What should abortion laws be?

What do you believe abortion laws should be?


  • Total voters
    59
Fetal tissue is parasitic. If a women want to rid her body of the parasite that is HER right. It's legal so I laugh at you holier than thou, religious, wack-jobs who want your beliefs imposed on others - you are NAZIS.
 
☭proletarian☭;1843401 said:
Its purpose is to join with another specialized cell which is part of another organism, the female animal of the same species, and form a separate and distinct organism, the embryo of that same species. Neither the sperm nor the egg themselves are distinct organisms. .

In that case , the fetus is not an organism either.

Honest question: Are you legally retarded?

Yep.


Just reading such stupidity is painful.

And the truth shall set you free.



The only difference between a fetus and a child no longer a fetus is location. It's like the difference between magma and lava.

Honest question: Are you legally retarded?



I can't articulate how stupid you are... if there's a word in the English language to describe you and JD, I don't know it.

Astute, genius, discerner, deductive reasoner
 
That's very noble of you.

Let me ask , how much money did you contribute to Innocence Project in 2009?

The work of Innocence Network member organizations led to 27 exonerations in 2009. The 27 exonerees served a total of 421 years in prison for crimes they didn't commit, and their cases reveal deep flaws in the criminal justice system that must be addressed."

.

I understand you're not so sublte attempt to call me a hypocrit when I tell you I haven't donated anything to that organization. I'm not sure what exonerating innocent people has to do with abortion. Explain.
 
Last edited:
☭proletarian☭;1842358 said:
So when liposuction is illegal all you get are garage vacuum jobs whereas when it's legal they are extremely rare.
Far as I know, there's no law against using yoga to implant your head in your anal cavity, yet you and JD are the only ones doing it in this thread.

It's not even my damn argument it's hers, not my fault you can't grasp it (hint there was a clause about being safe when legal which doesn't apply to medial procedures done by untrained individuals without the proper equipment).
 
And so we should legalize involuntary lobotomies and harvesting organs from living persons, since we can do it in a cleanroom if it's legal?

Yours is a fool's argument.
 
☭proletarian☭;1843875 said:
And so we should legalize involuntary lobotomies and harvesting organs from living persons, since we can do it in a cleanroom if it's legal?

Yours is a fool's argument.

IT'S NOT MY DAMN ARGUMENT! It was JD's I was just correcting you.

Anyway lobotomies are always perilious and yes I believe you should have a right to sell your own organs, not for that reason though.

EDIT: Well fuck me I misread JD's post, you're on your own now JD. You were right that was her argument (I think).
 
Last edited:
☭proletarian☭;1843875 said:
And so we should legalize involuntary lobotomies and harvesting organs from living persons, since we can do it in a cleanroom if it's legal?

Yours is a fool's argument.

IT'S NOT MY DAMN ARGUMENT! It was JD's I was just correcting you.

Anyway lobotomies are always perilious and yes I believe you should have a right to sell your own organs, not for that reason though.

EDIT: Well fuck me I misread JD's post, you're on your own now JD. You were right that was her argument (I think).

Always tread lightly when defending a woman who thinks dogs and humans can interbreed.
 
Once again, I go through the posts and not a single Conservative has any solution other than, "Make abortion illegal". Nothing to help the mother. Nothing to help the child.

It's like they are saying, "get it born and then screw it, it's not MY problem. I did MY job by making it illegal. I'm though. Next!"
 
That's very noble of you.

Let me ask , how much money did you contribute to Innocence Project in 2009?

The work of Innocence Network member organizations led to 27 exonerations in 2009. The 27 exonerees served a total of 421 years in prison for crimes they didn't commit, and their cases reveal deep flaws in the criminal justice system that must be addressed."

.

I understand you're not so sublte attempt to call me a hypocrit when I tell you I haven't donated anything to that organization. I'm not sure what exonerating innocent people has to do with abortion. Explain.

Well, I understand that most of the defendants are Negroes. Who wants to save the lives of Negroes?

Not you.

.
 
Once again, I go through the posts and not a single Conservative has any solution other than, "Make abortion illegal". Nothing to help the mother. Nothing to help the child.

It's like they are saying, "get it born and then screw it, it's not MY problem. I did MY job by making it illegal. I'm though. Next!"

Once again, you go through the posts and only see what you want to see. Why do you even bother with an interactive medium when you only interact with your own paranoia and bigotry? You could do that offline and save a lot of board space.
 
☭proletarian☭;1842638 said:
☭proletarian☭;1842524 said:
an amoeba is a cell of a larger organism? And here I thought the were their own entities.

Do share your source.

The spermatozoa has unique characteristics is alive and constitutes an integral part of the fetus. Just like the fetus has the POTENTIAL to create a human being so does the spermatozoa.

Any guy caught jerking off must be arrested for performing an abortion without a license.

We need to protect the babies.

.


How can you be so purposely stupid? Doesn't it hurt? It sure hurts to read it.

The sperm and ovum cease to be as distinct entities when they combine to form a new human organism. neither is a human organism- they are simply human germ cells. A fetus is a distinct living organism that is genetically human- a human being by definition.

This has been explained countless times and either you're purposely being retarded or you're simply not smart enough to caerry on a meaningful and honest discussion.


The fetus is not a distinct entity. To be distinct, or a human "being", or an organism whatsoever, one must be capable of adapting to different environments, which zygotes cannot do. HUMANS can survive in air, and cannot survive in an perpetual underwater state. Zygotes can ONLY survive in the uterus. Thus, a zygote is NOT THE SAME THING as a human being because it CANNOT hold its breath, and breathe air.

A person on a ventilator is DIFFERENT- so don't try to argue semantics on this one. A person on a ventilator CAN have their nose and mouth sealed off for a few seconds, and immersed in water, thereby doing the same thing as a conscious person would do if they held their breath and went underwater.

Women are life support systems, at least loosely defined, and even if the embryo was carefully removed, it would NOT be capable of surviving the environment that all human beings CAN survive without the aide of a parent encasing them, to do so.

And furthermore- DEAD people are no longer human "beings" either. They are human corpses, once they die. Yes they have human DNA, but if they cease from being capable of functioning, or breathing on their own, or having a blood pressure (a pulse) without support, they are, by all accounts DEAD. There is no BEING left in them. No sense in keeping them alive based on some technicality. The right to die is just as important as the right to life.. and the right to life should never be construed as an entitlement to live.

What happens if someone's born kid/ or fetus needs an organ or tissue? Do you think that the parents should be forced to give up their own bodily autonomy to keep that kid alive, based on some ridiculous nonsensical entitlement to the working parts of another person's body, that you associate with the right to life?? No way!! I can't explain autonomy in a way that is any more simplistic for you..
 
☭proletarian☭;1842638 said:
The spermatozoa has unique characteristics is alive and constitutes an integral part of the fetus. Just like the fetus has the POTENTIAL to create a human being so does the spermatozoa.

Any guy caught jerking off must be arrested for performing an abortion without a license.

We need to protect the babies.

.


How can you be so purposely stupid? Doesn't it hurt? It sure hurts to read it.

The sperm and ovum cease to be as distinct entities when they combine to form a new human organism. neither is a human organism- they are simply human germ cells. A fetus is a distinct living organism that is genetically human- a human being by definition.

This has been explained countless times and either you're purposely being retarded or you're simply not smart enough to caerry on a meaningful and honest discussion.


The fetus is not a distinct entity. To be distinct, or a human "being", or an organism whatsoever, one must be capable of adapting to different environments, which zygotes cannot do. HUMANS can survive in air, and cannot survive in an perpetual underwater state. Zygotes can ONLY survive in the uterus. Thus, a zygote is NOT THE SAME THING as a human being because it CANNOT hold its breath, and breathe air.

A person on a ventilator is DIFFERENT- so don't try to argue semantics on this one. A person on a ventilator CAN have their nose and mouth sealed off for a few seconds, and immersed in water, thereby doing the same thing as a conscious person would do if they held their breath and went underwater.

Women are life support systems, at least loosely defined, and even if the embryo was carefully removed, it would NOT be capable of surviving the environment that all human beings CAN survive without the aide of a parent encasing them, to do so.

And furthermore- DEAD people are no longer human "beings" either. They are human corpses, once they die. Yes they have human DNA, but if they cease from being capable of functioning, or breathing on their own, or having a blood pressure (a pulse) without support, they are, by all accounts DEAD. There is no BEING left in them. No sense in keeping them alive based on some technicality. The right to die is just as important as the right to life.. and the right to life should never be construed as an entitlement to live.

What happens if someone's born kid/ or fetus needs an organ or tissue? Do you think that the parents should be forced to give up their own bodily autonomy to keep that kid alive, based on some ridiculous nonsensical entitlement to the working parts of another person's body, that you associate with the right to life?? No way!! I can't explain autonomy in a way that is any more simplistic for you..

uh oh---here we go again :lol:
 
Once again, I go through the posts and not a single Conservative has any solution other than, "Make abortion illegal". Nothing to help the mother. Nothing to help the child.

It's like they are saying, "get it born and then screw it, it's not MY problem. I did MY job by making it illegal. I'm though. Next!"

Once again, you go through the posts and only see what you want to see. Why do you even bother with an interactive medium when you only interact with your own paranoia and bigotry? You could do that offline and save a lot of board space.

I'm sure you believe what you say, too bad you couldn't link any corroborating evidence.

I have seen Democrats with solutions, even Obama. Solutions other than abortion.

While Obama supports a woman's right to choose, he has stated many times that he is against abortion, but until women have a viable alternative, then he has to support women's rights.

Republicans simply don't care about consequences. They would rather see their own children die than to reconsider their ideology. We know that with the HPV Virus:

HPV is an increasingly common sexually transmitted disease and one that scientists say is linked to 70% of all cases of cervical cancer.

An STD Vaccine For All Girls? - TIME

if you are good folks who raise your daughter to be chaste and pure until she reaches her marriage bed, she won't need this."

------------

They would rather see their kids die. Hey, if they are raised "right", they won't have sex.
 
Republicans simply don't care about consequences. They would rather see their own children die than to reconsider their ideology
Take your partisan hackery elsewhere.
 
^ Has nothing to do with this subject. Those groups you are referring to are nut jobs, the few but the loud and are talking about immunization policy not abortion. The general populous does not feel this way.

Once again, I put fourth an option in the very first post – allow abortions up to the end of the first trimester. That is one possible solution. If you believe that there is a better solution then put it forward AND STATE YOU’RE REASONING. If you believe there is error in what I suggested then POINT IT OUT AND STATE YOUR REASONING. Since you have failed to do anything of the sort I can only surmise that you have no idea why you support your pov nor truly have you even put forward what you truly believe in. If all you have is rhetoric then leave. If you have some input, we have been waiting.

oops, that was at rdean, you posted while I was typing pro :)
 
☭proletarian☭;1844399 said:
Republicans simply don't care about consequences. They would rather see their own children die than to reconsider their ideology
Take your partisan hackery elsewhere.

You forgot the "sputtering", the "outrage" and the "dirty words".

I put up links.

Abstinence only doesn't work.

Rejecting vaccines for STD's don't work.

And believe me, abortion is most definitely related to abstinence and STD's. You can see the connection, right?
 

Forum List

Back
Top