Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
[
OK, now I get it, it is a matter of how long one can live with assistance.
The cessation of brain waves is considered death. Why is the inception of brain waves not considered life?
1) Because we really don't know for sure when brain waves begin.
2) As a purely practical matter, women are going to get abortions no matter what the law is.
Considering the fact every sexual act has the potential for life, I sure hope none of those who feel cellular life is a potential child consider too that their cellular life is a potential child. No hanky panky folks for unless you are procreating or at least attempting procreation you too are destroying potential life. Must be boring huh? Oh and make sure you help all these children born in these states in which life is so important that they care what individuals are doing in the privacy of their lives. Care shouldn't stop at birth unless you are a hypocrite and surely these states care for all children. They show it don't they?
http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...-a-heartbeat-is-detectable-4.html#post3814184
The Rise of DIY Abortions | New Republic
'Catholic Hospital Argues Fetuses Are Not People In Malpractice Suit'
Catholic Hospital Argues Fetuses Are Not People In Malpractice Suit
A Moral Theory?s Immoral Outcome by Peter Singer - Project Syndicate
[
OK, now I get it, it is a matter of how long one can live with assistance.
The cessation of brain waves is considered death. Why is the inception of brain waves not considered life?
1) Because we really don't know for sure when brain waves begin.
2) As a purely practical matter, women are going to get abortions no matter what the law is.
1) Medical science has figured it out. Your ignorance of that is no excuse.
2) Same logic, As a purely practical matter, people are going murder no matter what the law is. But even you wouldn't advocate removing the laws against murder, would you?
All men should know by now that each and every act of intercourse is presumed to result in conception. It's a legal fact. Although they should know that, they obviously aren't smart enough to have figured it out because men still wonder why they have to pay 18 years of child support for a one night stand.
1) not exactly, but they can. Your ignorance is showing.1) Because we really don't know for sure when brain waves begin.
2) As a purely practical matter, women are going to get abortions no matter what the law is.
1) Medical science has figured it out. Your ignorance of that is no excuse.
2) Same logic, As a purely practical matter, people are going murder no matter what the law is. But even you wouldn't advocate removing the laws against murder, would you?
1) No, it really doesn't know.
2) Big difference- you can get a conviction for murder. You can't get a conviction for abortion.
Do you know how many women were arrested for having abortions before Roe v. Wade?
2.
One in 1911, one in 1922.
Do you ever read the news?2) Big difference- you can get a conviction for murder. You can't get a conviction for abortion.
[
2) See post #123 in this thread. The last being an abortion doctor.
Do you ever read the news?2) Big difference- you can get a conviction for murder. You can't get a conviction for abortion.
Kermit Gosnell?
It's like the GOP didn't learn a fucking thing from 2012!
Amazing.
The moderate GOP did but the problem children didn't. They are pushing their agenda even harder than ever. 2014 is going to be interesting given what is happening in TX and OH these days. Something tells me that the Dems are going to be energized to do a massive GOTV effort targeting women and minorities in red states.
This goes back to my original discussion about Rich vs. Rubes in the GOP.
The Rich like this issue because it energizes the Rubes and distracts them from asking questions like, "Hey, what happened to the Middle Class?"
But in national elections, it's a loser for them.
Republican men must have raging erections over this. Seems they think of nothing else but women's vaginas.
[
I have no idea what society standard you're using, because, the bold portion above is, we'll, not to tightly wrapped, to put it mildly, are those 3 sentences to be taken together? Or?
That's the standard of "The world most of us actually live in".
then you are using the word/term 'standard' wrong. The standard isn't 'I want it gone so it goes away', its never been that simple and there are rules.
The standard is what the gov. allows and I don't have an issue with 26 weeks btw.
Do you recognize any limits? 26, 30, or right up until the due date?
I know this is hard for the anti-abortion folks to deal with.
In their fantasy world, there were no abortions before Roe v. Wade.
Women don't think of unwanted pregnancies as "babies" or "children". They think of them as a problem to be dealt with.
And I suspect this was the case all the way back to the Romans.
see bold emphasis- then I feel sorry for them and I am betting that for maybe a third that may be true, but as for the rest I would hope and believe they see it as more than just a "problem", not some dispassionate issue that requires little more thought than what kind of smart phone to buy ....this is a viable life (until or if proven otherwise)
I'll throw out a general observation- theres are entities that love using crass emotional appeals to drive agenda.
I have heard that case made vis a vis states wanting to enact laws demanding sonograms prior to an abortion, yes, I can see that as an emotional appeal as well as containing an educational aspect too.
But either way, I don't see that as any different from any of the other de jour emotional appeals others use profligately either in general context.... BUT, here? there is a difference, a potential life is at stake, its a one on one situation, a one time event, if a neutral doctor performs an ultra sound and tells the mother that the baby seems healthy and absent any unforeseen incidents can be carried to term and birthed, I am not sure how that is a 'bad' thing.......
Oh and I am sure you can surface some situation(s) where in this has occurred and can be portrayed as trauma, but, that to is just another emotionally driven refutation that doesn't quite square the circle.
Democrats can count on the women vote at least through 2016. I hope this stops the silly argument Republicans are for less government.
Democrats can count on the women vote at least through 2016. I hope this stops the silly argument Republicans are for less government.
So,
Hillary?
Do you ever read the news?2) Big difference- you can get a conviction for murder. You can't get a conviction for abortion.
Kermit Gosnell?
You mean the one where they had to try to tack a dead woman, seven babies outside the womb (that got knocked down to three) and a bunch of drug charges to get a conviction, and then had to cut a deal with him after the trial so he wouldn't appeal it to someone who can actually read a law book?
I think you are kind of proving my point. If you have to put that much firepower into convicting a total fuckup like Gosnell, and still contort yourself into a pretzel to get half a loaf, convicting a woman of having a nice clean surgical abortion in a licensed clinic is going to be pretty much impossible.
Democrats can count on the women vote at least through 2016. I hope this stops the silly argument Republicans are for less government.
So,
Hillary?
Hillary is not a for sure thing. I'm not sure she will run.
So,
Hillary?
Hillary is not a for sure thing. I'm not sure she will run.
Really? Why do you say that? I am generally a conservative, and did not really like Bill, but it is time for a female president, and Sara Palin would make me sick.
I am ready for Hillary. Even though I disagree with her on some things, I would vote for her over most Republican candidates I have seen, especially Bachmann...Gag.
the topic is-
Starting This Week, Its Harder to Get an Abortion in 5 States
