"personhood" idiocy in N Dakota

[JakeStarkey]

You have the right to your opinion, no matter how wrong it is. A mother's right to security from rape and incest and to life and health supersede that of a fetus to come to full term.

Sorry, dave, that's the law, both secularly and morally.

We weren't discussing those extreme examples, we're talking about abortion on demand. I would never want to see a law that required women to have a child when doing so would put her life or health in serious jeopardy anymore than I would expect someone who can't swim to jump in a pool to try to save a person who was drowning.

Now can you please explain where my opinion is so wrong?

Jake I will ask again, why is it that I am wrong? What makes you think that a baby growing inside a pregnant woman is actually a part of that woman? This idea lends itself readily to pithy little 5 second TV soundbites but no scientist, doctor or court has ever made such a ridiculous claim.

I have explained clearly several times that you are thinking is simplistic at best. The fetus, if conceived by rape or incest, or if it threatens the health and life of the mother, ethically and legally (in most cases, in the latter), the mother's need takes precedence. As such, only she can decide. No one else. Certainly not you.

 

[Noomi]

I haven't. All are alive and well. HIPPA regulations keep my medical history private....so you have no right to my reproductive medical info.

I don't as to yours, either.

Ethically, you need to stay uninterested and aloof concerning my lady parts. You are verging on immorality.

Regards from Rosie

When you suggest that you have the right to kill your offspring, I have a moral obligation to tell you that you're deluding yourself.

A fetus is not a child. A woman has the right to abort it. You are wrong on both counts.

No matter how many times you explain the facts to these people, it goes in one ear and out the other.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You have the right to your opinion, no matter how wrong it is. A mother's right to security from rape and incest and to life and health supersede that of a fetus to come to full term.

Sorry, dave, that's the law, both secularly and morally.

We weren't discussing those extreme examples, we're talking about abortion on demand. I would never want to see a law that required women to have a child when doing so would put her life or health in serious jeopardy anymore than I would expect someone who can't swim to jump in a pool to try to save a person who was drowning.

Now can you please explain where my opinion is so wrong?

Jake I will ask again, why is it that I am wrong? What makes you think that a baby growing inside a pregnant woman is actually a part of that woman? This idea lends itself readily to pithy little 5 second TV soundbites but no scientist, doctor or court has ever made such a ridiculous claim.

That’s not the issue.

You and others have the right to believe that a fetus is a baby, separate and apart from its mother, and act on that belief accordingly.

The issue is, however, you may not use the power and authority of the state to compel others to abide by that subjective belief.

 

[Mr. H.]

My first wife didn't have an abortion, not against my wishes.

My wife didn't have an abortion, to our wishes.

I wish abortion wasn't such a non-birthing thing.

 

[Mr. H.]

We're not pro-lifers, we're only non un-birthing people.

 

[Mr. H.]

Un-birthing... a woman's un-best non friend. The right to choose nothing in the place of something.
And nothing beats something from a non baby gut-oven.

Don't you go bakin' something in my gut-oven, lest I approve.

Hey gut-oven bitches. Bake me a babby.

 

[Mr. H.]

Are you ready?

Let's bake it.

9 1/2 months at 98.6 degrees.

Whoops! I done spilt the recipe. Can I back up?

I don't mean to do dat. My mistake.

Wipe it up. Gut oven gone bad.

 

[Mr. H.]

The womb to this man is as the womb to that woman.

Nothing. Shit. Garbage, Your choice, not mine.

 

[Mr. H.]

Tough talking girls who think they have irrespective proprietary rights.

 

[Obamanation]

 

[AmyNation]

1st, um, no.

This is a 12 week fetus. That pic is a doll that pro-life people use.

2nd, are you suggesting its less of a "person" when it looks less human? When does it become a "person" in your opinion?

 

[paulitician]

Big Brother wants to control Citizens from womb to tomb. And most of the posters complaining about that on this Board, are diehard Socialist/Progressive Nanny/Police Staters. They have contributed heavily to Big Brother's hostile takeover of Citizens' personal lives. So they just don't have credibility on issues like this. They just want to have it both ways. But they can't. They wanted Big Brother in total control. Well, he's more than happy to oblige. Maybe they'll reconsider their Big Brother-Worship someday. I hope so anyway.

 

[Delia]

Are you ready?

Let's bake it.

9 1/2 months at 98.6 degrees.

Whoops! I done spilt the recipe. Can I back up?

I don't mean to do dat. My mistake.

Wipe it up. Gut oven gone bad.

I am scaring the cat. STOP!!

 

[Noomi]

I dunno which lifer gave you that garbage, but none of us looked like that at 12 weeks of age.

 

[paulitician]

When a woman looks at her Ultrasound, does she call it a thing? No, of course not. She calls it her child. She even takes photos of her child in her womb and shares them with her loved ones. It's not just a thing. It is a person. Too many 'Pro-Choice' advocates are just very dishonest people. By calling it just a thing, they justify the mass slaughter of these Babies. Take a closer look at what a baby looks like in the very early stages of development in the womb. And then come back and tell me honestly, that it's not a person. I dare you.

 

[Mr. H.]

When a woman looks at her Ultrasound, does she call it a thing? No, of course not. She calls it her child. She even takes photos of her child in her womb and shares them with her loved ones. It's not just a thing. It is a person. Too many 'Pro-Choice' advocates are just very dishonest people. By calling it just a thing, they justify the mass slaughter of these Babies. Take a closer look at what a baby looks like in the very early stages of development in the womb. And then come back and tell me honestly, that it's not a person. I dare you.

We were told that our daughter's 12 week ultrasound revealed strong indications of Downes Syndrome. The doc matter of factly told us to go down to the coffee shop and "discuss our options". We opted in.

By default, we are all here now (obviously) having been granted life for whatever reason. Perhaps the Right to Life movement should change its name to Grant of Life.

What an abusive thing this concept of "Choice" has become.

 

[paulitician]

When a woman looks at her Ultrasound, does she call it a thing? No, of course not. She calls it her child. She even takes photos of her child in her womb and shares them with her loved ones. It's not just a thing. It is a person. Too many 'Pro-Choice' advocates are just very dishonest people. By calling it just a thing, they justify the mass slaughter of these Babies. Take a closer look at what a baby looks like in the very early stages of development in the womb. And then come back and tell me honestly, that it's not a person. I dare you.

We were told that our daughter's 12 week ultrasound revealed strong indications of Downes Syndrome. The doc matter of factly told us to go down to the coffee shop and "discuss our options". We opted in.

By default, we are all here now (obviously) having been granted life for whatever reason. Perhaps the Right to Life movement should change its name to Grant of Life.

What an abusive thing this concept of "Choice" has become.

Yeah, too many have become Pro-Choice zealots. They've allowed Politics to poison their reasoning and good judgement. They justify the mass slaughter of babies by referring to them as mere 'things.' But modern technology is showing us what babies look like in the very early stages of development in the womb. And it has shown us that they are indeed people, and not just 'things.' No Mother looks at her Ultrasound and calls it a 'thing.' She calls it her baby. Because that's what it is.

 

[RosieS]

Spare me the saintliness. Such concern and care...then the children go and get blown to bits in Iraq and that is fine. If it s for profit - if the Cheneys get obscenely richer, then those lives are all worth less than one fetus.

Egads.

Regards from Rosie

 

[paulitician]

Spare me the saintliness. Such concern and care...then the children go and get blown to bits in Iraq and that is fine. If it s for profit - if the Cheneys get obscenely richer, then those lives are all worth less than one fetus.

Egads.

Regards from Rosie

You need to read up more on what modern technology is showing us about very early stages of development in the womb. It's showing us that they are indeed people, not just 'things.' But i understand referring to babies as 'things' makes you feel better about your support for killing so many of them. It eases your conscience. I understand that.

 

[RosieS]

Spare me the saintliness. Such concern and care...then the children go and get blown to bits in Iraq and that is fine. If it s for profit - if the Cheneys get obscenely richer, then those lives are all worth less than one fetus.

Egads.

Regards from Rosie

You need to read up more on what modern technology is showing us about very early stages of development in the womb. It's showing us that they are indeed people, not just 'things.' But i understand referring to babies as 'things' makes you feel better about your support for killing so many of them. It eases your conscience. I understand that.

Ewwww. That is stomach-churning unctuousness; that's what that is.

Regards from Rosie