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

[Soggy in NOLA]

Poorly worded question...... wanna try again Pocahontas?

 

[Lakhota]

Poorly worded question...... wanna try again Pocahontas?

Why don't you just "reword" it for us.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Poorly worded question...... wanna try again Pocahontas?

Why don't you just "reword" it for us.

Uhm, its your thread. Not to mention my Carnac turban is at the cleaners.

 

[Lakhota]

Poorly worded question...... wanna try again Pocahontas?

Why don't you just "reword" it for us.

Uhm, its your thread. Not to mention my Carnac turban is at the cleaners.

Well, here's a question for you and your kind:

Why don't the rabid anti-choice zealots ever show any compassion or concern for pregnant women who choose to exercise their legal rights to have an abortion for various reasons - such as convenience, mental, physical, and/or financial reasons? It's like they only view women as birthing pods.

 

[deltex1]

Stupid prickindian. The fertilized egg, the fetus, the baby, the child, the grandchild, the great grandchild are one and the same. Caesar says the woman can kill all of them. God says no, you may not.

 

[bendog]

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.

If we're talking biology, I'll go with the woman option.

 

[Dragonlady]

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.

That would be idiotic politics as we need birth control.

What does politics have to do with anything?

We have plenty of birth control around. All anyone has to do is use it if they choose to.

What they don't have the right to do is force others to pay for their birth control.

Birth control is part of health care and is rightfully paid for by health care insurance.

Birth control isn't 100% effective. Fully half of the women seeking abortions used birth control, which failed. So to suggest that using birth control would prevent abortions, that's just not true.

 

[JoeMoma]

The argument is made that a fetus is not a human being.

I don't know at which stage of life that a fetus becomes a human being if at all.

and the argument was once made (and legally supported) that black people are 3/5ths of a human being.

Our laws evolve.

I believe that a fetus is a human being and deserves protection under our legal system. Scientific evidence supports that conclusion as does common sense. If a fetus is NOT a human, then what is it? An banana?

At any rate our legal system has two major pillars that support protecting a fetus:

1) To err on the side of life. If we are uncertain in a death penalty case - we have decided to err on the side of life - not execution. So if we can't be certain about when human life actually begins (and not just trying to massage a guilty conscience, but REAL questions) then we should err on the side of life and protect the fetus.

2) One HUGE reason for laws is so society can help protect the rights of the weaker - those who are unable to protect themselves - from the stronger who would trample their rights for their own convenience. That principle demands that we protect fetuses.

Liberals will claim that blacks are 3/5ths human constitutionally, which, of course is wrong. But has that argument really ever been legally supported?

Laws protect the rights of citizens. Citizens are persons born or naturalized in the United States. That doesn't include fetuses.

Does that mean I can use my shotgun to solve the illegal immigration problem by terminating noncitizens?

 

[Lakhota]

The argument is made that a fetus is not a human being.

I don't know at which stage of life that a fetus becomes a human being if at all.

and the argument was once made (and legally supported) that black people are 3/5ths of a human being.

Our laws evolve.

I believe that a fetus is a human being and deserves protection under our legal system. Scientific evidence supports that conclusion as does common sense. If a fetus is NOT a human, then what is it? An banana?

At any rate our legal system has two major pillars that support protecting a fetus:

1) To err on the side of life. If we are uncertain in a death penalty case - we have decided to err on the side of life - not execution. So if we can't be certain about when human life actually begins (and not just trying to massage a guilty conscience, but REAL questions) then we should err on the side of life and protect the fetus.

2) One HUGE reason for laws is so society can help protect the rights of the weaker - those who are unable to protect themselves - from the stronger who would trample their rights for their own convenience. That principle demands that we protect fetuses.

Liberals will claim that blacks are 3/5ths human constitutionally, which, of course is wrong. But has that argument really ever been legally supported?

Laws protect the rights of citizens. Citizens are persons born or naturalized in the United States. That doesn't include fetuses.

Does that mean I can use my shotgun to solve the illegal immigration problem by terminating noncitizens?

Is that covered under Roe v. Wade?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The personal responsibility bit is nonsense, as DragonLady explained immediately above

Avatar4321 is LDS, which makes his opposition nonsensical. LDS doctrine states every soul must acquire a physical body. Abortion before birth obviously requires the soul to be sent to a new body.

You LDS don't do theology well at all, with the exception of Teryl Givens and Patrick Mason.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The argument is made that a fetus is not a human being.

I don't know at which stage of life that a fetus becomes a human being if at all.

and the argument was once made (and legally supported) that black people are 3/5ths of a human being.

Our laws evolve.

I believe that a fetus is a human being and deserves protection under our legal system. Scientific evidence supports that conclusion as does common sense. If a fetus is NOT a human, then what is it? An banana?

At any rate our legal system has two major pillars that support protecting a fetus:

1) To err on the side of life. If we are uncertain in a death penalty case - we have decided to err on the side of life - not execution. So if we can't be certain about when human life actually begins (and not just trying to massage a guilty conscience, but REAL questions) then we should err on the side of life and protect the fetus.

2) One HUGE reason for laws is so society can help protect the rights of the weaker - those who are unable to protect themselves - from the stronger who would trample their rights for their own convenience. That principle demands that we protect fetuses.

Liberals will claim that blacks are 3/5ths human constitutionally, which, of course is wrong. But has that argument really ever been legally supported?

Laws protect the rights of citizens. Citizens are persons born or naturalized in the United States. That doesn't include fetuses.

Does that mean I can use my shotgun to solve the illegal immigration problem by terminating noncitizens?

If you want to be executed, sure.

 

[JoeMoma]

The argument is made that a fetus is not a human being.

I don't know at which stage of life that a fetus becomes a human being if at all.

and the argument was once made (and legally supported) that black people are 3/5ths of a human being.

Our laws evolve.

I believe that a fetus is a human being and deserves protection under our legal system. Scientific evidence supports that conclusion as does common sense. If a fetus is NOT a human, then what is it? An banana?

At any rate our legal system has two major pillars that support protecting a fetus:

1) To err on the side of life. If we are uncertain in a death penalty case - we have decided to err on the side of life - not execution. So if we can't be certain about when human life actually begins (and not just trying to massage a guilty conscience, but REAL questions) then we should err on the side of life and protect the fetus.

2) One HUGE reason for laws is so society can help protect the rights of the weaker - those who are unable to protect themselves - from the stronger who would trample their rights for their own convenience. That principle demands that we protect fetuses.

Liberals will claim that blacks are 3/5ths human constitutionally, which, of course is wrong. But has that argument really ever been legally supported?

Laws protect the rights of citizens. Citizens are persons born or naturalized in the United States. That doesn't include fetuses.

Does that mean I can use my shotgun to solve the illegal immigration problem by terminating noncitizens?

Is that covered under Roe v. Wade?

Try reading the post I replied too if you want to try to understand.

 

[g5000]

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.

It's not an either/or situation.

Abortion is not necessary for the survival of the species, idiot. In fact, quite the opposite is true.

 

[Lakhota]

The argument is made that a fetus is not a human being.

I don't know at which stage of life that a fetus becomes a human being if at all.

and the argument was once made (and legally supported) that black people are 3/5ths of a human being.

Our laws evolve.

I believe that a fetus is a human being and deserves protection under our legal system. Scientific evidence supports that conclusion as does common sense. If a fetus is NOT a human, then what is it? An banana?

At any rate our legal system has two major pillars that support protecting a fetus:

1) To err on the side of life. If we are uncertain in a death penalty case - we have decided to err on the side of life - not execution. So if we can't be certain about when human life actually begins (and not just trying to massage a guilty conscience, but REAL questions) then we should err on the side of life and protect the fetus.

2) One HUGE reason for laws is so society can help protect the rights of the weaker - those who are unable to protect themselves - from the stronger who would trample their rights for their own convenience. That principle demands that we protect fetuses.

Liberals will claim that blacks are 3/5ths human constitutionally, which, of course is wrong. But has that argument really ever been legally supported?

Laws protect the rights of citizens. Citizens are persons born or naturalized in the United States. That doesn't include fetuses.

Does that mean I can use my shotgun to solve the illegal immigration problem by terminating noncitizens?

Is that covered under Roe v. Wade?

Try reading the post I replied too if you want to try to understand.

Oh, honey, I did read it. Does Roe v. Wade allow you to legally kill immigrants with your shotgun?

 

[JoeMoma]

and the argument was once made (and legally supported) that black people are 3/5ths of a human being.

Our laws evolve.

I believe that a fetus is a human being and deserves protection under our legal system. Scientific evidence supports that conclusion as does common sense. If a fetus is NOT a human, then what is it? An banana?

At any rate our legal system has two major pillars that support protecting a fetus:

1) To err on the side of life. If we are uncertain in a death penalty case - we have decided to err on the side of life - not execution. So if we can't be certain about when human life actually begins (and not just trying to massage a guilty conscience, but REAL questions) then we should err on the side of life and protect the fetus.

2) One HUGE reason for laws is so society can help protect the rights of the weaker - those who are unable to protect themselves - from the stronger who would trample their rights for their own convenience. That principle demands that we protect fetuses.

Liberals will claim that blacks are 3/5ths human constitutionally, which, of course is wrong. But has that argument really ever been legally supported?

Laws protect the rights of citizens. Citizens are persons born or naturalized in the United States. That doesn't include fetuses.

Does that mean I can use my shotgun to solve the illegal immigration problem by terminating noncitizens?

Is that covered under Roe v. Wade?

Try reading the post I replied too if you want to try to understand.

Oh, honey, I did read it. Does Roe v. Wade allow you to legally kill immigrants with your shotgun?

The post I was replies too was not about Roe vs. Wade. The poster stated that the law protected U.S. citizens, thus it's okay to kill fetuses. Well, based on that logic, it should be okay to kill illegal immigrants. Well, It is not okay to just kill illegal immigrants, even though they are not citizens of the United states. Roe vs. Wade is not relevant to my post.........so the answer to your irrelevant question is no.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Poorly worded question...... wanna try again Pocahontas?

Why don't you just "reword" it for us.

Uhm, its your thread. Not to mention my Carnac turban is at the cleaners.

Well, here's a question for you and your kind:

Why don't the rabid anti-choice zealots ever show any compassion or concern for pregnant women who choose to exercise their legal rights to have an abortion for various reasons - such as convenience, mental, physical, and/or financial reasons? It's like they only view women as birthing pods.

Here's a question for you and YOUR kind: How come the most rabid baby-killing supporters are younger men? How much concern are YOU showing for women when your big "cause" seems to be turning them into vaginas on legs for any and every cad that comes along.

 

[yiostheoy]

Holy thread resurrections Batman !!!

 

[yiostheoy]

A good day for women's reproductive rights. Thank you, SCOTUS.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Abortion Law, Breathing New Life Into Roe v. Wade

Court Rules 5-3 Against TX Anti-Abortion Law...

‘Undue Burden’...Ginsburg: ‘Beyond Rational Belief’ That Law Could Protect Women’s Health...

A Decision Against Texas, For Science...

How The Ruling Will Affect Abortion Access...

Watch The Epic Filibuster That Put The Texas Law In The National Spotlight...

Ok I see -- you were rubbing their faces into the latest SCOTUS ruling.

Probably better to let this crazy far right thread die though.

 

[Lakhota]

A good day for women's reproductive rights. Thank you, SCOTUS.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Abortion Law, Breathing New Life Into Roe v. Wade

Court Rules 5-3 Against TX Anti-Abortion Law...

‘Undue Burden’...Ginsburg: ‘Beyond Rational Belief’ That Law Could Protect Women’s Health...

A Decision Against Texas, For Science...

How The Ruling Will Affect Abortion Access...

Watch The Epic Filibuster That Put The Texas Law In The National Spotlight...

Ok I see -- you were rubbing their faces into the latest SCOTUS ruling.

Probably better to let this crazy far right thread die though.

Nope, women's reproductive rights should never die.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Poorly worded question...... wanna try again Pocahontas?

Why don't you just "reword" it for us.

Uhm, its your thread. Not to mention my Carnac turban is at the cleaners.

Well, here's a question for you and your kind:

Why don't the rabid anti-choice zealots ever show any compassion or concern for pregnant women who choose to exercise their legal rights to have an abortion for various reasons - such as convenience, mental, physical, and/or financial reasons? It's like they only view women as birthing pods.

Here's a question for you and YOUR kind: How come the most rabid baby-killing supporters are younger men? How much concern are YOU showing for women when your big "cause" seems to be turning them into vaginas on legs for any and every cad that comes along.

Then let every woman decide for herself, Cecilie, is where you logic is headed.