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.
End the life of a human baby is not a reproductive right.
A reproductive right would be the right not to get pregnant
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The Constitution says otherwise.
Actually, it doesn't. A handful of unelected judges said otherwise, reading something new into the Constitution that was never there and rendering a decision that even Bader-Ginsburg admitted was poorly written. That said, the government needs to stay out of people's private lives. People who don't approve of abortion don't need to have one. What someone else decides is really nobody else's business.
Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.
I know a few libertarians that are against abortion. Thing about libertarians is, they arent a big collective like the duopoly is.One of the few areas I agree with Trump’s current position
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Aren't you libertarian?
Your position seems contrary.
Seriously, does anyone believe that Donald Trump gives a shit one way or another about whether a woman can get a legal abortion?
Here's a thought, don't get pregnant. Apparently some people lack the discipline.
Yes, you birthed a baby. You didnt birth a fetus."having" in this sense, is the actual birth, isnt it? So, wouldnt saying "im having a baby" be correct?If it is human, why add fetus? Hell, why do we terms for the zygote as well?Is that why the technical term is human fetus?
To make baby killers more comfortable. I've yet to hear an expectant mother claim she is having a fetus or zygote
I was six weeks and I said I'm having a baby. Guess what? I did
Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.
The Constitution affords no rights of personhood to transgenders either. Does that mean it's O.K. to kill them?
crazy thing about the religion argument is, in the bible the fetus wasnt a big deal. Killing a fetus was "loss of property" if you will. In fact, it says human beings didnt begin until god breathed into them and they took their first breath of air. The Jews thought a pregnant woman had nothing but water for the first 40 days. Also, in jewish law, the baby doesnt matter until the head pops out. AKA becoming a human being.Translation: "Pay for my baby or I'll kill it!"
no. translation... pro-birth activists are hypocrites who don't give a damn about children once they're born.
'
it's also -- don't tell me an embryo is a baby and leave other people alone to follow their own consciences within the law as defined constitutionally because this isn't a theocracy and I personally couldn't care less what religious zealots want.
mmmmkay?
I find it particularly appalling that the government cooperates with these filthy theocrats' desire to remove from our female population the right to choose our own religious beliefs, as well as our constitutional right to privacy. No government at any level has any legitimate business interfering with people's privacy, private decisions, private medical decisions, choice of religious beliefs, or personal relationships. These people talk about "freedom," and fuss about government "intrusion" into their financial lives, beliefs, privacy, etc. but seek to compromise it daily as to the most basic rights to have sovereignty over their own bodies and to choose their own beliefs.
Are you saying abortion is a religion?
I have to say I do agree with you. But freedom of religion ends when it comes to killing people.
Abortion is a religion? Are you out of your mind? From your prior postings, I'm inclined to believe this.
she But the idea that a fertilized egg/zygote/embryo is a human being is based on theology thought up by some bat-shit crazy cleric. Just because a person is pregnant does not give anyone any legitimate right to force somebody's else's religion on her. She will make the decision whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term based on her own chosen beliefs, not those of some jackass cleric from a faith that she has not chosen to embrace. If she wishes to ask someone for their advice, she will of her own accord. But some of these states force her to consult openly sectarian religious organizations as a condition of obtaining an abortion. Why would she want to discuss her pregnancy with an outsider, particularly one with a clear religion-based agenda. Her uterus is her property alone, not some jackass outsider cleric's.
I know a few libertarians that are against abortion. Thing about libertarians is, they arent a big collective like the duopoly is.One of the few areas I agree with Trump’s current position
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Aren't you libertarian?
Your position seems contrary.
End the life of a human baby is not a reproductive right.
A reproductive right would be the right not to get pregnant
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The Constitution says otherwise.
Actually, it doesn't. A handful of unelected judges said otherwise, reading something new into the Constitution that was never there and rendering a decision that even Bader-Ginsburg admitted was poorly written. That said, the government needs to stay out of people's private lives. People who don't approve of abortion don't need to have one. What someone else decides is really nobody else's business.
crazy thing about the religion argument is, in the bible the fetus wasnt a big deal. Killing a fetus was "loss of property" if you will. In fact, it says human beings didnt begin until god breathed into them and they took their first breath of air. The Jews thought a pregnant woman had nothing but water for the first 40 days. Also, in jewish law, the baby doesnt matter until the head pops out. AKA becoming a human being.no. translation... pro-birth activists are hypocrites who don't give a damn about children once they're born.
'
it's also -- don't tell me an embryo is a baby and leave other people alone to follow their own consciences within the law as defined constitutionally because this isn't a theocracy and I personally couldn't care less what religious zealots want.
mmmmkay?
I find it particularly appalling that the government cooperates with these filthy theocrats' desire to remove from our female population the right to choose our own religious beliefs, as well as our constitutional right to privacy. No government at any level has any legitimate business interfering with people's privacy, private decisions, private medical decisions, choice of religious beliefs, or personal relationships. These people talk about "freedom," and fuss about government "intrusion" into their financial lives, beliefs, privacy, etc. but seek to compromise it daily as to the most basic rights to have sovereignty over their own bodies and to choose their own beliefs.
Are you saying abortion is a religion?
I have to say I do agree with you. But freedom of religion ends when it comes to killing people.
Abortion is a religion? Are you out of your mind? From your prior postings, I'm inclined to believe this.
she But the idea that a fertilized egg/zygote/embryo is a human being is based on theology thought up by some bat-shit crazy cleric. Just because a person is pregnant does not give anyone any legitimate right to force somebody's else's religion on her. She will make the decision whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term based on her own chosen beliefs, not those of some jackass cleric from a faith that she has not chosen to embrace. If she wishes to ask someone for their advice, she will of her own accord. But some of these states force her to consult openly sectarian religious organizations as a condition of obtaining an abortion. Why would she want to discuss her pregnancy with an outsider, particularly one with a clear religion-based agenda. Her uterus is her property alone, not some jackass outsider cleric's.
Actually, not true at all.
King James Bible
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
That's from the OT.
King James Bible
And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost..
NT.
Translation: "Pay for my baby or I'll kill it!"
no. translation... pro-birth activists are hypocrites who don't give a damn about children once they're born.
'
it's also -- don't tell me an embryo is a baby and leave other people alone to follow their own consciences within the law as defined constitutionally because this isn't a theocracy and I personally couldn't care less what religious zealots want.
mmmmkay?
I find it particularly appalling that the government cooperates with these filthy theocrats' desire to remove from our female population the right to choose our own religious beliefs, as well as our constitutional right to privacy. No government at any level has any legitimate business interfering with people's privacy, private decisions, private medical decisions, choice of religious beliefs, or personal relationships. These people talk about "freedom," and fuss about government "intrusion" into their financial lives, beliefs, privacy, etc. but seek to compromise it daily as to the most basic rights to have sovereignty over their own bodies and to choose their own beliefs.
Are you saying abortion is a religion?
I have to say I do agree with you. But freedom of religion ends when it comes to killing people.
Abortion is a religion? Are you out of your mind? From your prior postings, I'm inclined to believe this.
she But the idea that a fertilized egg/zygote/embryo is a human being is based on theology thought up by some bat-shit crazy cleric. Just because a person is pregnant does not give anyone any legitimate right to force somebody's else's religion on her. She will make the decision whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term based on her own chosen beliefs, not those of some jackass cleric from a faith that she has not chosen to embrace. If she wishes to ask someone for their advice, she will of her own accord. But some of these states force her to consult openly sectarian religious organizations as a condition of obtaining an abortion. Why would she want to discuss her pregnancy with an outsider, particularly one with a clear religion-based agenda. Her uterus is her property alone, not some jackass outsider cleric's.
You are the one who said that de-legalizing abortion interferes with your choice to exercise your religious beliefs.
Another nutzoid baby killing freak.
There's more human cells in my morning crap than in a fertilized egg.Find me science that says an unborn fetus is a human being.The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.So the right of an individual to own a gun isn't a constitutional right, it's just a mere interpretation made by unelected judges?
The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.
Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.
it says nothing about having the right to terminate one either, and is thus left up to the State legislatures.
No it gives persons the right of privacy. The states ought not be allowed to interfere in a woman's right to the private act of abortion because there is no constitutional protection of what is being aborted.
what is being aborted is a human, what else could it possibly be? Do you think the thing being aborted is a frog?
I know. But the phrase "im having a baby" is referring to the birth. Future tense.Yes, you birthed a baby. You didnt birth a fetus."having" in this sense, is the actual birth, isnt it? So, wouldnt saying "im having a baby" be correct?If it is human, why add fetus? Hell, why do we terms for the zygote as well?
To make baby killers more comfortable. I've yet to hear an expectant mother claim she is having a fetus or zygote
I was six weeks and I said I'm having a baby. Guess what? I did
It was a fetus...just like you were at one point.
I gotta be honest here....you're struggling mightily on this thread. Not like you at all
no. translation... pro-birth activists are hypocrites who don't give a damn about children once they're born.
'
it's also -- don't tell me an embryo is a baby and leave other people alone to follow their own consciences within the law as defined constitutionally because this isn't a theocracy and I personally couldn't care less what religious zealots want.
mmmmkay?
I find it particularly appalling that the government cooperates with these filthy theocrats' desire to remove from our female population the right to choose our own religious beliefs, as well as our constitutional right to privacy. No government at any level has any legitimate business interfering with people's privacy, private decisions, private medical decisions, choice of religious beliefs, or personal relationships. These people talk about "freedom," and fuss about government "intrusion" into their financial lives, beliefs, privacy, etc. but seek to compromise it daily as to the most basic rights to have sovereignty over their own bodies and to choose their own beliefs.
Are you saying abortion is a religion?
I have to say I do agree with you. But freedom of religion ends when it comes to killing people.
Abortion is a religion? Are you out of your mind? From your prior postings, I'm inclined to believe this.
she But the idea that a fertilized egg/zygote/embryo is a human being is based on theology thought up by some bat-shit crazy cleric. Just because a person is pregnant does not give anyone any legitimate right to force somebody's else's religion on her. She will make the decision whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term based on her own chosen beliefs, not those of some jackass cleric from a faith that she has not chosen to embrace. If she wishes to ask someone for their advice, she will of her own accord. But some of these states force her to consult openly sectarian religious organizations as a condition of obtaining an abortion. Why would she want to discuss her pregnancy with an outsider, particularly one with a clear religion-based agenda. Her uterus is her property alone, not some jackass outsider cleric's.
You are the one who said that de-legalizing abortion interferes with your choice to exercise your religious beliefs.
Another nutzoid baby killing freak.
You are the one who said that de-legalizing abortion interferes with your choice to exercise your religious beliefs.
This is not what I said. What I actually said that "de-legalizing" abortion denies a pregnant person the right to choose what religious beliefs to follow and act accordingly. An atheist who is pregnant may choose to act one way, a person who is Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Wiccan, Sikh, whatever, have their own beliefs and act within their parameters. Not every woman is a Roman Catholic or a Protestant fundie, you know. Not everyone thinks that pregnancy must be a punishment for the free exercise of female sexuality, either. Only sickos think so.
Since the Constitution affords NO rights of personhood, citizenship, or any such other relevant condition to fetuses,
the right to terminate a fetus has nothing to do with killing humans as far as the law of the land is concerned.
The Constitution affords no rights of personhood to transgenders either. Does that mean it's O.K. to kill them?
They aren't citizens?
When i eat my fresh chicken eggs in the morning for breakfast, am i eating eggs or chickens?Find me science that says an unborn fetus is a human being.So the right of an individual to own a gun isn't a constitutional right, it's just a mere interpretation made by unelected judges?
The right to bear arms is stated specifically in the Constitution. Please find me the part of the constitution where killing a human being is listed as a right.
What else can it be? Is it a chicken? or is is a penguin? or is is frog? NOPE the only possible answer is that the results of two humans mating is that they created another human.
Science tells us that each kind begets its own.
Look, i understand the emotion in this, but calling them human beings isnt correct. They dont even meet the requirements for a living organism, much less a human.
you are eating a chicken egg.
Please explain to me how a fetus does not meet the requirements for a living organism.
When does the magic happen that transforms the non-human into a human? Are you a big Harry Potter fan?
Logically, it's a human when it can survive outside of the womb.When does the magic happen that transforms the non-human into a human?
" Those claiming that abortion is needed to reduce child abuse must contend with the empirical reality that child abuse increased by over 500 percent in the decade following Roe v. Wade. In fact, in less than a decade after Roe, child abuse had already risen by over 500 percent. These stats come right from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services."Did it? Link?I don’t assume every, but it’s a safe assumption that some certainly will not be good parents. Look at all the stories of child abuse we have now.You ASSUME every person who aborts would be a bad mother. Fascinating. That's very revealing.
Pro-choicers are ugly inside. Through and through. You hold victims of rape and incest as human shields. You threaten, "Pay for my baby or I'll kill it".
Disgusting.
We had a totally unexpected child. My wife got pregnant at the worst possible time. We had moved 3,000 miles from our families, had just had twins which were exhausting us, and I was laid off from the job which had brought me 3000 miles.
Everyone we knew suggested abortion.
FUCK. THAT. SHIT.
Inconveniences are temporary. Life is forever.
I cannot imagine life without our youngest child.
Child abuse sky rocketed since the advent of abortion.
Which makes sense. Pro-abortion fruitcakes maintain that humanity is dependent upon age, and that there is no such thing as an inalienable right..rights go to the strong and the aggressive. Not to the vulnerable and passive.
Mike Adams - Does Abortion Really Prevent Child Abuse?
1976: 10
- Trends in Reporting Rates (per 1,000)
1977: 13
1978: 13
1979: 15
1980: 18
1981: 19
1982: 20
1983: 24
1984: 27
1985: 31
1986: 33
1987: 34
1988: 35
1989: 38
1990: 41
1991: 41
1992: 43
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Bureau. 1993 and 1999. Child Maltreatment (1993,1997): Reports from the States to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Crimes Against Children Research Center
It is hard to abuse a child that doesn’t exist.
No it isn't!! I've shown a dozen ways your stance is non-biological! Just saying it's *biological* doesn't make it so. Every *biological* point you've made has been shown to be utterly and completely unscientific and unbiological.I know. But the phrase "im having a baby" is referring to the birth. Future tense.Yes, you birthed a baby. You didnt birth a fetus."having" in this sense, is the actual birth, isnt it? So, wouldnt saying "im having a baby" be correct?To make baby killers more comfortable. I've yet to hear an expectant mother claim she is having a fetus or zygote
I was six weeks and I said I'm having a baby. Guess what? I did
It was a fetus...just like you were at one point.
I gotta be honest here....you're struggling mightily on this thread. Not like you at all
How am i struggling? My entire stance on this is based on biology.
