1917" did you not understand? And where did I speak to the ratification process? Oh that's right, I didn't. But even a simpleton like you should understand that you don't craft and propose legislation that you don't support.

And go peddle your bullshit revisionist history to someone else. That nonsense has been debunked more times than I can count. Like I said in a previous post, you leftists never own up to a goddamn thing.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

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.

When is it a human being? Is something that cannot live outside of the womb a human being? You are playing God. Picking a arbitrary time is playing God. Using the power of the state to enforce YOUR beliefs is playing God. The fact is that Northam was talking about a bill to make 3rd trimester abortions easier to get. If you want to use God then quite lying.

How about we concentrate on 'when is it a living thing'?


Then we can move on to whether you have a right to kill it.

ttps://www.wired.com/2015/10/science-cant-say-babys-life-begins/ We did, and there is no precedence to prove it is killing it, because "life" cannot be established. We are not God. Only your religious beliefs tell you that. I don't practice your religion, "THANK GOD."


Life - Wikipedia

The bible does say when life begins. It's right there in the book of genesis.

That's when the first breath of life is taken through the nose.

Not while it's in gestation but after it's born and takes it's first breath of air through the nose.

The so called christians use the bible to say life starts at conception but they are lying. The bible most certainly doesn't say that at all.

They use the Bible to excuse their radical extremist views on abortion but if they had actually read that book they would find that their god gives them instructions on how to perform an abortion in the book of numbers.

So it's all nothing but a very sick and twisted lie by far right wing radical extremists.

Better read Jeremiah 1:5 ya wanna be Biblical scholar

 

[Dragonlady]

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.

When is it a human being? Is something that cannot live outside of the womb a human being? You are playing God. Picking a arbitrary time is playing God. Using the power of the state to enforce YOUR beliefs is playing God. The fact is that Northam was talking about a bill to make 3rd trimester abortions easier to get. If you want to use God then quite lying.

The definition of "life", or of "human being" for that matter, does not in any way include location.

Also, I don't see the post you're responding to mentioning God at all. That would be the pro-abort SHE responded to, trying to create a straw man to attack.

So according to you the dead have rights because they’re human beings.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

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

Neat.

Now how about we factor race into your stats, shall we?

View attachment 262039

View attachment 262040

View attachment 262042


Just to name a few. Source: STDs in Racial and Ethnic Minorities - 2016 STD Surveillance Report

And race has what to with it?

Other than the fact that the states you want to wave around like a flag because "they're red states, so that means POLITICS are responsible!" often also have higher percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in their populations?

It is easy to show a correlation and causal effect as a result of politics and subsequent policy. And increased teen pregnancy and STD rates. Not so easy to with race.

For example the effects of shutting down Planned Parenthood Clinics in poor rural red states means a loss of available services that provided STD screening and treatment and education in areas where evidence based sexual education is frowned upon. Red state politicians still spout the old canards about how abortion causes cancer and a woman who is raped can't get pregnant because "the juices aren't flowing".

I suspect it makes you feel better to blame it on race though.

The problem with that is Planned Parenthoods are rare in rural red states. Usually located in inner city areas...why is that I wonder?

 

[Flopper]

A fetus is not a baby until birth and it takes its first beath? Science debunks that. The unborn baby is taking in life-sustaining oxygen and nutrient early in development and is a LIVING BEING. After 5-6 weeks of pregnancy, the umbilical cord develops to deliver oxygen directly to the developing fetus's body.
For the first 11 weeks of pregnancy, before the mother’s nutrient-rich blood supply is plumbed in, all the materials and energy for building a baby are supplied by secretions from glands in the uterus lining. Life begins at conception. The embryo protection law in force as of January 1, 1991, defines the beginning of life in a medical sense, to wit, the embryo is the fertilized egg cell capable of development already from the time of fertilization. ... No other law explicitly provides a similar definition of the appearance of early human life.

The fifth-grade textbook stated "Human life begins when the sperm cells of the father and the egg cells of the mother unite. This union is referred to as fertilization. For fertilization to take place and a baby to begin growing, the sperm cell must come in direct contact with the egg cell."

No one is disputing the fetus is alive.

An entity that is technically living and has human DNA is not equivalent to an entity that we should consider a person with all the rights, values and protections therein. In short, there is a difference between a living human entity at the cellular level and a person.

LOTS of people are disputing that the fetus is alive. What message board are YOU reading?! Do you want a damned list?!

"An entity"? Really? You can admit that the fetus is alive, but you just can't bring yourself to call him "a human" or "a person" or "a baby"? 'Cause that IS what "an entity which [I fixed your grammar] is 'technically living' (sorry, but that's just a pathetic attempt at face-saving for your beliefs) and has human DNA" would be called . . . if one wasn't twisting oneself into a pretzel to acknowledge reality while still holding evil positions.

Personhood - to the extent I even believe that's a real thing - is not conveyed by laws. Recognized, perhaps, but not conveyed. Yes, there is a difference between a person who is protected by the law and whose rights are recognized by the law, and one who is not: the same difference between a slave and a free man. Once again, do you think a slave is less of a person?

There is a difference between a human at the beginning of his existence and an adult, as well; that difference is NOT "person" and "non-person", though. It is merely the difference between young and old.

Anyone that disputes that the unborn are not alive is wrong. The fetus or embryo is certainly alive because it is composed of living cells and it's a developing organism. It lacks self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control but it will acquire these characteristics as it slowly develops into a person. At what point the organism is a person is of course the subject of debate.

I don't refer to a fetus or embryo as a human because the word has a number of different definitions and connotations. Fetus or embryo is the correct biological term for the the unborn.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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

Neat.

Now how about we factor race into your stats, shall we?

View attachment 262039

View attachment 262040

View attachment 262042


Just to name a few. Source: STDs in Racial and Ethnic Minorities - 2016 STD Surveillance Report

And race has what to with it?

Other than the fact that the states you want to wave around like a flag because "they're red states, so that means POLITICS are responsible!" often also have higher percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in their populations?

It is easy to show a correlation and causal effect as a result of politics and subsequent policy. And increased teen pregnancy and STD rates. Not so easy to with race.

For example the effects of shutting down Planned Parenthood Clinics in poor rural red states means a loss of available services that provided STD screening and treatment and education in areas where evidence based sexual education is frowned upon. Red state politicians still spout the old canards about how abortion causes cancer and a woman who is raped can't get pregnant because "the juices aren't flowing".

I suspect it makes you feel better to blame it on race though.

My God, with this amount of kneejerking and meme-parroting, it's hard to even know where to start.

Prevalence of STDs Is High For Black Young Adults Regardless of Risk Behavior

The CDC aside for the moment, The Guttmacher Institute - no bastion of right-wingers, for sure - has done studies that indicate that young black people have a higher incidence of STDs than their white counterparts who had the same behavioral patterns. Rather than kneejerking to squawk, "Racist! You're blaming black people!", don't you think it might be to the best interests of black people to find out WHY they have a higher risk of infection in every behavioral category? Do you think ignoring this so as not to look "racist" is doing THEM any favors?

I'm sure you want to jump right to "Well, you right-wingers closed Planned Parenthood in XYZ area, so they couldn't get diagnosis and treatment, so THAT'S why", but do consider that white people in those areas would presumably have the same loss of treatment, but they still have a lower infection rate. Possibly there's something at work here besides politics, and it might behoove everyone to find out what.