X
Don't miss a thing
We’d like to send you notifications for things that might interest you.
We can let you know when...
- someone follows you
- or replies to your comment
- or sends you a message
- etc.
We'll also give you a heads up when a really cool, funny, or hotly debated post is trending.
*You can customize or cancel notifications in your “Settings” page.
X
Login with Facebook
Login with Google
The last time you logged in, you used your account. Using a different login will create a new account.

If you are pro-choice, at what point should abortion not be allowed?

X
Delete This Choozlet?
Are you sure you want to delete this choozlet?



X
Who upvoted...
X
Choozlet Image
Share on social media, your blog, etc.
 
X
Are you sure you want to delete this choozlet?



If you are pro-choice, at what point should abortion not be allowed?
I find it hard to believe that, even for pro-choicer, an abortion the hour before birth is ok.

So, if not, then what is the cutoff?

Is one day before birth ok?
Two days?
A week?
A month?
Thee months?

Whatever your cutoff is, ask yourself this question: what if it were one day later?

So, if you think at seven months into the pregnancy abortion is still ok, then why not seven months and one day?

And, if a person does have an abortion after that cutoff, is it murder? And if so, what is the punishment?

I think it will be very difficult to get a pro-lifer to commit to anything here but lets give it a shot.

A lot of questions so Im not giving any options. Lets just discuss.
Created: May 12, 2018
By: tommyb
Totals: 0 votes, 89 comments
Image | Widget | Id 
Choozlet Id: niVtiJp1910ssN1
 
0%
0 votes

Comments

3 months ago
Don;t you mean "Pro-Choicer" rather than "Pro-Lifer"?

No one that I know thinks an abortion 1 hour before birth is murder
This post is a mess.
reply to: Don;t you mean "Pro-Choicer" rather than "Pro-Lifer"? No one that I know thinks an abortion 1 hour before birth is murder This post is a mess.
3 months ago
Oops :) Yup. Fixed it. Thanks.
0
3 months ago
Well, is "abortion" one second before birth murder?
0
reply to: Well, is "abortion" one second before birth murder?
3 months ago
Aright..I' ****ing pissed off..Tmy comment is not what I posted. I made a mistake and edited that comment. This is what I updated with ...

"No one thinks that abortion 1 hour before pregnancy is NOT murder.
On the contrary...that is typically called a C-Section"
reply to: Well, is "abortion" one second before birth murder?
3 months ago
This is a weird bug. It has happened to me b fore. The edit updates disappear
0
reply to: Aright..I' fucking pissed off..Tmy comment is not what I posted. I made a mistake and edited that comment. This is what I updated with ... "No one thinks that abortion 1 hour before pregnancy is NOT murder. On the contrary.
3 months ago
So the question is, as what point does it become murder?
0
reply to: So the question is, as what point does it become murder?
3 months ago
the 9th week after fertilization when the fetus becomes an embryo, would be my guess. Abortion is not my business nor is it yours unless you were one of the people who created that baby.

I don't know why you guys are all in a twist anyways. Once the baby is born, so called "Pro-life" do not give a **** about it. Especiually if it's black. True Story
reply to: the 9th week after fertilization when the fetus becomes an embryo, would be my guess. Abortion is not my business nor is it yours unless you were one of the people who created that baby. I don't know why you guys are all in
3 months ago
"the 9th week after fertilization when the fetus becomes an embryo, would be my guess."

So, the best you can do is take a guess? Not a very good argument on your behalf.


"Abortion is not my business nor is it yours unless you were one of the people who created that baby."

So, my murdering someone is none of your business, so all is well?

"Once the baby is born, so called "Pro-life" do not give a **** about it. Especiually if it's black. True Story"

That's truly moronic. So pro-life = racist? So millions of black pro-lifers hate other blacks? As well as 50% of the hispanic population? Interesting.
-1
reply to: "the 9th week after fertilization when the fetus becomes an embryo, would be my guess." So, the best you can do is take a guess? Not a very good argument on your behalf. "Abortion is not my business nor is it yours unle
3 months ago
It's a perfect response
Get over yourself

There is no such thing as "Pro-Life" you fool. Y'all advocate the death sentance and you are war mongereres. You don''t man-up about police violence on civivilians and you sure as **** don't care about dead kids in schools when you make statements like "your kids life is worth my right to bear arms". The right uses abprtion as a battle cry but the funny thing is it' ony the extreme religous right who started that. You people are not religious or godly in any wy whatsoever. If you were, you would be respectful and caring of others.

Sorry, buddy. You are not Pro-Life and you are not followers of Jesus Christ. I don't know what you peope are
3 months ago
If the post is a mess it is because you cant answer it. At what point is it wrong? And at what point is it murder?
0
3 months ago
And, you may not know them personally, but courts have convicted killers for double murder counts with a pregnant woman (Scott Peterson). So the idea is not as crazy as you try to make it seem.
0
3 months ago
Its very difficult to have an in-depth debate about abortion as the pro-choice argument will always break down at some point.

As the OP framed the question: at what point does it become unacceptable/immoral/illegal?

The problem with trying to answer that is that whatever time is picked, is an arbitrary number. If you say only 8 weeks or earlier, then what about 8 weeks and a day? There is no ironclad scientific difference between 56 days or 57 days as far fetal development goes. Or between, 57 and 58. Or 58 and 59, etc. whatever physical conditions you look for at 56 days may not exist until 65 days, or may have existed a little earlier at 48 days.

So, at this point, you are making judgements based on an arbitrary number. Since this cant be resolved, the pro-choice side can only change the argument which is where we usually get the "its a woman's body" or "none of my business" or as we see above "well you dont care about the once born"

On the pro-life side, there is no such grey area. Abortion is murder.

We all know that taking a life is murder. So, at what point is that fetus "alive" ?

To me personally, its hard to say that something that is actively growing, changing, using nutrients, responding to stimuli, etc, is not alive. I think that pro-choicers, if they are intellectually honest (and intellectual) recognize this but wont admit it for some other reason(s). Im not pro-choice so its difficult for me to know what the r
reply to: Its very difficult to have an in-depth debate about abortion as the pro-choice argument will always break down at some point. As the OP framed the question: at what point does it become unacceptable/immoral/illegal? The
3 months ago
Then taking a life to protect yourself is murder. Correct?
reply to: Then taking a life to protect yourself is murder. Correct?
3 months ago
No. And i dont thunk anyone would think that. Murder would be the unneccessary taking of a life. Not sure if that us what websters says, but that would be the logic. Abd i think it is sensible and moral logic.
0
reply to: No. And i dont thunk anyone would think that. Murder would be the unneccessary taking of a life. Not sure if that us what websters says, but that would be the logic. Abd i think it is sensible and moral logic.
3 months ago
Well...now I'm about to destroy you and your argument...

Abortion is currently legal

Murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

Therefore, abortion is not murder
reply to: Well...now I'm about to destroy you and your argument... Abortion is currently legal Murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another. Therefore, abortion is not murder
3 months ago
How is that destroying his argument? Fact that abortion is currently legal means nothing in this argument because that's what the argument is about. So if murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another, that is what abortion is so it should be defined as murder. You make no sense.
0
reply to: How is that destroying his argument? Fact that abortion is currently legal means nothing in this argument because that's what the argument is about. So if murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human be
3 months ago
A-fetus is not a human being. Not yet. Thus abortion is not murder.
-1
reply to: How is that destroying his argument? Fact that abortion is currently legal means nothing in this argument because that's what the argument is about. So if murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human be
3 months ago
"You make no sense."
I'll keep saying forever. PAY ATTENTION:
-------
Abortion is currently legal
Murder is defined as "The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another."
Therefore, abortion is not murder
-------
0
reply to: A-fetus is not a human being. Not yet. Thus abortion is not murder.
3 months ago
So when does it become a human being? Because JG said earlier that 9 weeks, when the embryo becomes a fetus is when abortion should not be allowed. So which is it? Fetus or human? And when is it human?

And, you really think it should be legal to end the life of this (9 weeks in the pic)? Dont you feel disgusting suggesting that? I see eyes, fingers, etc. But that is ok to you?

0
reply to: So when does it become a human being? Because JG said earlier that 9 weeks, when the embryo becomes a fetus is when abortion should not be allowed. So which is it? Fetus or human? And when is it human? And, you really think
3 months ago
I fail to understand how a person can look at the picture above (or the 18 week on below) and not see that it is a baby, and be ok with ending its life.

The liberal position that you guys have put forward (here or another post, Im not sure) is pretty stunning as well.

So conservatives want the baby to live. But, should that baby grow up and be poor, we wont "take car of it" so we are horrible.

But liberals would rather kill it, End of story, So it never becomes a burden?

But if you are ok with killing humans at the stages shown in these pics, that is sad.
reply to: I fail to understand how a person can look at the picture above (or the 18 week on below) and not see that it is a baby, and be ok with ending its life. The liberal position that you guys have put forward (here or another po
3 months ago
Would I rather a fetus die in the womb than grow uo to be abused and neglected. 100% yes.
-1
reply to: Would I rather a fetus die in the womb than grow uo to be abused and neglected. 100% yes.
3 months ago
First of all, even on the surface that answer is borderline psychotic.

But Im pretty sure there is a bit of hyperbole there (at least I hope, otherwise you are a frightening individual) so I wont even address that part of it.

But... abused? So do we have stats on how many babies were born (but almost aborted) went on to become abused? If you can find that Id love to see it but until you present that info, I'll go on with the reasonable assumption that the number is a fraction of a fraction of a percent--but lets kill all babies just in case. Good thinking.
0
reply to: Then taking a life to protect yourself is murder. Correct?
3 months ago
Yes. but justified as the person was going to harm me or mine. In that same vane wouldn't it be awesome if the fetus could fight back?
0
3 months ago
Once the fetus is viable and can survive outside of it's mother.

Btw.. your statement avout one day before birth is stupid.
reply to: Once the fetus is viable and can survive outside of it's mother. Btw.. your statement avout one day before birth is stupid.
3 months ago
And that is part of the problem. When is that? Just like all kids hit puberty at different times, and woman hit menopause, etc... fetua vary as to if they could suevive outside the womb. Plus some even at full term some need the help of science. That is what zombie was saying about the argument always breaking down at some point for pro choicers. You would be better served by siimply admitting it as murder but wanting to make allowances for it.
reply to: Once the fetus is viable and can survive outside of it's mother. Btw.. your statement avout one day before birth is stupid.
3 months ago
So when is that? Are you afraid to commit to an answer? And how are we supposed to know when the fetus can survive outside? Should the abortion doctors first get baby outside, see if it lives, and if so, they dont abort? Have you ever thought through an answer before?
-1
reply to: Once the fetus is viable and can survive outside of it's mother. Btw.. your statement avout one day before birth is stupid.
3 months ago
And here we are at 18 weeks. Dont think this could survive outside the mother.

Should be legal to abort this?

0
reply to: And that is part of the problem. When is that? Just like all kids hit puberty at different times, and woman hit menopause, etc... fetua vary as to if they could suevive outside the womb. Plus some even at full term some need
3 months ago
As I said in another reply, your argument is moot...

Abortion is currently legal
Murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
Therefore, abortion is not murder
0
reply to: As I said in another reply, your argument is moot... Abortion is currently legal Murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another. Therefore, abortion is not murder
3 months ago
Right but the fact that murder is legal is what the argument is about. So it obviously makes no sense to use that in the definition. Which would make murder definition the premeditated killing of another human being. Since we are arguing whether or not abortion should be legal it's impossible to use that as part of the argument.
-1
reply to: Right but the fact that murder is legal is what the argument is about. So it obviously makes no sense to use that in the definition. Which would make murder definition the premeditated killing of another human being. Since we
3 months ago
It's not murder if it's legal.
No matter how many times you repeat it. You cannot change the defininiton of murder..

It's only an abortion
It's only an abortion
It's only an abortion
It's only an abortion
It's only an abortion
It's only an ab...
0
reply to: It's not murder if it's legal. No matter how many times you repeat it. You cannot change the defininiton of murder.. It's only an abortion It's only an abortion It's only an abortion It's only an abortion It's only an abortion It's only an ab...
3 months ago
Ok, Im not sure if you are interested in truly debating this or not but if so, here is the point.

Yes, I see what you are saying now. That since, at this point in time, abortion is legal, it cant be murder because murder has the word "illegal" in the Webster's definition.

But the point of arguing is to say that abortion is miscategorized, so to speak. So, of course it doestn fit the definition. When one says "abortion is murder" it is meant as "abortion needs to be recognized and categorized as murder" (by making it illegal)

It simply a shorter way of saying it. That is how the english language works.

It not too much different from gay marriage in that respect. Marriage is defined (or was) as a man and woman. But I never heard anyone say "change the definition of marriage" No. The protests simply said "we want to get married" Well, based on the definition, it is was a literal impossibility. So "we want to get married" didnt mean " one of us intends to grow new genitalia and then get married" It meant our arrangement is essentially the same thing as a marriage, so it needs to be recognized as such.

And of course, it still doesnt speak to the main issue which is the unnecessary taking of a human life--illegal or not. Self defense is not the unnecessary taking of a life. The death penalty is not the unnecessary taking of life, Murder and abortion (lets keep them as separate entities) are both the unnecessary taking of a human life. So, if not illegal, it is still as heinous and immoral as murder which--to anyone with a conscience--should mean that it needs to be treated one in the same.

Interestingly, although you and Melicious have both stated that you answered the question and I simply dont accept your answer, the reality is you have not answered the question. Re-read it. You did answer the time frame question with 9th week after fertilization. But that is it. So should it be murder after that? Should there be punishment? What if the fetus becomes an embryo sooner or later?

See, it was a detailed question and I said that in the post, But you very quickly pivoted to "why do you guys care anyway?" Typical liberal response. Dont answer the questions and go on the attack. My post had no attacks, it was a bunch of questoins. But your first comment went right off topic and then attacked.
0
reply to: And that is part of the problem. When is that? Just like all kids hit puberty at different times, and woman hit menopause, etc... fetua vary as to if they could suevive outside the womb. Plus some even at full term some need
3 months ago
You push for an answer and don't like it when it is given. That is not a me problem, that is a you problem and frankly, idaf.
reply to: You push for an answer and don't like it when it is given. That is not a me problem, that is a you problem and frankly, idaf.
3 months ago
It's not that I don't like the answer. It's at the answer makes no sense.
-1
reply to: It's not that I don't like the answer. It's at the answer makes no sense.
3 months ago
It makes perfect sense and Mel is correct.
Now, you're just badgering
reply to: It's not that I don't like the answer. It's at the answer makes no sense.
3 months ago
It does make sense. You do this often with me. I can point out several posts where I answer your stupid****question and you dont like the answer so you try to push me into a different one. What you havent learned, is that I do not care if my answer makes sense to you or not. As I said that is a YOU problem, not a me problem.
reply to: It does make sense. You do this often with me. I can point out several posts where I answer your stupid ass question and you dont like the answer so you try to push me into a different one. What you havent learned, is that I
3 months ago
Please point them out. Your not going to point to the gay marriage hypothetical question that you refused to answer, are you? Because you still never answered that. Of course its understandable becuase an honest answer would show how hypocritical you are.
-1
reply to: Please point them out. Your not going to point to the gay marriage hypothetical question that you refused to answer, are you? Because you still never answered that. Of course its understandable becuase an honest answer would
3 months ago
Badgering does not make you a good debater nor do diversionary tactics such as switching topics.
You lost
Case Closed.
0
reply to: Please point them out. Your not going to point to the gay marriage hypothetical question that you refused to answer, are you? Because you still never answered that. Of course its understandable becuase an honest answer would
3 months ago
I did answer. You called me "a terrible parent".
0
reply to: I did answer. You called me "a terrible parent".
3 months ago
Because your answer was indicative of a bad parent. But, lets be honest, that answer you gave was not a real answer.

The question: "would you want your kids to be raised by a gay or straight couple if all else were equal?"

Your answer: "I would send one to live with each"

Youre going to tell me that is truly what you would do in that hypothetical situation? You would split your kids up? Give me a break. The truth is you dont want to anwer the question for real because you know it will the wrong choice, or hypocritical.
reply to: Badgering does not make you a good debater nor do diversionary tactics such as switching topics. You lost Case Closed.
3 months ago
Typical liberal. Quit and declare victory so as not to expose yourself to being a hypocrit.
0
reply to: Because your answer was indicative of a bad parent. But, lets be honest, that answer you gave was not a real answer. The question: "would you want your kids to be raised by a gay or straight couple if all else were equal?"
3 months ago
See. You are doing it again. You cannot bully me into giving the answer you want.
0
reply to: See. You are doing it again. You cannot bully me into giving the answer you want.
3 months ago
So youre telling me that, given that hypothetical situation, your decision would honestly be to split your kids up and send each to a different family? Come on. You know as well as I, and anyone else reading this, that that would not be your choice.

Besides, Its not a matter of the answer I want, it is a matter of a valid answer. The question has two choices but you made up your own choice. A foolish one at that.

Why are you so afraid to answer?
0
reply to: It does make sense. You do this often with me. I can point out several posts where I answer your stupid ass question and you dont like the answer so you try to push me into a different one. What you havent learned, is that I
3 months ago
Still waiting for the several examples.
0
3 months ago
Wow. Wild post. As always, conservatives try to save babies and liberals trying to kill them.

Those libs sure do like killing black babies disproportionately.
reply to: Wow. Wild post. As always, conservatives try to save babies and liberals trying to kill them. Those libs sure do like killing black babies disproportionately.
3 months ago
How silly of us.

Who will you people and the police have for target practice.
-1
3 months ago
Abortion equates to murder.
3 months ago
Embryology /Embryologists make the scientific argument for life beginning at conception, regardless of what legal, pro-choice definitions etc. are used. And since it is they, embryologists, who are the experts in the field, their conclusions are to be weighted infinitely greater than the pro-deathers who advocate for the death of a "person" (Yes, person, since personhood begins at conception.). Disagreement with the position of those who medical field of expertise IS predicated more on opinion/desire to make infant death legal, and an issue free of moral or ethical considerations. IF YOU HAVE THE TIME AND ACTUAL INTEREST, you may read the following: WHEN DO HUMAN BEINGS BEGIN?

"SCIENTIFIC" MYTHS AND SCIENTIFIC FACTS

Dianne N. Irving, M.A., Ph.D. ... https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html
reply to: Embryology /Embryologists make the scientific argument for life beginning at conception, regardless of what legal, pro-choice definitions etc. are used. And since it is they, embryologists, who are the experts in the field, t
3 months ago
Excellent point!

I dont think there is any question that life begins at conception-even for pro-choicers.

The problem is that they must find a way to circumvent that fact in order to fulfull the progressive mantra of woman's choice. So, we get all kinds of pretzel logic.
reply to: Excellent point! I dont think there is any question that life begins at conception-even for pro-choicers. The problem is that they must find a way to circumvent that fact in order to fulfull the progressive mantra of woma
3 months ago
The question was answered above by several people, but you don't listen.
0
reply to: The question was answered above by several people, but you don't listen.
3 months ago
I tend to put a bit more stock in scientists that specialize in the field, you dont?
0
3 months ago
Barring any non-preventable issues, I believe after 18 weeks it shouldn't happen. This is purely based off statistics of survivability. If it happened after a day, or even a week of what I believe..... the chance of the fetus surviving is extremely rare.
3 months ago
I am definitely pro choice. You have the following choices: Celibacy, birth control, or adoption. Once you CHOOSE to have unprotected sex you are then subject to the conditions that choice may bring. One of which is pregnancy. See ALL actions have consequences. I know that isn't popular anymore. But that doesn't change it being a fact. You have choices. But the killing of the child conceived as a result of your choices is a chicken **** choice...
3 months ago
Ok, here's my take.

On both sides, we've got a lot of people that never really dove deep into this issue and their opinion is based on the groupthink that they adhere to. So, many of the opinions in reality, are little more than parroting.

I beleive that anyone that took the time to dig deep and truly research would come to the conclusion that life begins at conception. After that, it become a moral issue for each to decide at what point it is ok to end a human life.

A human life starts at conception and ends with death. If you put that on a sliding scale, there are a number of change events that take place between those two points: various named stages of the embryo, fetus, birth, puberty, menopause, etc.

It is all the same living being. But, part of life is that each being is constantly going through changes, states. Birth is simply one of the events along that timeline.

The article posted above gives a pretty good explanation.

So, scientists conclude--scientifically--that life begins as conception. It is as illogical to say that an embryo that has not had its nose formed yet (week 8) is not a human life as it is to say that a boy that has not gotten his six-year molars is not a human life, or that girl that has not gotten her first period is not a human life. They are all changes to the same being. That being is constantly changing.

So, the real question is when is it ok to take a human life. Now, the rest is all speculation on my part and being pro-life I dont have the mindset of a pro-choicer. So they will likely be unhappy with the rest.

Choicers tend to use the death penalty as an argument. I think they have a harder time killing adults than embryos simply because of the visual. An adult LOOKS like us, an embryo doesnt. Im not saying they are ruthless and biased and murderous, but that it makes it easier to be pro-choice when the being to be killed is very different visually, not fully formed, and it is known (or accepted or thought) that the being is unaware anyway. I think the "not being fully formed" is a big part of this.

I add to that, the desire for humans to have sex. It is a REALLY strong desire and being anti-abortion infringes on that desire/need. Now Im not saying that choicers make the decision to be choicers because it means free love. But I do think that the abortion part of it impacts the thought process. Pregnancy is a natural result of sex. If you dont want pregnancy dont have sex. If you want pregnancy, have sex. Quite a conundrum when you want one without the other.

Yes, there are other forms of birth control but they are not part of the instinctual thought process of sex=pregnancy. The instinctual reflex is sex=pregnancy and that helps to form the core belief.

When faced with the instinct of sex (one of the most powerful human instincts as it is required for keeping the species alive, and the fact that the being is not fully formed and unaware, it becomes easier to allow for its death.

Just my opinion and I know the choicers will be offended. So, have at it.
0
reply to: Ok, here's my take. On both sides, we've got a lot of people that never really dove deep into this issue and their opinion is based on the groupthink that they adhere to. So, many of the opinions in reality, are little more
3 months ago
It interesting to me this assumption that pro-choicers are a). Pro-abortion and b) anti death penalty. First. I am pro-choice. But not pro-abortion. Second, the only problem I have with the death penalty is the waste of tax dollars. It costs millions more than life in prison.

Have you ever had a friend, a colleague, a personal connection to a person who has made the choice have an abortion? Very few people find it easy.
reply to: Ok, here's my take. On both sides, we've got a lot of people that never really dove deep into this issue and their opinion is based on the groupthink that they adhere to. So, many of the opinions in reality, are little more
3 months ago
BIRTH CONTROL IS PRE-EMPTIVE ABORTION
0
reply to: It interesting to me this assumption that pro-choicers are a). Pro-abortion and b) anti death penalty. First. I am pro-choice. But not pro-abortion. Second, the only problem I have with the death penalty is the waste of tax d
3 months ago
Pro-choice and pro-abortion are the same thing. I think you are saying that you dont WANT abortions, but its essentially the same. If you allow them, you arent anti-abortion. Its symantics.

As for the death penalty, its just a very common argument dragged into the abortion argument. I know beliefs vary, but its a generalizaion.

I know of two. And both did it as a means of birth control. The decision may have been hard, but it was, by far, the easier decision. So, the idea that it was a tough choice is not really accurate, relatively speaking. The decision to allow the baby to be born is a much tougher choice. Sometimes the right way isnt easy.

Abortion as means of birth control is selfish. cowardly, and taking the easy way out.
0
reply to: Pro-choice and pro-abortion are the same thing. I think you are saying that you dont WANT abortions, but its essentially the same. If you allow them, you arent anti-abortion. Its symantics. As for the death penalty, its just
3 months ago
I know two. The first was a friend. She was young (a minor as was I) her family and home life was not great. They used birth control. She got pregnant. He walked away. She was terrified. Terrified for her father to find out. Terrified to go to a clinic.. Terrified to have a baby. In the end her fear of her fathet won out. It was NOT an easy decision.

Another. An adult friend. Aboyt 6 and a half months pregnant. Went to for her check up. No heart beat. Did ultra sound. Fetus, baby whatever you want to call it. Dead. Her doctor refused to remove it from her uterus. Fully expected her to carry it to term. Knowing it was dead inside her body and could harm her health. She had a hard time finding a doctor willing to perform a "late term abortion". Thats what they called it. This was crushing for her. Heart breaking. And abortion laws would make this illegal. Forcing her to carry a dead baby to term. Harming her emotional and physical self.

So yes, I am pro-choice and I will fight tooth and nail for it to remain legal in this country. If you believe it is-wrong. Dont get one. If you believe ir is sinful. Well that is between that woman and her god.
0
reply to: I know two. The first was a friend. She was young (a minor as was I) her family and home life was not great. They used birth control. She got pregnant. He walked away. She was terrified. Terrified for her father to find out.
3 months ago
As for the first girl, yes that is very sad situation to be in. No Doubt. But you still took the easier way out. The right thing to do would be to face the fire and if you don't want the baby give it up for adoption. Of course you can expect a minor to always make the right choice. That's part of being a minor I suppose. But you certainly can expect an adult to make the right decision in that case.

As for the second woman, sorry but I don't believe that. If the baby was dead inside her then they'll be a miscarriage I believe. I find it very very difficult to believe that a doctor would not remove it from her

Still, these are but two situations in a myriad of possible situations. Policy should not be made for very specific situations. The vast majority of abortions are carried out because of convenience. We know that to be true when you're dealing with incest rape and other special situations.

I think zombie is absolutely correct what he says that a fetus looking very different than us and unformed as well as the desire to not infringe on sex play a big role in people's view on abortion when they want to allow it. I only add to that another very big reason, convenience. When a girl gets pregnant especially at a young age she can say bye bye to her white wedding dreams, meeting a nice guy and raising a family, maybe College, a career, the list goes on. People kill all the time out of convenience. And the fact that being pregnant can be ended so easily and not inconvenience somebody for the rest of their lives makes it very very easy to be pro-choice.

Pro-choicers are very well aware of the fact that at fertilization you now have a human being. It's science. There's no question about it. It's fact. But the only way to make abortion sound tomorrow is to somehow prove that it is not yet a human being, hence the debate about when it becomes human. Any thinking person knows at fertilization the process of Life Begins. Without resorting to name-calling you have to mean absolute moron to not understand that. But the need to somehow prove that life begins later is the only way to justify taking a life. If it's not a human then it's not murder. All Pro choices know the truth. It's not a matter of if it's human, it's a matter of how do we legally allow the killing of the human.
0
reply to: As for the first girl, yes that is very sad situation to be in. No Doubt. But you still took the easier way out. The right thing to do would be to face the fire and if you don't want the baby give it up for adoption. Of cours
3 months ago
We have already legally established it. Abortion is legal.
0
reply to: We have already legally established it. Abortion is legal.
3 months ago
So your argument as to whether or not abortion should be legal is: it already is legal

Lol

In the 1850s would you have argued that slavery should be legal because it already is?
0
reply to: We have already legally established it. Abortion is legal.
3 months ago
The original post mentioned that the pro-choice logic always breaks down at some point. And here we see the culmination of that in the final argument. The answer abortion should be legal is... because I said so.
0
reply to: The original post mentioned that the pro-choice logic always breaks down at some point. And here we see the culmination of that in the final argument. The answer abortion should be legal is... because I said so.
3 months ago
No. We answered your question. Repeatedly. Are you admitting you cant read or are incapable of simple comprehension?
0
reply to: No. We answered your question. Repeatedly. Are you admitting you cant read or are incapable of simple comprehension?
3 months ago
Looking back over the comments the only thing that came close to an answer from you was this: Once the fetus is viable and can survive outside of it's mother.

Well when is that? As I said in my follow-up question that can vary from one situation to the next. Just as some kids have puberty earlier or later, or some women go through menopause earlier or later, a fetus can survive outside the mother earlier or later than others. So if that's the criteria, surviving outside the womb, how do we know when that is? How do we know we're not killing a human being?
0
reply to: Looking back over the comments the only thing that came close to an answer from you was this: Once the fetus is viable and can survive outside of it's mother. Well when is that? As I said in my follow-up question that can va
3 months ago
21 weeks is the earliest a fetus MIGHT be viable. At 23 weeks, a fetus has approximately a 29% chance to live and of those that survive, only about half have no disabilities (be it mild or severe) at age 3.

A smaller study showed that at 22 weeks, the death rate was between 97% and 98%... compared to a 55% survival rate at 24 weeks (even then there's a fairly high chance that the infant could have disabilities)
0
reply to: 21 weeks is the earliest a fetus MIGHT be viable. At 23 weeks, a fetus has approximately a 29% chance to live and of those that survive, only about half have no disabilities (be it mild or severe) at age 3. A smaller study
3 months ago
Are you saying these are the stats IF the baby were taken out of the womb?

If so, is that the argument? That if it cant live outside the mother on its own, it is not a living being? About 21 weeks?

Here is a baby at 20 weeks. Thats not a living baby that should have God's right to life? Youd be ok ending this life?
reply to: Are you saying these are the stats IF the baby were taken out of the womb? If so, is that the argument? That if it cant live outside the mother on its own, it is not a living being? About 21 weeks? Here is a baby at 20 we
I hope no one replies yes. Anyone that can support abortion at this stage, whatever week it is, is pure evil. Im sorry about name calling and all that. But lets call it what it is. Some advocating to end the life of a baby at whatever week this pic is, is pure evil.
reply to: Are you saying these are the stats IF the baby were taken out of the womb? If so, is that the argument? That if it cant live outside the mother on its own, it is not a living being? About 21 weeks? Here is a baby at 20 we
3 months ago
Before you jump down my throat, I am pro choice, however personally it's only an option I would consider in very certain and specific circumstances.

I believe those stats are for if the baby left the womb for any reason. It makes me extremely sad when I see pictures of a mother's miscarriage at work, regardless of gestational age... and yes, I know there's a difference between an abortion and a miscarriage, but it's still sad to see.

Are you saying that a drug addict who can't take care of themselves should bring an innocent life into the world and possibly have something happen to the baby? That is a real disregard of human life to me. Making abortion illegal and forcing someone that's suffered sexual assault go to some back alley "doctor" is disregarding human life.
reply to: Are you saying these are the stats IF the baby were taken out of the womb? If so, is that the argument? That if it cant live outside the mother on its own, it is not a living being? About 21 weeks? Here is a baby at 20 we
3 months ago
Awwwwwwwww!
That reminds me;

How do you get 100 babies into a bucket? With a blender.
How do you get them out again? With a Dorito
reply to: BIRTH CONTROL IS PRE-EMPTIVE ABORTION
3 months ago
No I don't think that's correct. With birth control you avoid fertilization. So being is never formed. The link above by the embryologist explains it well. Sperm and egg alone do not constitute life. It is only at the moment of fertilization that it happens. So birth control has nothing to do with abortion.
0
reply to: No I don't think that's correct. With birth control you avoid fertilization. So being is never formed. The link above by the embryologist explains it well. Sperm and egg alone do not constitute life. It is only at the moment
3 months ago
Sure it does...Every sperm is sacred. The Catholic shurch has felt as much and they also ban birth control.
From a spiritual aspect, Birth control most certainly is abortion
0
I didnt mean for it to sound like jumping down your throat. Sorry if it did. I think most make allowances in their belief for rape and incest. And yes, that is somewhat hypocritical. I mean if you are saying it is a life and is precious then why does it matter if it were from a rape. As far as the baby is concerned, it is a life either way. But to me that is just erring on the side of life. the amount of rape/incest babies are so miniscule it is beyond statistically insignificant. So is there some hypocrisy there. sure a little but no policy can be perfect and not allowing would be far far MORE perfect than allowing in that sense.

As for a drug addict, that is also another problem area of course. But for those that belive life begins at conception it is a life. So theree is no difference between taking the life of the fetus with a dug addicted mother, or taking the life of a 3 year old with a drug addicted mother.

But again, these would be the exceptions, not the rule. it just seems kind of backwards to base policy or belief on that. Sort of saying that 50 babies are in drug addict mother womb, and 50,000 are in non drug addict womb. We dont want the 50 to suffer, so allow all 50k to be aborted.
0
3 months ago
Forcing a woman to have a baby that will affect her forever infringes on her constitutional right to life liberty and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
3 months ago
So there we have it, finally and admission that abortion is simply for convenience.

The whole when does Life Begin issue is a farce, a red herring. Life begins at conception and science has proven that. Progressives are just grasping at any way to justify taking the life of an innocent human because it inconveniences that.
reply to: So there we have it, finally and admission that abortion is simply for convenience. The whole when does Life Begin issue is a farce, a red herring. Life begins at conception and science has proven that. Progressives are just
3 months ago
Yes...because one persons opinion defines everyone's. RIght?
I'd be happy to slide down that slippery slope with you

0
reply to: So there we have it, finally and admission that abortion is simply for convenience. The whole when does Life Begin issue is a farce, a red herring. Life begins at conception and science has proven that. Progressives are just
More than a month ago
yes 94% of abortions is for selfish reasons, the other 6% is the death penalty for the innocent for a crime of an evil man!
this (unlike Judas goats assertions) is fact,not opinion
0
reply to: Yes...because one persons opinion defines everyone's. RIght? I'd be happy to slide down that slippery slope with you https://youtu.be/dUvvebRL_rA
3 months ago
Well, the truth is that most of the arguments from the left, in this form. Taking what one crazy person says or does and projecting it on half the country. Having said that it's hard to disagree with this: " Obama may very well be a homosexual himself"
0
reply to: Well, the truth is that most of the arguments from the left, in this form. Taking what one crazy person says or does and projecting it on half the country. Having said that it's hard to disagree with this: " Obama may very we
3 months ago
You're not quite right in the head, are you?

Everything you say is lunatic fringe
0
reply to: You're not quite right in the head, are you? Everything you say is lunatic fringe
3 months ago
0
3 months ago
3 months ago
without reading everything before. this . and being a new again christian, I say never...this country has the blood of the saints on their hands for the genocide of millions of babies. Don't bother replying to this or me...I am not going to look and will quit if if I have too...it is what it is...non believers dont have the same perspective...so lets not discuss.
0
reply to: without reading everything before. this . and being a new again christian, I say never...this country has the blood of the saints on their hands for the genocide of millions of babies. Don't bother replying to this or me...I
3 months ago
0
reply to:
3 months ago
typical....
0
More than a month ago
Regressives claim to care about abortion but are happy to allow babies die in the desert. SICK
0
reply to: Regressives claim to care about abortion but are happy to allow babies die in the desert. SICK
More than a month ago
Youre a disgusting human being.
reply to: Youre a disgusting human being.
More than a month ago
he is,

funny thing is he says regressives, funny thing is liberals are the regressives
-1
reply to: Youre a disgusting human being.
More than a month ago
Hey...it's true.

Regressives are hateful murderers. You must love that picture of the dead baby above that @tommyb. Posted.

How dare you use a beautiful dolphins for your avatar when you side with these vulgarians

Pleas go play with your pictures of aborted fetuses like @Matt.Maros

You people will answer to your God for your behavior.

.
0
More than a month ago
differences between liberals/abortion and nazi's/Jews
Liberals: Nazi's
-unborn babies are not Human -Jews are not Human
-babies are not people . - Jews are not people
-they are inconvenient and are a burden . -they are criminals who are inconvenient to Germany
-ageist . - hitler was racists
-use every dehumanizing tactic in the book. -hitler used every dehumanizing tactics in the book
uses lies and propaganda to support it. -Hilter and propaganda to justify or
-deny they kill people

denies abortion is repeated history
-abortion clinics target minority groups -Hitler used abortion as a means to target minority groups
-says its a right to kill a baby -Nazi's say its a right to kill a jew

and like genocide of jews being evil was MORE then an opinion and had to be faught against, so is infanticide! it choice/pro-life isn;t a choice, its a HUMAN RIGHTS issue, killing a human baby is as much a violation of human rights as killing a jew or black
0
More than a month ago
@Matt.Maros --- Says "-abortion clinics target minority groups -Hitler used abortion as a means to target minority groups "Attacks miniroity groups like Blacks and gays.
-Lives in Canada
-Lives in a Canada whose national healthcare system pays for abortion
-Thinks he is a US citizen
-Repeats what he was told like a lemming
-Did I say, "Lives in a Canada whose national healthcare system pays for abortion"?
0
3 weeks ago
Sometime in the third trimester when the fetus can survive outside the mother.
0