Roe v. Wade getting overturned!!

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

NFBW: In the British colonies when America was being founded, abortions were legal if they were performed prior to quickening which was somewhere between 16 to 24 weeks.

This is before microscopy and cell theory, let alone ultrasound.

They didn’t know when life begins then. Quickening was the first physical manifestation they could note.

In science and medicine, we no longer even consider quickening as a positive sign of pregnancy, just a presumptive one. It is known that life begins at fertilization.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

It is known that life begins at fertilization.

NFBW: it is universal and indisputable fact that the life that begins at fertilization.
is not viable until about 24 weeks according to the most modern science and technology at keeping premature babies alive outside the womb.

Our founding fathers and our founding generation applied traditional laws and common sense to set 16 to 24 weeks as the period of time that a new developing unborn potential citizen of the colonies needed to become a viable human being. END2209171027

PS: There is no requirement in the US Constitution to value the lives of not viable human beings.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

NFBW: it is universal and indisputable fact that the life that begins at fertilization.

Cool, thanks for recognizing you're wrong, now scurry off.

is not viable until about 24 weeks

Completely irrelevant.

 

[beagle9]

NFBW: In the British colonies when America was being founded, abortions were legal if they were performed prior to quickening which was somewhere between 16 to 24 weeks. At 24 weeks, viability of the fetus was the original accepted moral restriction on abortion during the birth of our nation end through the early 1800s. Abortion was not widespread banned until after the 1860s

Well then beagle9 your moral Jesus driven histrionics are what is over the cliff when you assign Rio v Wade as the primary cause of sexual debauchery in post 1950s “Leave it to Beaver” America. END220917092

So what you are after, and you won't get it hopefully, is for the federal government to be forced by you to inject itself into the abortion issue upon your side, otherwise in order to squash any non-support for the out of control open ended abortion issue.

Not only are you leftist wanting a government boot on the neck of the people concerning their pro-life stance, but you also want it on the necks of the people based upon a miriad of issue's in which people are dealing with as a negative in their live's, and guess what, that boot has not worked as is proven over time.

Time to kick the controversial issue's back to the state's, and let the people decide by a majority in their state's what they want. The Fed's aren't the end all to the issue's, because if they were they would be communist Marxist dictators ohh wait.

The federal government should have never taken on these issue's in a political way, otherwise in order to force people against their will to accept the abusive things in which they have been forced to accept for political reasons in order to pander to the fringe minority...... These issue's have huge mountains of evidence to prove how wrong the Fed's were when it believed that they were doing the right thing but weren't always right, otherwise when they (by strong evidence of now), were doing the exact opposite of the right thing in regards to the people of this nation (who oppose the recklessness and unorthodoxed bull crap in which it has been proven now to be pushing)... The Fed's refused to lend an ear to those it should have been representing......Instead without looking at the fall outs from it all or ignoring it for political reason's, many problems have since developed in a huge way.

The people need representation not lie's and pandering by a political class that has become authoritarian and dictator's for a fringe minority of voter's.

Now don't go trying to claim that the issue's that have been settled by the court's, and have since been proven to work is what is being rehashed or considered to be rehashed somehow here, because it is not. We are talking unsettled issues that have been highly controversial, abusive, and are not accepted by the majority of citizen's, but somehow have been pushed down the throat's of the American people by a government that is out of control in trying to be politically correct, and therefore panderers to a small percentage of fringe whiner's on everything or for those who have been brainwashed to believe that the sky is falling because certain individuals are telling them that.

 

[ClaireH]

This is before microscopy and cell theory, let alone ultrasound.

They didn’t know when life begins then. Quickening was the first physical manifestation they could note.

In science and medicine, we no longer even consider quickening as a positive sign of pregnancy, just a presumptive one. It is known that life begins at fertilization.

Exceptional points, kudos to you CPS, and as technology continues there will be more evidence of how much pain can be felt, unfortunately, experiments about that very thing (likely going on now) about how a baby still in the womb in early stages can feel pain. Society will change medical theories into concrete evidence as we increase our knowledge base, and not limited to the current topic of discussion of course.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

as technology continues there will be more evidence of how much pain can be felt, unfortunately, experiments about that very thing (likely going on now) about how a baby still in the womb in early stages can feel pain.

NFBW: What is your argument right here? Prior to a stage in a pregnancy where a fetus is able to feel pain should it still be legal for a pregnant woman to choose to terminate the pregnancy as Lindsey Graham set forth his scientifically deduced theory to determine thar abortion should be safe and legal up until 15 weeks. END2209171202

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Completely irrelevant.

NFBW: Why is viability irrelevant? END2209171224

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Cool, thanks for recognizing you're wrong, now scurry off.

NFBW: Now you have resorted to performing a contextdectomy on my statements.

Di you see the word “the” in the half statement you cited?

NFBW: it is universal and indisputable fact that the life that begins at fertilization.

 

[ClaireH]

NFBW: What is your argument right here? Prior to a stage in a pregnancy where a fetus is able to feel pain should it still be legal for a pregnant woman to choose to terminate the pregnancy as Lindsey Graham set forth his scientifically deduced theory to determine thar abortion should be safe and legal up until 15 weeks. END2209171202

Stop trying to change the orange into being coined purple. I don’t like to waste my time on here, so sorry move on. Oh, and by all means feel free to do your normal about “the only reason people won’t talk to me is because they’re afraid of me in someway and are running off” lol sure thing buddy!

 

[Billo_Really]

Is this a lock? I don’t know. But I’m so psyched to think that the ruling allowing slaughter of innocent life — sanctioned by the United States — is about to end.

And with that, the Republican Party!

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I don’t like to waste my time on here, so sorry move on.

NFBW: duly noted. You do not have time to define your argument precisely and defend it.

You were asked: Prior to a stage in a pregnancy where a fetus is able to feel pain should it still be legal for a pregnant woman to choose to terminate the pregnancy

When you have time can you define your argument more precisely?

I’ll keep an open file and wait for your response. END2209171243

 

[BackAgain]

And with that, the Republican Party!

Lol.

When dildo_really verbalizes ^ his wishful thinking, he is always kind of funny, in a pathetic way.

 

[Billo_Really]

Lol.

When dildo_really verbalizes ^ his wishful thinking, he is always kind of funny, in a pathetic way.

What do you mean "kind of"...?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Not only are you leftist wanting a government boot on the neck of the people concerning their pro-life stance,

NFBW: How does protecting a woman’s right to make a private decision between her and her doctor on whether to terminate her pregnancy, put a boot on your neck beagle9 ? Is your life, liberty and property affected or harmed in any way when a pregnancy is terminated? END2209171350

 

[ClaireH]

NFBW: duly noted. You do not have time to define your argument precisely and defend it.

You were asked: Prior to a stage in a pregnancy where a fetus is able to feel pain should it still be legal for a pregnant woman to choose to terminate the pregnancy

When you have time can you define your argument more precisely?

I’ll keep an open file and wait for your response. END2209171243

Your ice thin argument that you continue to restate over and over to the point of ad nauseam, that you only consider abortions to be wrong if the baby can live by his or her self, outside of the womb. Yes? So, what say you about babies post birth, would die without human intervention? Do you know the numbers I’m talking about? Your argument cannot be one way and not the other since you are stuck on viability.


We should conduct a broad-based survey across the US to determine how many people who have been born and currently living would have preferred that no medical intervention occurred at the time of delivery when they weren’t breathing on their own and needing their lungs cleared. Your foolish argument is bogus.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

NFBW: it is universal and indisputable fact that the life that begins at fertilization is not viable until about 24 weeks after fertilization based upon survivability outside the womb.

It is an indisputable fact that there is no way a state government can guarantee that every woman faced with an unplanned pregnancy will not suffer harm if she carries it to term.

So what gives the state the authority to keep a woman from preventing harm to her body by getting an abortion prior to the time that a fetus can be considered viable to live outside of the womb?

Your ice thin argument that you continue to restate over and over to the point of ad nauseam, that you only consider abortions to be wrong if the baby can live by his or her self, outside of the womb. Yes? So, what say you about babies post birth, would die without human intervention? Do you know the numbers I’m talking about? Your argument cannot be one way and not the other since you are stuck on viability.


We should conduct a broad-based survey across the US to determine how many people who have been born and currently living would have preferred that no medical intervention occurred at the time of delivery when they weren’t breathing on their own and needing their lungs cleared. Your foolish argument is bogus

All that and still no response to the following question

Prior to a stage in a pregnancy where a fetus is able to feel pain should it still be legal for a pregnant woman to choose to terminate the pregnancy

 

[NotfooledbyW]

you only consider abortions to be wrong if the baby can live by his or her self, outside of the womb. Yes?

No. I consider abortion to be none of my business and no business of the federal government and no business of any state government when a potentially viable human being is not being terminated.

Abortion is wrong to be used as a careless form of birth control if other methods are available. Society should do all it can to make abortion rare and only when it comes from the advice of a doctor or in rare cases of rape or incest. But it is absurd in my opinion to have decisions about terminating pregnancies determined by political voters and the politicians they vote into power. END2209172234

 

[NotfooledbyW]

So, what say you about babies post birth, would die without human intervention?

Other than stillbirth, if a post-birth preterm baby with life threatening complication who is placed into the care of preterm medical professionals - that child is viable to me. The professionals should do whatever it take to save the lives of these babies. Neonatal intensive care units have saved a lot of lives and they should continue to do so. END2209172424


.s
preterm baby might not meet growth or development milestones at the same rate as full term babies. This is normal. Preterm babies usually catch up to full-term babies developmentally by the age of two years.

Some premature birth complications can’t be prevented. However, neonatal intensive care units have saved a lot of lives and they will continue to do so. You can be confident tha

 

[NotfooledbyW]

We should conduct a broad-based survey across the US to determine how many people who have been born and currently living would have preferred that no medical intervention occurred at the time of delivery when they weren’t breathing on their own and needing their lungs cleared. Your foolish argument is bogus.

NFBW: For the record I am fully supportive of medical intervention at the time of delivery when newborn babies are not breathing on their own and needing their lungs cleared or anything else they need.

There is no way to understand what this line of attack from ClaireH is about.

you are stuck on viability.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

you are stuck on viability.

NFBW: Actually all fifty states are now voter determinant on the question of when ‘valuable’ human life begins. Is a pregnant woman biologically reproducing a ‘valuable’ human life from the instant of fertilization per CarsomyrPlusSix and the religious right or when her body and the new potential being she is carrying reaches a biological stage of development when an unborn being can survive on its own outside of the womb which is the opinion of a broader not necessarily unified coalition where 2 out of 3 voters roughly are.

ClaireH220914-#933 Mitch McConnell said about Graham’s bill: "I think every Republican senator running this year in these contested races has an answer as to how they feel about the issue," McConnell said. He said most GOP senators prefer having the issue dealt with by the states, rather than at the federal level. "So I leave it up to our candidates who are quite capable of handling this issue to determine for them what their response is."

ClaireH220914-#933 I, and many others, agree with this stance.

NFBW: I am hoping ClaireH has time to tell me if her agreement with ole Mitch’s GOP Stance means that she is agnostic on the issue of when valuable new human life begins because many states say it is at six weeks, Dobbs was based on 15 weeks, Blue States remain at 24 to 28 weeks based on viability. END2209180841