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.
You used the word “kid” asshole. The whole point of my comment, which you do not address or understand, is to explain the inadequacy and demagogy involved in using such emotional but misplaced language.Try again. The "kid" as you so crudely refer to him, was given the name, Connor! The only head that the wrench hit was your own. BTW, the catholic church has nothing to do with the CA justice system. Just accept the fact that you are a murderer by proxy--as far as I know, and by fact if you've ever murdered one of your own offspring.
The only misplaced and emotional language that has ever been produced on this issue is by the demagogues who mischaracterized abortion, which is murder, as reproductive healthcare. Abortion has absolutely nothing to do with either reproduction or healthcare. It is the antithesis of both. Try again, little miss pretzel.You used the word “kid” asshole. The whole point of my comment, which you do not address or understand, is to explain the inadequacy and demagogy involved in using such emotional but misplaced language.
the Left's so-called "support" of women comes down to ONLY supporting the right of women to kill future women and men in the womb.
That's it. Other than that they have abdicated any high ground they used to have in "women's rights" in this transgender mess, among other issues.
Maybe because at that point they are deceased, Simp.Great help me out. Why does the Catholic Church say that life begins at Conception, and at the same time refuse to baptize a stillborn or miscarried fetus, claiming that baptism is only for the living?
A jury in CA convicted a man of double murder after he killed his wife who was pregnant with his 8 month unborn son. That seems to throw a wrench in your argument. Abortion after a heartbeat is murder.
The Democrats are every bit as sleazy and corrupt and stupid as the Republicans.... just in different ways... and this is one of 'em... idiot scumbag Democrats.This used to be the biggest drum the left beat in politics.
Now they are the ones waging war on women via the support of men invading their spaces under the guise of pretending that pretending to be a woman is perfectly normal behavior.
Non sequitur. The catholic church has nothing to do with the American justice system which holds that the unborn child, Connor Peterson was murdered by Scott Peterson. Does that make the separation of the church and the justice system more clear? You're welcome.Great help me out. Why does the Catholic Church say that life begins at Conception, and at the same time refuse to baptize a stillborn or miscarried fetus, claiming that baptism is only for the living?
The Left has probably lost this argument for now... for at least another generation or two...The difference being that the woman had chosen to have the baby, and the fetus was well past the point of viability. At 8 months he could have been delivered and survived without an incubator, if he was big enough.
I have a nephew, and a great grandson who were both born at 40 weeks. My nephew, who is now 60, was touch and go when he was born. My great grandson who will be 3 next month was no big deal. Medicine is amazing today.
A fetus with a heartbeat is not "living". It has no brain or other organs. The "heartbeat" is simply an electrical charge since there is no circulatory system, or internal organs. The fetus is not autonomous and cannot survive without it's host. It's a potential life, but it is not yet "alive".
The difference being that the woman had chosen to have the baby, and the fetus was well past the point of viability. At 8 months he could have been delivered and survived without an incubator, if he was big enough.
I have a nephew, and a great grandson who were both born at 40 weeks. My nephew, who is now 60, was touch and go when he was born. My great grandson who will be 3 next month was no big deal. Medicine is amazing today.
A fetus with a heartbeat is not "living". It has no brain or other organs. The "heartbeat" is simply an electrical charge since there is no circulatory system, or internal organs. The fetus is not autonomous and cannot survive without it's host. It's a potential life, but it is not yet "alive".
A fetus with a heartbeat is not "living". It has no brain or other organs.
And you idiots hate women so much you want to replace them with men. Your support of murder is noted. And it doesn’t make you look good Cletus.What do you think does more damage to a woman? Depriving of the right to decide their own bodies? Denying them an Abortion? In Texas it is even illegal to travel to a state where Abortion is legal. Or the one locker room or bathroom out of what? A thousand? Ten thousand?
The Right hates independent women. It hates women making their own choices. And it is wrapping it in the guise of defending them.
The Right hates their own supporters. Declaring everyone as woke so they can demolish them.
The Right is feeding on their own and declaring themselves the winners. Victory now will insure their defeat for a generation.
No, your pathetic thread derail attempts are pathetic. Obviously you self identify an an asshole who supports murder of unborn children. While we want children protected and men kept out of women’s areas and sporting competitions.Your statement is bullshit.
More bullshit from a moron who can only put up a funny face and stamp his feet while defending murder. Your lies are just pathetic moron. There are exceptions in every state. Just because YOU are too lazy to do the right thing, you want to abandon all responsibility and just murder another human being. Without any input from the male partner. Also explain why anyone murdering a pregnant woman gets charged with 2 murders. Now funny this and run away again.No! Those who define a woman choosing — for example — to take a pill to end an unwanted pregnancy (by far the most popular form of abortion today) and who also purposely mis-define a distressed woman’s decision to take such action as “the contract killing of innocent young human beings” … they are the ones being both intellectually lazy and intentionally demagogic.
The egg, larvae and caterpillar is not yet a butterfly.
Definitions of “life” are many and varied, as the excellent Brittanica article Coyote linked to helps us understand.
“Human life” in the West has historically long been, and ordinarily is still, dated from birth, not from “conception.”
A six-month-old “baby” was born six months ago. Pre-born embryos and fetuses are not “kids.” To speak otherwise is to play demagogic politics with words, to be lazy and unscientific.
Yet of course humans are usually — but not always — profoundly moved by the miracle of human life developing in the womb as well as by a baby being born and breathing its first breaths. This is natural and healthy.
Of course at a certain stage a human embryo / fetus and a pig embryo / fetus look virtually identical — and may seem to some even like a pre-born “monster” — but paternal / maternal instincts and human psychology and our general understanding of pregnancy as a process today ordinarily dispose us to feel emotional attachment even to fetuses as they become more mature, in the same way we feel empathy toward pregnant women.
Again not everyone feels this way, especially toward pregnant women, who others — or they themselves — may not feel are nearly so “beautiful” as they once were.
Most of us are instinctually (and socially) especially sympathetic to new-born human babies. That is very natural. But even here some don’t feel the joy happy parents normally do.
Let’s be honest here. For many, especially unrelated people, their attitude at such a time is sometimes colored by their attitude toward the mother, her financial and social status. Can she support her child? How many other children does she have? Is she married? They may secretly despise her for having a baby she is unfit to raise. Yet rightfully, or at least by modern law, nobody would dare deny the newborn baby’s legal personhood, its right to live under the protection of our laws — however inadequate those may be.
Fertile women have the almost absolute right to birth children if they desire, regardless of their status or ability to care for them.
Yet other men (and some women) seem to think that they (unrelated people), or society itself, needs the right to legislate that these utter strangers, unwilling women of all classes, MUST carry within their bodies, give birth to and then raise up these potential future children.
So the “Moral Majority” seeks to use politicians to pass all kinds of legislation that once any woman is carrying a zygote, embryo or fetus in her womb, no matter how unwilling she may be, she has no right to stop the process of a pregnancy in her own body, even if it was the product of failed contraception. To make matters worse, the demagogues scream that the embryo or fetus she has just learned to her dismay is growing in her body … is an unborn “kid” with “rights” equal to her own.
The legal “personhood” of a child has in past ages usually begun with its birth as a human baby, not with its life as one of many sperm cells or unfertilized human eggs, not with conception, not with the usually unknown moment it attaches successfully to the woman’s nourishing body, and not when electrical impulses and pulsations can be observed with echocardiograms or other special instruments in cells that will or may eventually become differentiated into a human heart!
Science cannot resolve all ethical conflicts about child-rearing nor can it determine when or whether an abortion is appropriate or “moral.” That should be left to the real person most intimately involved. Science can, however, certainly help us all to use language more clearly, organize our thoughts more clearly, and give us insights into how different people understand how becoming a “living human being” is a process of development leading to birth — which is itself only the start of a human being’s physical independent existence.
Yet assholes like you want to be able to kill your child right up to the moment of birth.
Support of murder is not good.
So no surprise you fall right into that.
So why doesn't the father also get his say of whether or not he wants to keep his child? That's my question.
so if the pro life side compromised and said ONLY IN THE CASE OF rape and incest and when the mothers health is in danger (the others you mentioned are nonsense) aportion could be absolutely legal at the federal level, would you agree to that?
simple yes or no.
The topic has remained unchanged. Update your talking points and stop self-identifying as a moron.
And that decision could have easily been exercised before the act of conception happened. Again you are trying to justify gross irresponsibility resulting in MURDER.but there can only be ONE FINAL DECISION.
It would be nice if we could trust them to make the right decisions.You actually think that is worse than denying women control over their bodies and healthcare decisions?
So a woman can die in agony, bleeding out, septic, because the fetus still has a heart beat.
