Which should have first priority: The woman, the fertilized egg, or the fetus?

[PoliticalChic]

. . . but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

Above is an excellent example of Proof by Assertion Fallacy: Redfish has absolutely no evidence for such a stupid statement.

euthanasia is the next logical step from abortion on demand, just as multiple marriage is the next logical step from gay marriage.

You and deny and hurl your juvenile insults if it somehow makes you feel important, but you cannot refute the logical progression of the liberal agenda.

Bet you saw this...

"Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal' according to youth branch of Swedish Liberal People's Party"
”Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal', according to youth political group"

A tiny political group in another country making ridiculous demands...means what exactly?

Did you see the word "Liberal"?
...means what exactly?

So....embarrassment brings you here?

 

[Coyote]

. . . but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

Above is an excellent example of Proof by Assertion Fallacy: Redfish has absolutely no evidence for such a stupid statement.

euthanasia is the next logical step from abortion on demand, just as multiple marriage is the next logical step from gay marriage.

You and deny and hurl your juvenile insults if it somehow makes you feel important, but you cannot refute the logical progression of the liberal agenda.

Bet you saw this...

"Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal' according to youth branch of Swedish Liberal People's Party"
”Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal', according to youth political group"

A tiny political group in another country making ridiculous demands...means what exactly?

Did you see the word "Liberal"?
...means what exactly?

So....embarrassment brings you here?

You mean like "The Democratic People's Republic of Korea" is....democratic?

 

[boilermaker55]

If you do believe that ,ultimately, why or how can one freeze a human being for months?
They freeze embryos...Blastocyst & Embryo Freezing in IVF, Vitrification & Cryopreservation.
So!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Life begins at conception. If it begins it was God's will...and so the fertilized egg has first priority. If woman does not want the child...put it up for adoption.

 

[Dragonlady]

"Conservatives should focus their energies on providing for the already living children - ensuring better education opportunities for the poor to help them realize their potential."

When you do that, ultra right socons, the rest of us will listen.

Do you know what the ultimate irony is? These people focus all their energies on demonizing women who have abortions. Not a peep about the thousands of embryos left over from invitro fertilization that are destroyed. In fact - I can't find a single thread on it.

Actually, we peep about it quite a bit. We don't write a lot of separate threads specifically about it. We usually just fold it into the whole "killing unborn babies is wrong" scenario.

Pro-lifers can and do oppose IVF practices of destroying embryos. But frankly, it's a drop in the bucket, numerically, to the number of abortions taking place every year, and one only has so much time and energy.

I have a real problem over rape. I understand this from here to eternity. Cripes this is hard. I think many of us do.

It's been my experience that the right thing to do is usually the more difficult thing to do.

very true, but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

As long as Americans refuse to address the woefully inadequate supports for working pregnant women in terms of job security or maternity leave, women living at or below the poverty line have to choose between the living children they have, and the potential child she is carrying.


If she doesn't have the resources to care for her living children, how can she feed and clothe another child? What about daycare? If she is fired for being pregnant she has no recourse and then what happens to her and her family? These are fairly desperate questions.

The US has such a high rate of abortion precisely because of the lack of mandated maternity leave with job security for working families.

For these families, taking care of their living children IS taking responsibility.

 

[JakeStarkey]

. . . but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

Above is an excellent example of Proof by Assertion Fallacy: Redfish has absolutely no evidence for such a stupid statement.

euthanasia is the next logical step from abortion on demand, just as multiple marriage is the next logical step from gay marriage.

You and deny and hurl your juvenile insults if it somehow makes you feel important, but you cannot refute the logical progression of the liberal agenda.

Bet you saw this...

"Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal' according to youth branch of Swedish Liberal People's Party"
”Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal', according to youth political group"

A tiny political group in another country making ridiculous demands...means what exactly?

because Redfish has a tiny little mind, for creep's sake.

 

[Lakhota]

Women are calling the governor to protest tighter restrictions to abortion access in Indiana.

Women are flooding Indiana Gov. Mike Pence’s phone lines to protest his decision to sign a bill into law that will severely restrict abortion rights in the state.

But instead of voicing their disagreement in conventional ways, they’re providing detailed accounts of their menstrual cycles.

The creators of the “Periods for Pence” Facebook page explained their reasoning in a March 28 post, making the tongue-in-cheek observation that “any period could potentially be a miscarriage without knowledge,” and that “just to cover our bases, perhaps we should make sure to contact Governor Pence’s office to report our periods.”

The new law also requires women to listen to a fetal heartbeat and view an ultrasound 18 hours before getting an abortion. This will likely impose a significant travel burden on many women, since only four out of Indiana’s 92 counties have abortion clinics.

Additionally, doctors at abortionclinics will have to obtain admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. “Admitting privileges” have nothing to do with whether or not a hospital will accept a particular patient. Instead, they enable a clinic doctor to admit their patient for a stay in a hospital without another doctor at the hospital weighing in. As Slate notes, the fact that some hospitals are unwilling to grant admitting privileges to abortion providers may force some clinics will close.

If you’d like to tell Pence about your period, call (317) 232-4567, or 317–569-0709. Some Facebook users have reported busy signals, but you can still fill out a form on the governor’s website or leave a message on his Facebook page.

More: You Know You Want To Tell Indiana Gov. Mike Pence About Your Period

Governor Mike Pence is a religious nut - and batshit crazy! He's also very dangerous to female reproductive rights.

 

[Chuz Life]

Pence 2016!

 

[Redfish]

Do you know what the ultimate irony is? These people focus all their energies on demonizing women who have abortions. Not a peep about the thousands of embryos left over from invitro fertilization that are destroyed. In fact - I can't find a single thread on it.

Actually, we peep about it quite a bit. We don't write a lot of separate threads specifically about it. We usually just fold it into the whole "killing unborn babies is wrong" scenario.

Pro-lifers can and do oppose IVF practices of destroying embryos. But frankly, it's a drop in the bucket, numerically, to the number of abortions taking place every year, and one only has so much time and energy.

I have a real problem over rape. I understand this from here to eternity. Cripes this is hard. I think many of us do.

It's been my experience that the right thing to do is usually the more difficult thing to do.

very true, but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

As long as Americans refuse to address the woefully inadequate supports for working pregnant women in terms of job security or maternity leave, women living at or below the poverty line have to choose between the living children they have, and the potential child she is carrying.


If she doesn't have the resources to care for her living children, how can she feed and clothe another child? What about daycare? If she is fired for being pregnant she has no recourse and then what happens to her and her family? These are fairly desperate questions.

The US has such a high rate of abortion precisely because of the lack of mandated maternity leave with job security for working families.

For these families, taking care of their living children IS taking responsibility.

amazingly ignorant. Sure, poor mothers abort their children, so do the very rich Hollywood liberals and the girlfriends of DC politicians.

To blame the abortion rate on maternity leave is really really dumb.

 

[Redfish]

. . . but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

Above is an excellent example of Proof by Assertion Fallacy: Redfish has absolutely no evidence for such a stupid statement.

euthanasia is the next logical step from abortion on demand, just as multiple marriage is the next logical step from gay marriage.

You and deny and hurl your juvenile insults if it somehow makes you feel important, but you cannot refute the logical progression of the liberal agenda.

Bet you saw this...

"Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal' according to youth branch of Swedish Liberal People's Party"
”Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal', according to youth political group"

A tiny political group in another country making ridiculous demands...means what exactly?

because Redfish has a tiny little mind, for creep's sake.

the point, which you and your libtardian buddies are too stupid to grasp, is that liberalism is destroying societies in every country. The cite above was just one example. Damn, but you have to be one of the most ignorant humans on planet earth.

 

[Dragonlady]

Actually, we peep about it quite a bit. We don't write a lot of separate threads specifically about it. We usually just fold it into the whole "killing unborn babies is wrong" scenario.

Pro-lifers can and do oppose IVF practices of destroying embryos. But frankly, it's a drop in the bucket, numerically, to the number of abortions taking place every year, and one only has so much time and energy.

I have a real problem over rape. I understand this from here to eternity. Cripes this is hard. I think many of us do.

It's been my experience that the right thing to do is usually the more difficult thing to do.

very true, but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

As long as Americans refuse to address the woefully inadequate supports for working pregnant women in terms of job security or maternity leave, women living at or below the poverty line have to choose between the living children they have, and the potential child she is carrying.


If she doesn't have the resources to care for her living children, how can she feed and clothe another child? What about daycare? If she is fired for being pregnant she has no recourse and then what happens to her and her family? These are fairly desperate questions.

The US has such a high rate of abortion precisely because of the lack of mandated maternity leave with job security for working families.

For these families, taking care of their living children IS taking responsibility.

amazingly ignorant. Sure, poor mothers abort their children, so do the very rich Hollywood liberals and the girlfriends of DC politicians.

To blame the abortion rate on maternity leave is really really dumb.

To blame the US abortion rate on anything but poverty is really, really dumb.

40% of the American women who have abortions live below the poverty line. Another 27% have income over the poverty line but under 200% of the poverty line. Fully 75% of women who have abortions cite financial reasons for their abortions. Only 20% of abortions are obtained by women with the means to support their children.

Induced Abortion in the United States

Abortions rates in other first world countries where abortions are paid for by health insurance with no co-pay, have much lower abortion rates, but those countries also have far more supports for poor pregnant women, including higher minimum wages, mandated maternity leave and job security. Many women cite these supports as the reason they are able to keep their children.

 

[Redfish]

I have a real problem over rape. I understand this from here to eternity. Cripes this is hard. I think many of us do.

It's been my experience that the right thing to do is usually the more difficult thing to do.

very true, but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

As long as Americans refuse to address the woefully inadequate supports for working pregnant women in terms of job security or maternity leave, women living at or below the poverty line have to choose between the living children they have, and the potential child she is carrying.


If she doesn't have the resources to care for her living children, how can she feed and clothe another child? What about daycare? If she is fired for being pregnant she has no recourse and then what happens to her and her family? These are fairly desperate questions.

The US has such a high rate of abortion precisely because of the lack of mandated maternity leave with job security for working families.

For these families, taking care of their living children IS taking responsibility.

amazingly ignorant. Sure, poor mothers abort their children, so do the very rich Hollywood liberals and the girlfriends of DC politicians.

To blame the abortion rate on maternity leave is really really dumb.

To blame the US abortion rate on anything but poverty is really, really dumb.

40% of the American women who have abortions live below the poverty line. Another 27% have income over the poverty line but under 200% of the poverty line. Fully 75% of women who have abortions cite financial reasons for their abortions. Only 20% of abortions are obtained by women with the means to support their children.

Induced Abortion in the United States

Abortions rates in other first world countries where abortions are paid for by health insurance with no co-pay, have much lower abortion rates, but those countries also have far more supports for poor pregnant women, including higher minimum wages, mandated maternity leave and job security. Many women cite these supports as the reason they are able to keep their children.

most abortions in the US are done by or through planned parenthood. The founder of planned parenthood, Margaret Sanger, said that "colored people are human weeds that must be removed" PP was founded to reduce the black birth rate.

Hillary Clinton said that she respects Margaret Sanger and her work with PP.

Soooooo, Hillary Clinton wants to control the black population by killing unborn black babies, but blacks support her in large numbers------------do you see the contradiction there?

The rest of your post is nothing but liberal bullshit talking points.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have a real problem over rape. I understand this from here to eternity. Cripes this is hard. I think many of us do.

It's been my experience that the right thing to do is usually the more difficult thing to do.

very true, but the liberal ideology does not include personal responsibility or doing what's right, it only addresses what feels good at the moment. Euthanasia is next, watch. If a person is too expensive to keep alive, just give them a shot and put them in the ground.

As long as Americans refuse to address the woefully inadequate supports for working pregnant women in terms of job security or maternity leave, women living at or below the poverty line have to choose between the living children they have, and the potential child she is carrying.


If she doesn't have the resources to care for her living children, how can she feed and clothe another child? What about daycare? If she is fired for being pregnant she has no recourse and then what happens to her and her family? These are fairly desperate questions.

The US has such a high rate of abortion precisely because of the lack of mandated maternity leave with job security for working families.

For these families, taking care of their living children IS taking responsibility.

amazingly ignorant. Sure, poor mothers abort their children, so do the very rich Hollywood liberals and the girlfriends of DC politicians.

To blame the abortion rate on maternity leave is really really dumb.

To blame the US abortion rate on anything but poverty is really, really dumb.

40% of the American women who have abortions live below the poverty line. Another 27% have income over the poverty line but under 200% of the poverty line. Fully 75% of women who have abortions cite financial reasons for their abortions. Only 20% of abortions are obtained by women with the means to support their children.

Induced Abortion in the United States

Abortions rates in other first world countries where abortions are paid for by health insurance with no co-pay, have much lower abortion rates, but those countries also have far more supports for poor pregnant women, including higher minimum wages, mandated maternity leave and job security. Many women cite these supports as the reason they are able to keep their children.

As revealed in your post...
"Every Leftist is, essentially, a Marxist…even though most eschew the title since the fall of the Soviet Union. Even so, Left-wing ideas are predicated on Marx’s materialist view. Philosophically, the term implies that only material things are real."
Prager



As conservatives understand, the real problem is values.
And, what I mean to say, is your lack of same.
There is no excuse for killing a living unborn human being for the convenience of the individual who is responsible for creating same.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Above is an excellent example of Proof by Assertion Fallacy: Redfish has absolutely no evidence for such a stupid statement.

euthanasia is the next logical step from abortion on demand, just as multiple marriage is the next logical step from gay marriage.

You and deny and hurl your juvenile insults if it somehow makes you feel important, but you cannot refute the logical progression of the liberal agenda.

Bet you saw this...

"Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal' according to youth branch of Swedish Liberal People's Party"
”Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal', according to youth political group"

A tiny political group in another country making ridiculous demands...means what exactly?

because Redfish has a tiny little mind, for creep's sake.

the point, which you and your libtardian buddies are too stupid to grasp, is that liberalism is destroying societies in every country. The cite above was just one example. Damn, but you have to be one of the most ignorant humans on planet earth.

Good morning, my little fool fish. A tiny weirdo group in a country far away does not represent almost anyone in America except for a few pedophiles, who know no political boundary.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Redfish above completely ignored, "40% of the American women who have abortions live below the poverty line. Another 27% have income over the poverty line but under 200% of the poverty line. Fully 75% of women who have abortions cite financial reasons for their abortions. Only 20% of abortions are obtained by women with the means to support their children" by dragonlady.

That has nothing to do with Ronald Reagan, Margaret Sanger, Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, Redfish, you the reader, or me.

Stay with the facts, fool fish.

 

[Redfish]

euthanasia is the next logical step from abortion on demand, just as multiple marriage is the next logical step from gay marriage.

You and deny and hurl your juvenile insults if it somehow makes you feel important, but you cannot refute the logical progression of the liberal agenda.

Bet you saw this...

"Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal' according to youth branch of Swedish Liberal People's Party"
”Incest and necrophilia 'should be legal', according to youth political group"

A tiny political group in another country making ridiculous demands...means what exactly?

because Redfish has a tiny little mind, for creep's sake.

the point, which you and your libtardian buddies are too stupid to grasp, is that liberalism is destroying societies in every country. The cite above was just one example. Damn, but you have to be one of the most ignorant humans on planet earth.

Good morning, my little fool fish. A tiny weirdo group in a country far away does not represent almost anyone in America except for a few pedophiles, who know no political boundary.

once again you miss the point, not the least bit surprising. so let me try again, liberalism results in the degradation of society, no matter where it is practiced. History verifies that.

 

[Redfish]

Redfish above completely ignored, "40% of the American women who have abortions live below the poverty line. Another 27% have income over the poverty line but under 200% of the poverty line. Fully 75% of women who have abortions cite financial reasons for their abortions. Only 20% of abortions are obtained by women with the means to support their children" by dragonlady.

That has nothing to do with Ronald Reagan, Margaret Sanger, Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, Redfish, you the reader, or me.

Stay with the facts, fool fish.

So, lets take your argument to its logical conclusion. If the federal government guaranteed every American citizen an annual income of 100K there would be zero abortions????

 

[JakeStarkey]

Redfish above completely ignored, "40% of the American women who have abortions live below the poverty line. Another 27% have income over the poverty line but under 200% of the poverty line. Fully 75% of women who have abortions cite financial reasons for their abortions. Only 20% of abortions are obtained by women with the means to support their children" by dragonlady.

That has nothing to do with Ronald Reagan, Margaret Sanger, Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, Redfish, you the reader, or me.

Stay with the facts, fool fish.

So, lets take your argument to its logical conclusion. If the federal government guaranteed every American citizen an annual income of 100K there would be zero abortions????

That is your fool conclusion, fool fish.

The proper conclusion is to support women with educational training, with pre- and post-natal support, shelter, food, etc. We the taxpayer are going to pay one way or another if women have children the which they cannot or have real difficulties in supporting. We will pay up front or in the back.

You, fool fish, want women to have children then blame the mothers if they can 't raise their offspring well because of final difficulties. Let's make them good tax payers instead.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

This is a sincere poll. I would appreciate honest answers. If you're willing, I would also appreciate your reasons. I will not criticize your choice. I would just honestly like to know where USMB posters stand on this issue.

NOTE: I know there are many possible variables, but this poll assumes "typical" circumstances. In other words, this is a superficial poll that assumes "normal/average" circumstances - meaning no rape, incest, health, deformity, financial, or other extenuating issues.

I'll answer it......but first tell me- am I the woman, the egg or the fetus.

 

[Redfish]

Redfish above completely ignored, "40% of the American women who have abortions live below the poverty line. Another 27% have income over the poverty line but under 200% of the poverty line. Fully 75% of women who have abortions cite financial reasons for their abortions. Only 20% of abortions are obtained by women with the means to support their children" by dragonlady.

That has nothing to do with Ronald Reagan, Margaret Sanger, Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, Redfish, you the reader, or me.

Stay with the facts, fool fish.

So, lets take your argument to its logical conclusion. If the federal government guaranteed every American citizen an annual income of 100K there would be zero abortions????

That is your fool conclusion, fool fish.

The proper conclusion is to support women with educational training, with pre- and post-natal support, shelter, food, etc. We the taxpayer are going to pay one way or another if women have children the which they cannot or have real difficulties in supporting. We will pay up front or in the back.

You, fool fish, want women to have children then blame the mothers if they can 't raise their offspring well because of final difficulties. Let's make them good tax payers instead.

Wrong, you and the other fool said that abortions occur because of economic problems whereby the mother thinks she cannot support another child. I gave you a solution. You reject it because your original premise is bullshit. We get it.

 

[dannyboys]

Redfish above completely ignored, "40% of the American women who have abortions live below the poverty line. Another 27% have income over the poverty line but under 200% of the poverty line. Fully 75% of women who have abortions cite financial reasons for their abortions. Only 20% of abortions are obtained by women with the means to support their children" by dragonlady.

That has nothing to do with Ronald Reagan, Margaret Sanger, Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, Redfish, you the reader, or me.

Stay with the facts, fool fish.

Any negro women can get BC pills for free from the nearest clinic. They can get all the condoms they want for free.
But what's the point of getting condoms? NO negro 'real man' would ever wear a condom!
And forget the idea that negro women will bother taking the 'pill'.
Negro women use abortions as their preferred method of birth control.
When they go to the PP baby murder clinic they even get a free donut and a coffee thrown in.
Can't beat that!