Thinking about having an abortion?

[Chuz Life]

Be a use we all know that children's rights are contingent upon how much or how little Republicans are willing to fork out their earnings in free shit.

A pregnant woman has a hard choice to make....
If you do not make it less of a burden to have the child, abortion will be the only option

Republicans cause more abortions than they prevent

Legality sends the message that killing children is ok.

That causes more abortions than anything else republicans do or don't do.

There is no law that says it is okay to kill children. Only that it is okay to abort fetuses. They're not the same, and you know it. You demonstrated it, because when given a choice between saving a thousand fetus, or saving one child, you would choose the child. Children, and fetuses are not morally equivalent no matter how many times you tell that lie.

Murder is one of the charges a person can get under a fetal HOMICIDE law.

Your denials have already been defeated

Further proof that your posts are replete with misinformation, sophistry, and lies – in this case the lie concerning fetal ‘homicide’ laws.

Do you want a quote of the law, snowflake?

 

[RWNJ]

Thinking about having an abortion?

Don't count on Republicans to help you with your maternity care
Don't think that Republicans will care if you can no longer work
Don't think that Republicans will help you with childcare
Don't think that Republicans care if you have another mouth to feed

Be a use we all know that children's rights are contingent upon how much or how little Republicans are willing to fork out their earnings in free shit.

A pregnant woman has a hard choice to make....
If you do not make it less of a burden to have the child, abortion will be the only option

Republicans cause more abortions than they prevent

Legality sends the message that killing children is ok.

That causes more abortions than anything else republicans do or don't do.

There is no law that says it is okay to kill children. Only that it is okay to abort fetuses. They're not the same, and you know it. You demonstrated it, because when given a choice between saving a thousand fetus, or saving one child, you would choose the child. Children, and fetuses are not morally equivalent no matter how many times you tell that lie.

Murder is one of the charges a person can get under a fetal HOMICIDE law.

Your denials have already been defeated

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception. That being the case, the fourteenth amendment should protect them.

 

[Pete7469]

If you're a libturd then you really don't have the capacity to think anyway.

Just get the abortion. With any luck you'll have a severe hemorrhage and die.

 

[mamooth]

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception.

Anyone saying such a thing is obviously wrong, being that sperm and eggs are alive. Life existed before conception, and it continues after conception. Life is a continuum, not something with a dividing line.

 

[RWNJ]

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception.

Anyone saying such a thing is obviously wrong, being that sperm and eggs are alive. Life existed before conception, and it continues after conception. Life is a continuum, not something with a dividing line.

In this case, life is defined as a member of the species Homo Sapiens. A zygote is a member because it has a unique genetic identity. I just posted a thread about this. It's a medical fact. Life begins at conception.

 

[mamooth]

In this case, life is defined as a member of the species Homo Sapiens.

And as a zygote isn't a "member", it's fails the test there.

You're trying to define yourself as correct. It's not going to work.

A zygote is a member because it has a unique genetic identity.

So twins aren't humans. Interesting.

Your eugenics-based philosophy is noted, and rejected for being disgusting and immoral. What's to stop you from arbitrarily declaring that someone's DNA isn't up to snuff, relegating them to be sub-human in your eyes?

 

[Czernobog]

Be a use we all know that children's rights are contingent upon how much or how little Republicans are willing to fork out their earnings in free shit.

A pregnant woman has a hard choice to make....
If you do not make it less of a burden to have the child, abortion will be the only option

Republicans cause more abortions than they prevent

Legality sends the message that killing children is ok.

That causes more abortions than anything else republicans do or don't do.

There is no law that says it is okay to kill children. Only that it is okay to abort fetuses. They're not the same, and you know it. You demonstrated it, because when given a choice between saving a thousand fetus, or saving one child, you would choose the child. Children, and fetuses are not morally equivalent no matter how many times you tell that lie.

Murder is one of the charges a person can get under a fetal HOMICIDE law.

Your denials have already been defeated

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception. That being the case, the fourteenth amendment should protect them.

No one is denying that a fetus is alive. Only that it is not morally equivalent to child, nor that it is a person. You want to misapply fetal homicide laws, knowing full well that those laws are extremely limited in their definition of "personhood" for fetuses, and do not include abortion.

 

[RWNJ]

In this case, life is defined as a member of the species Homo Sapiens.

And as a zygote isn't a "member", it's fails the test there.

You're trying to define yourself as correct. It's not going to work.

A zygote is a member because it has a unique genetic identity.

So twins aren't humans. Interesting.

Your eugenics-based philosophy is noted, and rejected for being disgusting and immoral. What's to stop you from arbitrarily declaring that someone's DNA isn't up to snuff, relegating them to be sub-human in your eyes?

Read the article in the OP. You might learn something. I know you didn't read it. Such ignorance, as you have displayed here, can only be intentional.

 

[Czernobog]

In this case, life is defined as a member of the species Homo Sapiens.

And as a zygote isn't a "member", it's fails the test there.

You're trying to define yourself as correct. It's not going to work.

A zygote is a member because it has a unique genetic identity.

So twins aren't humans. Interesting.

Your eugenics-based philosophy is noted, and rejected for being disgusting and immoral. What's to stop you from arbitrarily declaring that someone's DNA isn't up to snuff, relegating them to be sub-human in your eyes?

Read the article in the OP. You might learn something. I know you didn't read it. Such ignorance, as you have displayed here, can only be intentional.

There was no "article" in the OP. There was only an incorrect observation, which I corrected, and you didn't respond to.

 

[mamooth]

Read the article in the OP. You might learn something. I know you didn't read it. Such ignorance, as you have displayed here, can only be intentional.

Hey dumbass, there is no article in the OP.

I understand. You don't want to discuss the immorality of your fanatical eugenics cult, so you're just flailing and running.

 

[RWNJ]

Read the article in the OP. You might learn something. I know you didn't read it. Such ignorance, as you have displayed here, can only be intentional.

Hey dumbass, there is no article in the OP.

I understand. You don't want to discuss the immorality of your fanatical eugenics cult, so you're just flailing and running.

Yeah, well. I have several threads I'm following now. Can you blame me for getting a little confused? Anyway, I never said anything about eugenics. You are the one putting words in my mouth, and spouting specious arguments.

 

[HenryBHough]

If you're a liberal and thinking an abortion I know a charity that will cheerfully pay for it.

They're genuine patriots who understand that the killing of child likely to become a full-blown, fully indoctrinated liberal may be abhorrent but serves the greater good.

 

[Coyote]

Before you decide, think about this. Your mother didn't abort you. Think really hard about this.

I did.

And I came to the conclusion that - I don't care. If she had aborted me - I wouldn't know. Or care.

Stupid argument.

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

Thinking about having an abortion?

Don't count on Republicans to help you with your maternity care
Don't think that Republicans will care if you can no longer work
Don't think that Republicans will help you with childcare
Don't think that Republicans care if you have another mouth to feed

Be a use we all know that children's rights are contingent upon how much or how little Republicans are willing to fork out their earnings in free shit.

A pregnant woman has a hard choice to make....
If you do not make it less of a burden to have the child, abortion will be the only option

Republicans cause more abortions than they prevent

Why not make the choice before sex?
Responsibility ring a bell?

The issue isn’t personal responsibility; it’s conservatives seeking to compel conformity through force of law.

How many children have you aborted so far?

 

[MPS777]

Be a use we all know that children's rights are contingent upon how much or how little Republicans are willing to fork out their earnings in free shit.

A pregnant woman has a hard choice to make....
If you do not make it less of a burden to have the child, abortion will be the only option

Republicans cause more abortions than they prevent

Legality sends the message that killing children is ok.

That causes more abortions than anything else republicans do or don't do.

There is no law that says it is okay to kill children. Only that it is okay to abort fetuses. They're not the same, and you know it. You demonstrated it, because when given a choice between saving a thousand fetus, or saving one child, you would choose the child. Children, and fetuses are not morally equivalent no matter how many times you tell that lie.

Murder is one of the charges a person can get under a fetal HOMICIDE law.

Your denials have already been defeated

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception. That being the case, the fourteenth amendment should protect them.

If someone commits a needless and premeditated murder of an innocent person, the perpetrator would deserve nothing less than a very lengthy prison sentence. The fourteenth amendment dictates that all innocent persons deserve “equal protection of the laws”. If a human zygote is considered a person under the fourteenth amendment, there’s really no way to see them as anything other than an innocent person. Therefore RWNJ must believe that if a rape victim takes an “abortion pill” a few days after they are raped; that RAPE VICTIM must get the equivalent of a very lengthy prison sentence in order to faithfully apply “equal protection of the laws” to all innocent persons. This follows logic and law. People must learn that there are some among us that hold such tyrannical beliefs.

 

[Chuz Life]

A pregnant woman has a hard choice to make....
If you do not make it less of a burden to have the child, abortion will be the only option

Republicans cause more abortions than they prevent

Legality sends the message that killing children is ok.

That causes more abortions than anything else republicans do or don't do.

There is no law that says it is okay to kill children. Only that it is okay to abort fetuses. They're not the same, and you know it. You demonstrated it, because when given a choice between saving a thousand fetus, or saving one child, you would choose the child. Children, and fetuses are not morally equivalent no matter how many times you tell that lie.

Murder is one of the charges a person can get under a fetal HOMICIDE law.

Your denials have already been defeated

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception. That being the case, the fourteenth amendment should protect them.

If someone commits a needless and premeditated murder of an innocent person, the perpetrator would deserve nothing less than a very lengthy prison sentence. The fourteenth amendment dictates that all innocent persons deserve “equal protection of the laws”. If a human zygote is considered a person under the fourteenth amendment, there’s really no way to see them as anything other than an innocent person. Therefore RWNJ must believe that if a rape victim takes an “abortion pill” a few days after they are raped; that RAPE VICTIM must get the equivalent of a very lengthy prison sentence in order to faithfully apply “equal protection of the laws” to all innocent persons. This follows logic and law. People must learn that there are some among us that hold such tyrannical beliefs.

Uuuuhmmmmm. Logic and law allows for the use of deadly force to protect one's self against a threat to their life that is forced upon them.

 

[MPS777]

Legality sends the message that killing children is ok.

That causes more abortions than anything else republicans do or don't do.

There is no law that says it is okay to kill children. Only that it is okay to abort fetuses. They're not the same, and you know it. You demonstrated it, because when given a choice between saving a thousand fetus, or saving one child, you would choose the child. Children, and fetuses are not morally equivalent no matter how many times you tell that lie.

Murder is one of the charges a person can get under a fetal HOMICIDE law.

Your denials have already been defeated

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception. That being the case, the fourteenth amendment should protect them.

If someone commits a needless and premeditated murder of an innocent person, the perpetrator would deserve nothing less than a very lengthy prison sentence. The fourteenth amendment dictates that all innocent persons deserve “equal protection of the laws”. If a human zygote is considered a person under the fourteenth amendment, there’s really no way to see them as anything other than an innocent person. Therefore RWNJ must believe that if a rape victim takes an “abortion pill” a few days after they are raped; that RAPE VICTIM must get the equivalent of a very lengthy prison sentence in order to faithfully apply “equal protection of the laws” to all innocent persons. This follows logic and law. People must learn that there are some among us that hold such tyrannical beliefs.

Uuuuhmmmmm. Logic and law allows for the use of deadly force to protect one's self against a threat to their life that is forced upon them.

Very true, that rape victim would have a pretty valid case to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights to protect their liberty against the state's monopoly of force.

 

[Chuz Life]

There is no law that says it is okay to kill children. Only that it is okay to abort fetuses. They're not the same, and you know it. You demonstrated it, because when given a choice between saving a thousand fetus, or saving one child, you would choose the child. Children, and fetuses are not morally equivalent no matter how many times you tell that lie.

Murder is one of the charges a person can get under a fetal HOMICIDE law.

Your denials have already been defeated

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception. That being the case, the fourteenth amendment should protect them.

If someone commits a needless and premeditated murder of an innocent person, the perpetrator would deserve nothing less than a very lengthy prison sentence. The fourteenth amendment dictates that all innocent persons deserve “equal protection of the laws”. If a human zygote is considered a person under the fourteenth amendment, there’s really no way to see them as anything other than an innocent person. Therefore RWNJ must believe that if a rape victim takes an “abortion pill” a few days after they are raped; that RAPE VICTIM must get the equivalent of a very lengthy prison sentence in order to faithfully apply “equal protection of the laws” to all innocent persons. This follows logic and law. People must learn that there are some among us that hold such tyrannical beliefs.

Uuuuhmmmmm. Logic and law allows for the use of deadly force to protect one's self against a threat to their life that is forced upon them.

Very true, that rape victim would have a pretty valid case to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights to protect their liberty against the state's monopoly of force.

Congrats.

Your idiocy just earned you a free one way pass to my ignore list.

I look forward to the peace and quiet that I no doubt will be enjoying without your moronic noise in the future.

 

[Chuz Life]

Before you decide, think about this. Your mother didn't abort you. Think really hard about this.

I did.

And I came to the conclusion that - I don't care. If she had aborted me - I wouldn't know. Or care.

Stupid argument.

Did you have any rights before you became aware of the concept or what they are?

 

[Coyote]

Legality sends the message that killing children is ok.

That causes more abortions than anything else republicans do or don't do.

There is no law that says it is okay to kill children. Only that it is okay to abort fetuses. They're not the same, and you know it. You demonstrated it, because when given a choice between saving a thousand fetus, or saving one child, you would choose the child. Children, and fetuses are not morally equivalent no matter how many times you tell that lie.

Murder is one of the charges a person can get under a fetal HOMICIDE law.

Your denials have already been defeated

Embryologists have stated that life begins at conception. That being the case, the fourteenth amendment should protect them.

If someone commits a needless and premeditated murder of an innocent person, the perpetrator would deserve nothing less than a very lengthy prison sentence. The fourteenth amendment dictates that all innocent persons deserve “equal protection of the laws”. If a human zygote is considered a person under the fourteenth amendment, there’s really no way to see them as anything other than an innocent person. Therefore RWNJ must believe that if a rape victim takes an “abortion pill” a few days after they are raped; that RAPE VICTIM must get the equivalent of a very lengthy prison sentence in order to faithfully apply “equal protection of the laws” to all innocent persons. This follows logic and law. People must learn that there are some among us that hold such tyrannical beliefs.

Uuuuhmmmmm. Logic and law allows for the use of deadly force to protect one's self against a threat to their life that is forced upon them.

Doesn't fly.

In the eyes of the law, assuming constitutional protections are granted equally to unborn children - the unborn child does not represent a threat against one's life UNLESS it's a threat - ie pre-eclampsia etc.

There is no rational way to construe that the means of the child's conception is a threat to the mother's life. That is LOGIC.