U.S. Politics Discussion

[Mani-Man]

 

I wasted many years following the teachings of a man written book about a magical being that doesnt exist.

I dont need a clown like you to show me anything when the teachings have been beaten into me literally...i dont need more mindless sheep to tell me about fantasy stories weak man wrote to control even weaker humans.

 

Unlike you who only knows about anything when fake woke twitter tells you, i did my research on all kinds of topic.

So far there were only two people, two childish people who have been clearly manipulated by a religion controlled society to just spew the same nonsense without thinking for themself.

 

You are a trash person for devaluing life in general.

1.) Why do you call people clown so much? Did you have a bad childhood involving a clown?

 

2.) You're the one who brought up spitting on God. Correct me if I'm wrong but no one else in this thread mentioned God or the bible until you did. I know I didnt.

 

3.) I doubt you did much research. Based on how you respond to people who have a different opinions I'm guessing you only read things that fit your bias.

 

4.) Grow up.

 

1.) Its the word that describes you the best, cant help if you act like one

 

2.)This is all this anti abortion crap and value of life is about...society built rules formed through religion.

Valuing one life more than the other is spitting on God who created everything according to the bible.

 

3.)I did my research, if you doubt or not doesnt interest me.

I dont care about peoples opinion on this because there is only one opinion and that is the one of the woman that matters.

 

4.) Uhu, you hit me deeply with that...what a mature response.

Im a bit surprised, i was expecting some remark on me being german...but not this incredible childish "grow up" nonsense.

But shows nicely how mature you are when you lose an argument.

Thanks for providing the proof.

 

@KingKhan18 I see your point.

 

[KingKhan18]

I disagree with nWo-Kevin, but repeatedly calling him a " clown " is borderline flamebaiting.

[nWo_Kevin]

2.)This is all this anti abortion crap and value of life is about...society built rules formed through religion.

Valuing one life more than the other is spitting on God who created everything according to the bible.

 

3.)I did my research, if you doubt or not doesnt interest me.

I dont care about peoples opinion on this because there is only one opinion and that is the one of the woman that matters.

2.) As I've said, no one brought up religion....except you. No one has spit on God or insulted him....except you. The second part of your sentence is simply wrong based on what the bible says, in regards to humans vs animals/worms etc...

 

3.) But while our back and forth got out of hand, lets get it back to a more friendly discussion. What research have you done? Are there any articles you can link to? Any books you'd recommend I read?

[EJ!]

 

 

Had to whip out the portable computing device because the long text pyramids are a confusing eyesore on mobile. We need an @ function on this bitch.

 

Anyway this abortion subject is so infuriating to watch. I'm gonna say it right now: the woman > the non-baby you think is a baby. There's no need to talk about adoption or rape or danger to the mother or any of that because what's most important is the person having to carry the organism in her body and take care of it after it's pushed out in nine months. I don't want people forgetting that part. "That could have been the next Einstein!" and so could the 17 year old girl who is now forced to drop out of high school and carry out the entirety of her pregnancy.

 

Honestly, the pro-life side just sounds disingenuous every step of the way, that isn't to say you guys don't genuinely believe what you say, it just sounds like you know better than what you're saying. It's all in the way the wrong things get sensationalized around the topic of abortion. People who didn't know better hear pro-lifers and think that women who are about to pop just go dance into an abortion clinic and order infanticide like it's a cheeseburger. Planned Parenthood is constantly fighting to exist because dweebs behave as if they are baby mills, even though abortions are a small percentage of the services they offer. The baby parts debacle was *censored*ing despicable and anyone who peddled that should be ashamed. Nobody LIKES abortion. Pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion, it means being in favor of having the choice and that's all it means. There are other ways to prevent abortions and it starts with better sex education, because too much of it just teaches abstinence if at all, this leads to sexual mistakes that lead to pregnancy among other things.

 

 

It's funny seeing the side of the argument that usually disregards science in favor of religion now use science as an ally. There shouldn't be laws enforced because science just tells us the stages of the organism, the argument is about deciding at what stage is the organism considered a human with constitutional rights and shit. There isn't a consensus so there shouldn't be a law that considers it murder. Some people think conception is enough (please grow up if you believe this), Georgia thinks it's six weeks, to me it's simple: can the organism survive outside the womb at a given point in time using any and all tools available? If the answer is a no, then it's not viable and abortion should be permitted. At about 20 weeks, it has a less than a 40% chance of surviving outside the womb but at least the little asshole starts really looking like a baby and in most states, that's where the abortion cut-off is. That really should be enough. By then, the mother usually has had ample time to figure out whether she wants to continue with it or not. After that, she becomes a fatboy and has to give birth. I feel gross saying anyone HAS to do anything but that is more than enough of a fair compromise for abortion laws to be left alone.

 

 

This all just sounds like lawmakers going through any all lengths to police women's sexuality. Blame "liberal academia" if you want but I take classes on things like this and there are countless studies and intensive research about the type of things that are happening right now. Georgia and Alabama are two of the worst states for sexual education and among the highest in teen pregnancy and STDs. Now they are two states that pass abortion laws that buck science. They don't teach about sex and then don't help out when the kids make mistakes (don't forget birth control is still argued against even though its purposes include much more than pregnancy prevention). The Georgia bill is specifically disingenuous because many women do not know they're pregnant and can't detect pregnancy in the time they're allowed to have an abortion and the lawmakers *censored*ing know that. So the only solution is to not have sex right? That's how deeply ingrained gender roles and religion are in our society, that women having sex with non-reproductive intent is now punishable by law and possibly the death penalty. Notice how there is no conversation about the man who inseminates the woman, what's his punishment? Dude if men could get pregnant they would invent TerminatorX supplements that come in a milkshake by the next weekend. This seems like punishment for women choosing to enjoy sex with someone they don't necessarily plan to start a family with or for getting raped when they should have been at home in their nightgowns reading their Bibles.

 

Think of it this way: What if you left your front door wide open and someone walked right in, or you had your front door closed and a window open and someone climbed through, or someone just straight up kicked down the door and they hid in your attic for I don't know...about 3 months before they came down and revealed themselves? You possibly would like to throw the person out or shit maybe even shoot em DEAD #2A #ObamaCan'tTakeMyGuns but what if the law said that you were only allowed to do either of those things within the first 6 weeks of the person's presence? Since that time window has passed without you even getting a chance to realize it, you are now forced to deal with this person sitting on all your furniture butt-ass naked, eating up all your food and kicking the shit outta you for no reason for about 9 months when they're ready to leave the house, but they stay at your doorstep for the foreseeable future because they constantly need money, food and clothes. Going back to the beginning, what if instead of 6 weeks, the government decided the very moment the person has entered your house, you are never allowed to prematurely escort them out. You get it. The fact of the matter is, while they may or may not have support systems during and after, only one person is going through the pregnancy, only one person is vomiting every morning, only one person is dealing with excruciating back pain every day, and only one person is spending several hours in pain shitting out an entire human (babies come out of butts right?). These abortion laws completely disregard that.

 

 

That is the reason I go with conception because it is a concrete standard. Viability ranges depending on where the baby is. That is basically saying that one life is more important than another because one person lives in NYC and the other lives in the Congo.

 

 

First of all, thinking a newly fertilized egg is a human with rights is ridiculous, especially considering not every fertilized egg gets farther than that stage. Secondly, that analogy sucks man. Viability in this context means the fetus' ability to survive outside the womb. I honestly don't see what you're getting at with the NYC/Congo comparison. A seven year old child in NYC and a seven year old child in the Congo have the same importance. Are you trying to say since the Congo is a poorer country that the seven year old child would be less viable? Hope not, because that logic falls flat here.

 

Had to whip out the portable computing device because the long text pyramids are a confusing eyesore on mobile. We need an @ function on this bitch.

 

You mentioned a lot of things here so I want to be respectful and ask you a few questions when you have time. But I wanted to highlight this and say THANK YOU. Best thing said in the last 4-5 pages.

 

However I do quickly want to ask one thing because I think you said you'd want the cutoff to be 20 weeks? Is this based on the survival rate you mentioned? Because if a woman knows she's pregnant at say 6-8 weeks. Does she really need another 3 months to decide if she wants the baby or not?

 

Also, why do you feel the "baby parts debacle" is despicable. Are you talking about the stories of baby parts being sold? Or are you talking about the procedure typically during the 2nd trimester where the arms/legs would be removed from the baby to perform the abortion. Because I think educating people about the types of procedures of abortion is important.

 

Finally I don't think the "random person enters your home and hides for 3 months" is a correct example of abortion. Although perhaps you've just accidentally made an argument against people coming into the country illegally.

 

 

I remember the mobile site wasn't always this garbage. I don't know what happened.

 

1. The 20 week cut-off was based off the laws in most states. Upon second look, I see 22 weeks is the actual cutoff. Around 25 weeks is when it's a baby and it can live outside the womb but the percentage of abortions that happen at or beyond that time is very low and it's usually because of things like sickness, death and harm to the mother etc. Also, the majority of women DO NOT know they are pregnant at 6-8 weeks, as it's often undetectable as anything other than just odd period activity. Most women know at 10 weeks at the earliest, if not a little later. Lawmakers probably just asked a couple doctors if 6weeks was possible, heard a "yes but not likely" and ran with it. And she may need another three months for a couple reasons. That's simultaneously a short time and a long time. That's enough time to feel the effects of pregnancy and decide you are not ready, that's enough time for financial woes to rise and fear of not being able to support the child or get back on the job become more real and seeing that pushing out this child wouldn't be worth it. Three months is not enough time to plot out the next 18+ years of your life and three months is still enough time to not be sure of a pregnancy, jokes aside. It still looks like visceral fat. I had a math teacher who I thought was four months pregnant but she looked the exact same size the entire school year, she just had a beer belly. Conversely, I've seen a chubby woman get into an entire fist fight and scream out about being three months pregnant. Women's clinics aren't available everywhere, healthcare is expensive, it's easy for some women to just not know. You can't assume things about people's lives.

 

Honestly, the best people to have children are the ones who WANT to have children. I see no benefit in forcing someone who doesn't want to be a parent to be pregnant. Yes many women say they were traumatized by their own abortion but many women also say they feel less guilt knowing that a child wouldn't be brought into this world to suffer in more ways than one. Most people want to have the means to give their child an actual childhood before they have kids, that shouldn't mean they should not be allowed to have sex until then.

 

2. I am indeed talking about when PP was under fire because of lies told about them saying that they were selling baby parts. The type of lies that got their facility shot up by a mad man. That's despicable and it further stigmatized both Planned Parenthood (which again is far more than abortions) and people who seek abortions.

 

3. I was weary about someone turning my analogy into immigration commentary but I'm sticking with it. What did I miss?

 

Btw, immigration would be more like inviting people into your house and then the people who come in just stay and help clean up and rebuild the house and bring in food and things like that. There are people who climb through the window but many times that's because they're running from a couple of the neighbor's rottweilers and your house is the only known safe haven but the front door was clogging up with people, but once they're in the house they pretty much do the same as everyone else and make it better. In some cases, you go to other houses and burn them down for supplies, leaving the people who lived in those houses with nowhere else to go and now they have their neighbors' german shepherds chasing after them and only place big enough to accomodate them and keep them safe is your house.

[Mango kid]

The Democrats won in federal court over the Battle of Trump's Financial records is accounting firm has seven days producer records

[Doink!]

 

 

 

Had to whip out the portable computing device because the long text pyramids are a confusing eyesore on mobile. We need an @ function on this bitch.

 

Anyway this abortion subject is so infuriating to watch. I'm gonna say it right now: the woman > the non-baby you think is a baby. There's no need to talk about adoption or rape or danger to the mother or any of that because what's most important is the person having to carry the organism in her body and take care of it after it's pushed out in nine months. I don't want people forgetting that part. "That could have been the next Einstein!" and so could the 17 year old girl who is now forced to drop out of high school and carry out the entirety of her pregnancy.

 

Honestly, the pro-life side just sounds disingenuous every step of the way, that isn't to say you guys don't genuinely believe what you say, it just sounds like you know better than what you're saying. It's all in the way the wrong things get sensationalized around the topic of abortion. People who didn't know better hear pro-lifers and think that women who are about to pop just go dance into an abortion clinic and order infanticide like it's a cheeseburger. Planned Parenthood is constantly fighting to exist because dweebs behave as if they are baby mills, even though abortions are a small percentage of the services they offer. The baby parts debacle was *censored*ing despicable and anyone who peddled that should be ashamed. Nobody LIKES abortion. Pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion, it means being in favor of having the choice and that's all it means. There are other ways to prevent abortions and it starts with better sex education, because too much of it just teaches abstinence if at all, this leads to sexual mistakes that lead to pregnancy among other things.

 

 

It's funny seeing the side of the argument that usually disregards science in favor of religion now use science as an ally. There shouldn't be laws enforced because science just tells us the stages of the organism, the argument is about deciding at what stage is the organism considered a human with constitutional rights and shit. There isn't a consensus so there shouldn't be a law that considers it murder. Some people think conception is enough (please grow up if you believe this), Georgia thinks it's six weeks, to me it's simple: can the organism survive outside the womb at a given point in time using any and all tools available? If the answer is a no, then it's not viable and abortion should be permitted. At about 20 weeks, it has a less than a 40% chance of surviving outside the womb but at least the little asshole starts really looking like a baby and in most states, that's where the abortion cut-off is. That really should be enough. By then, the mother usually has had ample time to figure out whether she wants to continue with it or not. After that, she becomes a fatboy and has to give birth. I feel gross saying anyone HAS to do anything but that is more than enough of a fair compromise for abortion laws to be left alone.

 

 

This all just sounds like lawmakers going through any all lengths to police women's sexuality. Blame "liberal academia" if you want but I take classes on things like this and there are countless studies and intensive research about the type of things that are happening right now. Georgia and Alabama are two of the worst states for sexual education and among the highest in teen pregnancy and STDs. Now they are two states that pass abortion laws that buck science. They don't teach about sex and then don't help out when the kids make mistakes (don't forget birth control is still argued against even though its purposes include much more than pregnancy prevention). The Georgia bill is specifically disingenuous because many women do not know they're pregnant and can't detect pregnancy in the time they're allowed to have an abortion and the lawmakers *censored*ing know that. So the only solution is to not have sex right? That's how deeply ingrained gender roles and religion are in our society, that women having sex with non-reproductive intent is now punishable by law and possibly the death penalty. Notice how there is no conversation about the man who inseminates the woman, what's his punishment? Dude if men could get pregnant they would invent TerminatorX supplements that come in a milkshake by the next weekend. This seems like punishment for women choosing to enjoy sex with someone they don't necessarily plan to start a family with or for getting raped when they should have been at home in their nightgowns reading their Bibles.

 

Think of it this way: What if you left your front door wide open and someone walked right in, or you had your front door closed and a window open and someone climbed through, or someone just straight up kicked down the door and they hid in your attic for I don't know...about 3 months before they came down and revealed themselves? You possibly would like to throw the person out or shit maybe even shoot em DEAD #2A #ObamaCan'tTakeMyGuns but what if the law said that you were only allowed to do either of those things within the first 6 weeks of the person's presence? Since that time window has passed without you even getting a chance to realize it, you are now forced to deal with this person sitting on all your furniture butt-ass naked, eating up all your food and kicking the shit outta you for no reason for about 9 months when they're ready to leave the house, but they stay at your doorstep for the foreseeable future because they constantly need money, food and clothes. Going back to the beginning, what if instead of 6 weeks, the government decided the very moment the person has entered your house, you are never allowed to prematurely escort them out. You get it. The fact of the matter is, while they may or may not have support systems during and after, only one person is going through the pregnancy, only one person is vomiting every morning, only one person is dealing with excruciating back pain every day, and only one person is spending several hours in pain shitting out an entire human (babies come out of butts right?). These abortion laws completely disregard that.

 

 

That is the reason I go with conception because it is a concrete standard. Viability ranges depending on where the baby is. That is basically saying that one life is more important than another because one person lives in NYC and the other lives in the Congo.

 

 

First of all, thinking a newly fertilized egg is a human with rights is ridiculous, especially considering not every fertilized egg gets farther than that stage. Secondly, that analogy sucks man. Viability in this context means the fetus' ability to survive outside the womb. I honestly don't see what you're getting at with the NYC/Congo comparison. A seven year old child in NYC and a seven year old child in the Congo have the same importance. Are you trying to say since the Congo is a poorer country that the seven year old child would be less viable? Hope not, because that logic falls flat here.

 

Had to whip out the portable computing device because the long text pyramids are a confusing eyesore on mobile. We need an @ function on this bitch.

 

You mentioned a lot of things here so I want to be respectful and ask you a few questions when you have time. But I wanted to highlight this and say THANK YOU. Best thing said in the last 4-5 pages.

 

However I do quickly want to ask one thing because I think you said you'd want the cutoff to be 20 weeks? Is this based on the survival rate you mentioned? Because if a woman knows she's pregnant at say 6-8 weeks. Does she really need another 3 months to decide if she wants the baby or not?

 

Also, why do you feel the "baby parts debacle" is despicable. Are you talking about the stories of baby parts being sold? Or are you talking about the procedure typically during the 2nd trimester where the arms/legs would be removed from the baby to perform the abortion. Because I think educating people about the types of procedures of abortion is important.

 

Finally I don't think the "random person enters your home and hides for 3 months" is a correct example of abortion. Although perhaps you've just accidentally made an argument against people coming into the country illegally.

 

 

I remember the mobile site wasn't always this garbage. I don't know what happened.

 

1. The 20 week cut-off was based off the laws in most states. Upon second look, I see 22 weeks is the actual cutoff. Around 25 weeks is when it's a baby and it can live outside the womb but the percentage of abortions that happen at or beyond that time is very low and it's usually because of things like sickness, death and harm to the mother etc. Also, the majority of women DO NOT know they are pregnant at 6-8 weeks, as it's often undetectable as anything other than just odd period activity. Most women know at 10 weeks at the earliest, if not a little later. Lawmakers probably just asked a couple doctors if 6weeks was possible, heard a "yes but not likely" and ran with it. And she may need another three months for a couple reasons. That's simultaneously a short time and a long time. That's enough time to feel the effects of pregnancy and decide you are not ready, that's enough time for financial woes to rise and fear of not being able to support the child or get back on the job become more real and seeing that pushing out this child wouldn't be worth it. Three months is not enough time to plot out the next 18+ years of your life and three months is still enough time to not be sure of a pregnancy, jokes aside. It still looks like visceral fat. I had a math teacher who I thought was four months pregnant but she looked the exact same size the entire school year, she just had a beer belly. Conversely, I've seen a chubby woman get into an entire fist fight and scream out about being three months pregnant. Women's clinics aren't available everywhere, healthcare is expensive, it's easy for some women to just not know. You can't assume things about people's lives.

 

Honestly, the best people to have children are the ones who WANT to have children. I see no benefit in forcing someone who doesn't want to be a parent to be pregnant. Yes many women say they were traumatized by their own abortion but many women also say they feel less guilt knowing that a child wouldn't be brought into this world to suffer in more ways than one. Most people want to have the means to give their child an actual childhood before they have kids, that shouldn't mean they should not be allowed to have sex until then.

 

2. I am indeed talking about when PP was under fire because of lies told about them saying that they were selling baby parts. The type of lies that got their facility shot up by a mad man. That's despicable and it further stigmatized both Planned Parenthood (which again is far more than abortions) and people who seek abortions.

 

3. I was weary about someone turning my analogy into immigration commentary but I'm sticking with it. What did I miss?

 

Btw, immigration would be more like inviting people into your house and then the people who come in just stay and help clean up and rebuild the house and bring in food and things like that. There are people who climb through the window but many times that's because they're running from a couple of the neighbor's rottweilers and your house is the only known safe haven but the front door was clogging up with people, but once they're in the house they pretty much do the same as everyone else and make it better. In some cases, you go to other houses and burn them down for supplies, leaving the people who lived in those houses with nowhere else to go and now they have their neighbors' german shepherds chasing after them and only place big enough to accomodate them and keep them safe is your house.

 

 

Yes, which can very different place to place. In NYC the baby may be able to survive outside the womb at 20 weeks where the backhills of WV the baby might be viable at 26 weeks. It is subjective and to say that viability is the standard of human life would mean that one human life is more valuable than the other due to technological innovation. Conception is the only marker that is concrete. Hope that clears it up for you.

[maskedmaniac]

No way a baby lives long in WV than it does in NYC. You have to take into account the meth heads and feral tweakers.

[Generations]

The Democrats won in federal court over the Battle of Trump's Financial records is accounting firm has seven days producer records

 

Good

[Bdon]

What's these financial records supposed to accomplish? I haven't been paying attention to politics much lately

[Generations]

What's these financial records supposed to accomplish? I haven't been paying attention to politics much lately

 

Proving that the president is a criminal.

 

Or...are you cool with that?

 

Wait...don't answer. I think we know.

[nWo_Kevin]

 

What's these financial records supposed to accomplish? I haven't been paying attention to politics much lately

 

Proving that the president is a criminal.

 

When prison sir?

[Generations]

 

 

When prison sir?

 

 

Using presidential privilege to duck sentencing does not clear one of being a criminal.

 

So...what's your point? That the president is a criminal, but it's fine, because we can't touch him? You asked a question and I answered it. The point of releasing the tax records is to prove that he's a criminal. Do with that what you wish.

[M3J]

 

I'm going by a lot of children and adults who wish they were dead or aborted instead of being brought up in a miserable home or being abused or neglected. Besides, about people coming from nothing, are they wanted or unwanted?

 

What's more messed up is that you're trying to take away women's choice and freedom over her body, but on the same hand, you claim guns are for everyone, and anyone should freely own guns even though they kill people as well.

 

Ashley Massaro lived a life that many on here could only dream of having. She was beautiful, she won money from a diva search contest, she became a professional wrestler. Yet just a few days ago she killed herself. Some people can have great parents, great life, and still be miserable. Likewise others have terrible parents, terrible childhood and they overcome it. I don't see how the quality of life someone might have can be used as an excuse for abortion when you have no idea how their life will go.

 

No one cares what a woman does. A woman in 2019 can dress how she wants, marry who she wants, hell she can become a man if she wants. Sure some might disagree with it, but they can still do it. This isn't about women's life, this is about the extra heartbeat and life inside of her that is not her own.

 

Ashley Massaro is unrelated to this topic, and they don't know if she committed suicide or not (at the time of your post anyway). What I want to know is, would these same people wishing they were aborted still have that viewpoint IF they were fetuses who could think and knew how their lives would be played out? I know at least one person who says had she been aborted, her mom would have been a doctor, and apparently there'd be far less drama and more happiness.

 

Yes, republicans do care what women do, and that's why they're waging a war against women and are trying to punish them, some even wanting to give them death sentences. The "life" inside her is her own because it cannot survive outside the womb, it cannot survive without her. If she dies, then the embryo/fetus dies. The "extra heartbeat" doesn't justify anything.

 

Who are you or I or even another random woman to tell a pregnant woman to put her life, emotional wellbeing, and mental health at risk just to give birth? Especially if she's not ready to become a parent yet, and especially if the baby would be in a horrible environment. I'm pretty sure you'd be deadset against helping the mother in any way and her unwanted child and even oppose increasing minimum wage so she can keep the child fed, so why should you have any say whatsoever in what she does? Whenever I say this, anti-abortionists almost always respond with "hell no, why should I help her?!"

 

 

 

 

You just claimed it was.

 

 

right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

 

 

Healthcare =/= Life

 

 

 

No one cares what a woman does. A woman in 2019 can dress how she wants, marry who she wants, hell she can become a man if she wants. Sure some might disagree with it, but they can still do it. This isn't about women's life, this is about the extra heartbeat and life inside of her that is not her own.

 

That is the single most dumbest thing i heard about the topic abortion, right next to the idiots who say that rape is gods will because it creates life.

 

It is her own because her body feeds it, her body makes it possible to even exist.

Everything a woman does is hurting or growing this fetus.

Do you have any idea what woman go through during pregnancy? How much they need to sacrifice and give up for child to be born?

How much they risk their life even in the most normal pregnancy?

 

According to you, a patient who has a brain eating worm or so in his head...is not allowed to have it removed because that living organism isnt the patients...what kind of idiotic logic is that?

 

This is *censored*ing about Womens life,

And even if we argue like you...its not your own or anybody elses heartbeat and life...so if a woman isnt allowed to decide on this life, why should anybody else?

 

 

That is an extremely flawed take, since if the mother's life is in danger the abortion would be allowed.

 

Because the baby has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Literally in the Declaration of Independence.

 

And I'll ask this again since nobody would answer.

 

If men and women are equal, since your primary issue is “control,” here’s a question for you. Should a man be forced by the state to pay child support for a child that he did not want prior to birth? If so, why?

 

Its a womans life...and its always in danger with a pregnancy.

Forcing a woman who is not ready or willing to have a child into motherhood is endangering her life and that of a child.

Many woman experience Depression after childbirth.

 

Oh so a fetus has all those rights, but a woman not? A woman is forced to give this all up even if she didnt get pregnant on her own will? If she is not ready?

So a fetus life is more important than the woman who has to carry it, who risks her body and health with every second? A woman has less worth than the child she carries?

No, dont come in with this liberty and life crap when in the same breath you are for taking it away from a woman in the first place by not allowing it to be her choice what to do with her body.

 

Any asshole who gets a woman pregnant but doesnt want the child can *Censored* off imo.

Those who are not ready or dont want a child shouldnt be forced into it because nothing good comes from it.

But it comes down to the case, someone who on purpose got a woman pregnant and then refuses to care for the child or help the mother should be forced yeah...especially when the woman isnt allowed to get an abortion or so.

When the man is tricked into it then he shouldnt be forced to pay.

Its a situation based thing imo that you cant answer with one template that fits all cases.

 

 

They both have those rights. The woman should be protected just as the baby should be protected. Both lives are equally important.

 

So by YOUR logic, every situation a woman gets pregnant she should have a choice, but men only get a choice in certain situations. Sounds sexist to me. And I hope you know that when you say men should be forced in certain situations, it is loaded with a ton of irony considering you are mad that women can only abort in certain situations.

 

Men do have a choice: at the beginning of the relationship when he has the opportunity to ask if she wants a family. If she says no or not anytime soon, then he can make the choice to stay despite being told she'd likely get an abortion or move on to another woman. After that, he gets no choice in whether she gets an abortion or not unless there's a technology that'll take away danger to the woman's life and even transfer it to the man, at the bare minimum.

 

Fetuses aren't humans yet to be considered equally important.

 

And as we have seen the past few years, healthcare does = life. Because many people don't have healthcare or proper healthcare, they aren't able to afford life-saving medicines and as result, die. Why aren't republicans worried about those lives? why worry about lives that can't even live outside the womb and aren't even humans yet?

 

 

 

No one cares what a woman does. A woman in 2019 can dress how she wants, marry who she wants, hell she can become a man if she wants. Sure some might disagree with it, but they can still do it. This isn't about women's life, this is about the extra heartbeat and life inside of her that is not her own.

That is the single most dumbest thing i heard about the topic abortion, right next to the idiots who say that rape is gods will because it creates life.

 

According to you, a patient who has a brain eating worm or so in his head...is not allowed to have it removed because that living organism isnt the patients...what kind of idiotic logic is that?

 

 

You call my argument the dumbest you ever heard. And then a few sentences later you start comparing a baby inside of a mother to a brain eating worm?

 

Just stop.

 

Nothing I said could make you come to that conclusion other than your emotions.

 

 

 

Yes we can actually, of course. But that is/was not really the point of the discussion at all.

 

When I brought this up, the point was that the cop murdered that woman while he had other optio s to contain her. And the first thing that I put the blame on wasn't even a personal attack on the cop himself, rather than on training of police officers, which makes these tyoe of incidents too often of occurence.

And I have no problems with better training for cops. I'm also in favor of having as much evidence on a situation as possible. Be it video cameras on cops or something else. But I also know it's easy for any of us, myself included, to play armchair quarterback when it comes to videos like this.

 

One of the few things I actually agree with you on.

Interestingly, I haven't heard any BLM talk about a black man being killed by cops when he was in his car and looked as if he was about to shoot, nor did they mention a black man being shot at for lunging at a cop with a knife (I think he survived as well?).

 

Shame "Blue/All Lives Matter" are okay with black men and women being killed by cops though. They could just as easily support the cops while being against police brutality.

 

Had to whip out the portable computing device because the long text pyramids are a confusing eyesore on mobile. We need an @ function on this bitch.

 

Anyway this abortion subject is so infuriating to watch. I'm gonna say it right now: the woman > the non-baby you think is a baby. There's no need to talk about adoption or rape or danger to the mother or any of that because what's most important is the person having to carry the organism in her body and take care of it after it's pushed out in nine months. I don't want people forgetting that part. "That could have been the next Einstein!" and so could the 17 year old girl who is now forced to drop out of high school and carry out the entirety of her pregnancy.

 

Honestly, the pro-life side just sounds disingenuous every step of the way, that isn't to say you guys don't genuinely believe what you say, it just sounds like you know better than what you're saying. It's all in the way the wrong things get sensationalized around the topic of abortion. People who didn't know better hear pro-lifers and think that women who are about to pop just go dance into an abortion clinic and order infanticide like it's a cheeseburger. Planned Parenthood is constantly fighting to exist because dweebs behave as if they are baby mills, even though abortions are a small percentage of the services they offer. The baby parts debacle was *censored*ing despicable and anyone who peddled that should be ashamed. Nobody LIKES abortion. Pro-choice doesn't mean pro-abortion, it means being in favor of having the choice and that's all it means. There are other ways to prevent abortions and it starts with better sex education, because too much of it just teaches abstinence if at all, this leads to sexual mistakes that lead to pregnancy among other things.

 

It's funny seeing the side of the argument that usually disregards science in favor of religion now use science as an ally. There shouldn't be laws enforced because science just tells us the stages of the organism, the argument is about deciding at what stage is the organism considered a human with constitutional rights and shit. There isn't a consensus so there shouldn't be a law that considers it murder. Some people think conception is enough (please grow up if you believe this), Georgia thinks it's six weeks, to me it's simple: can the organism survive outside the womb at a given point in time using any and all tools available? If the answer is a no, then it's not viable and abortion should be permitted. At about 20 weeks, it has a less than a 40% chance of surviving outside the womb but at least the little asshole starts really looking like a baby and in most states, that's where the abortion cut-off is. That really should be enough. By then, the mother usually has had ample time to figure out whether she wants to continue with it or not. After that, she becomes a fatboy and has to give birth. I feel gross saying anyone HAS to do anything but that is more than enough of a fair compromise for abortion laws to be left alone.

 

This all just sounds like lawmakers going through any all lengths to police women's sexuality. Blame "liberal academia" if you want but I take classes on things like this and there are countless studies and intensive research about the type of things that are happening right now. Georgia and Alabama are two of the worst states for sexual education and among the highest in teen pregnancy and STDs. Now they are two states that pass abortion laws that buck science. They don't teach about sex and then don't help out when the kids make mistakes (don't forget birth control is still argued against even though its purposes include much more than pregnancy prevention). The Georgia bill is specifically disingenuous because many women do not know they're pregnant and can't detect pregnancy in the time they're allowed to have an abortion and the lawmakers *censored*ing know that. So the only solution is to not have sex right? That's how deeply ingrained gender roles and religion are in our society, that women having sex with non-reproductive intent is now punishable by law and possibly the death penalty. Notice how there is no conversation about the man who inseminates the woman, what's his punishment? Dude if men could get pregnant they would invent TerminatorX supplements that come in a milkshake by the next weekend. This seems like punishment for women choosing to enjoy sex with someone they don't necessarily plan to start a family with or for getting raped when they should have been at home in their nightgowns reading their Bibles.

 

Think of it this way: What if you left your front door wide open and someone walked right in, or you had your front door closed and a window open and someone climbed through, or someone just straight up kicked down the door and they hid in your attic for I don't know...about 3 months before they came down and revealed themselves? You possibly would like to throw the person out or shit maybe even shoot em DEAD #2A #ObamaCan'tTakeMyGuns but what if the law said that you were only allowed to do either of those things within the first 6 weeks of the person's presence? Since that time window has passed without you even getting a chance to realize it, you are now forced to deal with this person sitting on all your furniture butt-ass naked, eating up all your food and kicking the shit outta you for no reason for about 9 months when they're ready to leave the house, but they stay at your doorstep for the foreseeable future because they constantly need money, food and clothes. Going back to the beginning, what if instead of 6 weeks, the government decided the very moment the person has entered your house, you are never allowed to prematurely escort them out. You get it. The fact of the matter is, while they may or may not have support systems during and after, only one person is going through the pregnancy, only one person is vomiting every morning, only one person is dealing with excruciating back pain every day, and only one person is spending several hours in pain shitting out an entire human (babies come out of butts right?). These abortion laws completely disregard that.

This is why you're one of the best members, and one of my favorites.

 

 

 

Again, that is an idiotic take. We value human life more than any other.

 

I call bullshit. Although, most of us know it's bullshit, and especially republican politicians. The party does almost nothing that shows they value human lives, from letting migrant kids die under custody to trying to repeal ACA and put a worse healthcare in place so the wealthy can pay less taxes. You're also willing to let mothers die or punish her if the fetus dies, all the meanwhile abandoning fetuses everywhere after they're born.

Mani-Man

 

I wasted many years following the teachings of a man written book about a magical being that doesnt exist.

I dont need a clown like you to show me anything when the teachings have been beaten into me literally...i dont need more mindless sheep to tell me about fantasy stories weak man wrote to control even weaker humans.

 

Unlike you who only knows about anything when fake woke twitter tells you, i did my research on all kinds of topic.

So far there were only two people, two childish people who have been clearly manipulated by a religion controlled society to just spew the same nonsense without thinking for themself.

 

You are a trash person for devaluing life in general.

1.) Why do you call people clown so much? Did you have a bad childhood involving a clown?

 

2.) You're the one who brought up spitting on God. Correct me if I'm wrong but no one else in this thread mentioned God or the bible until you did. I know I didnt.

 

3.) I doubt you did much research. Based on how you respond to people who have a different opinions I'm guessing you only read things that fit your bias.

 

4.) Grow up.

 

1.) Its the word that describes you the best, cant help if you act like one

 

2.)This is all this anti abortion crap and value of life is about...society built rules formed through religion.

Valuing one life more than the other is spitting on God who created everything according to the bible.

 

3.)I did my research, if you doubt or not doesnt interest me.

I dont care about peoples opinion on this because there is only one opinion and that is the one of the woman that matters.

 

4.) Uhu, you hit me deeply with that...what a mature response.

Im a bit surprised, i was expecting some remark on me being german...but not this incredible childish "grow up" nonsense.

But shows nicely how mature you are when you lose an argument.

Thanks for providing the proof.

 

@KingKhan18 I see your point.

 

 

4) You're not acting any better. Actually, you're probably acting way worse. And I don't think "anti-abortion" or anti-women rights can be considered fake woke.

[Doink!]

https://twitter.com/emrobinsonnn/status/1129565533211365377

 

Just a clump of cells. Yeah right.

[Creepy Bro]

This topic gets dumber every time I look at it.

 

The bit of foreshadowing here is VERY real. Yikes.

[LEGION]

https://twitter.com/emrobinsonnn/status/1129565533211365377

 

Just a clump of cells. Yeah right.

[WNX]

And I pick now of all times to comment after all the other times I typed sheeit and deleted it because I really shouldn't have to say what I was gonna but

 

^LMMFAO

 

On the real though, abortion isn't a topic I speak on often. It's not something I could ever fully understand and when people have their opinion set in stone, you can't make them see things your way. You can't help them see all the angles. I've had a child aborted because it was ectopic. I was kinda upset by it but not really a game changer for me.

 

I'm in no position to decide when a baby shouldn't be aborted, but I think it's a woman's responsibility to know when there are obvious changes in her body and should go determine whether or not that's due to conception. She's needs to know ahead of time what the situation is and the decision to drop it, depending on what that threshold of a fetus reaching "human" status with a full range of human rights, should be her's and an actively involved father's to make whether or not there's a risk of motherly harm.

 

It's wrong of me to say that these rights shouldn't apply to this child until after it's removed from the womb, because that would muddy my opinion about being charged twice when murdering a pregnant woman. Like I say, I'm not in the position to make that call so I can't give my clearest thoughts on it. I don't mind the no abortion unless it's a bodily threat aside of rape cases thing, but I couldn't possibly be the one to make that ruling. Sure, it sucks the slutty bitches out there who constantly get knocked and find the money to terminate kid after kid (and there should be cut offs for that btw) and I get that you should be responsible for your actions, but my brother infiltrated the pill (the shot, actually) and the condom. If people are actively trying to NOT get pregnant, they shouldn't have to be punished for wanting to do the dirty deed, even if it is unfortunately at the expense of another potential life.

 

I am not the one to judge or make these decisions. It's a tough topic and nobody is ever on the same page

[Generations]

https://twitter.com/emrobinsonnn/status/1129565533211365377

 

Just a clump of cells. Yeah right.

 

Having human-like features does not make something a human.

 

Can you see that it is in the process of developing? Yes.

 

And it is difficult to look at...not because it's "human", but because it is decidedly not human. It's not something that anyone should actually be seeing. We have an immediate reaction to it, because it is not something that should be seen. But, it is not developed. It has a mermaid tail, no gender, it is not self aware. It does not exist as a human being. You're taking the shock of seeing something that you shouldn't see, and twisting it into a personal feeling about something that is not actually there.

 

The fact that it does have features that resemble human features is the precise reason why it is so hard on young mothers to make the decision to abort. And the government should have no say in what is ultimately a heartbreaking decision for a female to make. The science behind abortion is sound. The laws based on religious opinions are not.

 

 

And once again...creating a world where abortions are not available is not going to keep people from having them done. It is simply going to create a world where desperate women are going to be attempting to self-abort via dangerous means...potentially harming both themselves and the embryo/fetus in the process. Is it better to have a safe and clean abortion in a surgical environment where the embryo/fetus can be removed, tears can be shed, and everyone can move on with their lives? Or is it better for a desperate woman to resort to a coat-hanger, punching herself in the abdomen, drinking alcohol or other poisons...and god knows what other types of attempts to avoid becoming responsible for another life? Which path truly values life more? One quick goodbye to something that could have been? Or a painful, dangerous, uncertain shot in the dark?

[EJ!]

 

 

 

 

It's funny seeing the side of the argument that usually disregards science in favor of religion now use science as an ally. There shouldn't be laws enforced because science just tells us the stages of the organism, the argument is about deciding at what stage is the organism considered a human with constitutional rights and shit. There isn't a consensus so there shouldn't be a law that considers it murder. Some people think conception is enough (please grow up if you believe this), Georgia thinks it's six weeks, to me it's simple: can the organism survive outside the womb at a given point in time using any and all tools available? If the answer is a no, then it's not viable and abortion should be permitted. At about 20 weeks, it has a less than a 40% chance of surviving outside the womb but at least the little asshole starts really looking like a baby and in most states, that's where the abortion cut-off is. That really should be enough. By then, the mother usually has had ample time to figure out whether she wants to continue with it or not. After that, she becomes a fatboy and has to give birth. I feel gross saying anyone HAS to do anything but that is more than enough of a fair compromise for abortion laws to be left alone.

 

 

That is the reason I go with conception because it is a concrete standard. Viability ranges depending on where the baby is. That is basically saying that one life is more important than another because one person lives in NYC and the other lives in the Congo.

 

 

First of all, thinking a newly fertilized egg is a human with rights is ridiculous, especially considering not every fertilized egg gets farther than that stage. Secondly, that analogy sucks man. Viability in this context means the fetus' ability to survive outside the womb. I honestly don't see what you're getting at with the NYC/Congo comparison. A seven year old child in NYC and a seven year old child in the Congo have the same importance. Are you trying to say since the Congo is a poorer country that the seven year old child would be less viable? Hope not, because that logic falls flat here.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, which can very different place to place. In NYC the baby may be able to survive outside the womb at 20 weeks where the backhills of WV the baby might be viable at 26 weeks. It is subjective and to say that viability is the standard of human life would mean that one human life is more valuable than the other due to technological innovation. Conception is the only marker that is concrete. Hope that clears it up for you.

 

 

Clears it up, still not a good argument. For one, I said nothing about value, I know that's how capitalists assess everything but that's not what I'm talking about here. Secondly, conception isn't concrete either. As I said to you before, fertilized eggs don't always become embryos and it doesn't happen at the same time for everyone. Per WebMD: "After the egg is released, it moves into the fallopian tube. It stays there for about 24 hours, waiting for a single sperm to fertilize it. All this happens, on average, about 2 weeks after your last period." Average, meaning the average of a range of different numbers. Similar to, if not, exactly like the range of different amounts of weeks before a fetus is able to survive without its host. So are you are a state law guy or a federal law guy? You want there to be a federal average or a state average?

 

Look at it like this, whether you want to accept it or not, you have to because abortions/terminations of pregnancy will happen one way or the other, so wouldn't it be best to allow a safe process that doesn't kill both the thing you think is a baby AND the mother? Isn't the mother still important, or "of value", as you would put it? Giving a person a chance to first realize they're pregnant (which these laws don't) and then giving them a deadline of a couple months to decide whether they want to go through with it or not before the embryo becomes viable outside of the womb sounds more than rational to both me, and the majority of the country, but for what's supposed to be a democracy, there are lot of unpopular laws and policies that are put in place without the say of the people.

 

If the woman were to drop dead at any moment, could the embryo survive? The answer is no because before a certain amount of weeks, it is a newly grown part of the woman's anatomy. In the same way that the dead woman can't perform sign language with her attached hand, the organism inside of her cannot continue to grow. It is not a human because humans do not need to physically feed off of other humans to survive. So the over-complication of all this seems indicative of other motivations than "preserving human life".

 

This is why you're one of the best members, and one of my favorites.

 

 

Appreciate that bruv.

 

https://twitter.com/emrobinsonnn/status/1129565533211365377

 

Just a clump of cells. Yeah right.

This is more damaging for your argument than helpful.

 

Bro gummy bears are not humans. This cherry-flavored fruit snack does not have constitutional rights, it doesn't even have opposable thumbs. This is the Snapchat ghost after a sunburn, not a baby. It cannot survive like this because it is not in the womb, feeding off the host, otherwise known as, the pregnant woman. Not viable to live on its own or even with medical tubes and incubators etc. Why are you placing more importance or "value" on this bloody loogie than an actual living, breathing, developed human being? If you think that is a baby, do you also refer to caterpillars as butterflies?

[Bdon]

 

What's these financial records supposed to accomplish? I haven't been paying attention to politics much lately

 

Proving that the president is a criminal.

 

Or...are you cool with that?

 

Wait...don't answer. I think we know.

 

So hostile. I see nothing changes with you. lol. And no, not ok with it. Not ok with any of them and I've been pretty clear on that. I also know that no matter what it finds it won't matter. If it shows he's a criminal you'll come in here and tell everyone how right you are and feel good about yourself. Even if it shows nothing it would do nothing to change your mind, you would come in here and bitch and still feel good about yourself. Either way nothing happens to him and he gets elected for another term and everyone will declare the end of the world. Next topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's funny seeing the side of the argument that usually disregards science in favor of religion now use science as an ally. There shouldn't be laws enforced because science just tells us the stages of the organism, the argument is about deciding at what stage is the organism considered a human with constitutional rights and shit. There isn't a consensus so there shouldn't be a law that considers it murder. Some people think conception is enough (please grow up if you believe this), Georgia thinks it's six weeks, to me it's simple: can the organism survive outside the womb at a given point in time using any and all tools available? If the answer is a no, then it's not viable and abortion should be permitted. At about 20 weeks, it has a less than a 40% chance of surviving outside the womb but at least the little asshole starts really looking like a baby and in most states, that's where the abortion cut-off is. That really should be enough. By then, the mother usually has had ample time to figure out whether she wants to continue with it or not. After that, she becomes a fatboy and has to give birth. I feel gross saying anyone HAS to do anything but that is more than enough of a fair compromise for abortion laws to be left alone.

 

 

That is the reason I go with conception because it is a concrete standard. Viability ranges depending on where the baby is. That is basically saying that one life is more important than another because one person lives in NYC and the other lives in the Congo.

 

 

First of all, thinking a newly fertilized egg is a human with rights is ridiculous, especially considering not every fertilized egg gets farther than that stage. Secondly, that analogy sucks man. Viability in this context means the fetus' ability to survive outside the womb. I honestly don't see what you're getting at with the NYC/Congo comparison. A seven year old child in NYC and a seven year old child in the Congo have the same importance. Are you trying to say since the Congo is a poorer country that the seven year old child would be less viable? Hope not, because that logic falls flat here.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, which can very different place to place. In NYC the baby may be able to survive outside the womb at 20 weeks where the backhills of WV the baby might be viable at 26 weeks. It is subjective and to say that viability is the standard of human life would mean that one human life is more valuable than the other due to technological innovation. Conception is the only marker that is concrete. Hope that clears it up for you.

 

 

Clears it up, still not a good argument. For one, I said nothing about value, I know that's how capitalists assess everything but that's not what I'm talking about here. Secondly, conception isn't concrete either. As I said to you before, fertilized eggs don't always become embryos and it doesn't happen at the same time for everyone. Per WebMD: "After the egg is released, it moves into the fallopian tube. It stays there for about 24 hours, waiting for a single sperm to fertilize it. All this happens, on average, about 2 weeks after your last period." Average, meaning the average of a range of different numbers. Similar to, if not, exactly like the range of different amounts of weeks before a fetus is able to survive without its host. So are you are a state law guy or a federal law guy? You want there to be a federal average or a state average?

 

Look at it like this, whether you want to accept it or not, you have to because abortions/terminations of pregnancy will happen one way or the other, so wouldn't it be best to allow a safe process that doesn't kill both the thing you think is a baby AND the mother? Isn't the mother still important, or "of value", as you would put it? Giving a person a chance to first realize they're pregnant (which these laws don't) and then giving them a deadline of a couple months to decide whether they want to go through with it or not before the embryo becomes viable outside of the womb sounds more than rational to both me, and the majority of the country, but for what's supposed to be a democracy, there are lot of unpopular laws and policies that are put in place without the say of the people.

 

If the woman were to drop dead at any moment, could the embryo survive? The answer is no because before a certain amount of weeks, it is a newly grown part of the woman's anatomy. In the same way that the dead woman can't perform sign language with her attached hand, the organism inside of her cannot continue to grow. It is not a human because humans do not need to physically feed off of other humans to survive. So the over-complication of all this seems indicative of other motivations than "preserving human life".

 

This is why you're one of the best members, and one of my favorites.

 

 

Appreciate that bruv.

 

https://twitter.com/emrobinsonnn/status/1129565533211365377

 

Just a clump of cells. Yeah right.

This is more damaging for your argument than helpful.

 

Bro gummy bears are not humans. This cherry-flavored fruit snack does not have constitutional rights, it doesn't even have opposable thumbs. This is the Snapchat ghost after a sunburn, not a baby. It cannot survive like this because it is not in the womb, feeding off the host, otherwise known as, the pregnant woman. Not viable to live on its own or even with medical tubes and incubators etc. Why are you placing more importance or "value" on this bloody loogie than an actual living, breathing, developed human being? If you think that is a baby, do you also refer to caterpillars as butterflies?

 

So this potential life is not important the same way a new born baby is? Because a new born child can't survive on its own outside the womb either without the parents or some able adult caring for it. Bullshit argument. Also the caterpillars comparison was just awful.

[Generations]

So hostile. I see nothing changes with you. lol.

 

I think you need to learn the difference between hostility and dismissiveness.

[Bdon]

 

So hostile. I see nothing changes with you. lol.

 

I think you need to learn the difference between hostility and dismissiveness.

 

I know the difference and you're both. I've seen your posts. The sad part about it is, it's who you are and who you are on this forum. Everyone is just getting used to it by now. You dodge a lot sure, you dismiss others opinions, but you're still hostile at the same time.

[nWo_Kevin]

 

https://twitter.com/emrobinsonnn/status/1129565533211365377

 

Just a clump of cells. Yeah right.

This is more damaging for your argument than helpful.

 

Bro gummy bears are not humans. This cherry-flavored fruit snack does not have constitutional rights, it doesn't even have opposable thumbs. This is the Snapchat ghost after a sunburn, not a baby. It cannot survive like this because it is not in the womb, feeding off the host, otherwise known as, the pregnant woman. Not viable to live on its own or even with medical tubes and incubators etc. Why are you placing more importance or "value" on this bloody loogie than an actual living, breathing, developed human being? If you think that is a baby, do you also refer to caterpillars as butterflies?

 

So you really don't see human life there? It's just a "bloody loogie" to you? Maybe I'm just sensitive to the topic because I do see a child there, and I truly do appreciate that you've taken the time to respond to my previous posts and don't attack me like others have here. But I just find most of this post disgusting.

[EJ!]

 

 

https://twitter.com/emrobinsonnn/status/1129565533211365377

 

Just a clump of cells. Yeah right.

This is more damaging for your argument than helpful.

 

Bro gummy bears are not humans. This cherry-flavored fruit snack does not have constitutional rights, it doesn't even have opposable thumbs. This is the Snapchat ghost after a sunburn, not a baby. It cannot survive like this because it is not in the womb, feeding off the host, otherwise known as, the pregnant woman. Not viable to live on its own or even with medical tubes and incubators etc. Why are you placing more importance or "value" on this bloody loogie than an actual living, breathing, developed human being? If you think that is a baby, do you also refer to caterpillars as butterflies?

 

So you really don't see human life there? It's just a "bloody loogie" to you? Maybe I'm just sensitive to the topic because I do see a child there, and I truly do appreciate that you've taken the time to respond to my previous posts and don't attack me like others have here. But I just find most of this post disgusting.

 

No I don't see a human there. If it was presented without caption or context, I wouldn't know what it was, and I don't think I'm the only one. Sorry if that disgusts you but I don't think that's worth protecting at the expense of the woman it's attached to. I don't think we should be prosecuting women for not wanting to keep that in their body.

 

 

Clears it up, still not a good argument. For one, I said nothing about value, I know that's how capitalists assess everything but that's not what I'm talking about here. Secondly, conception isn't concrete either. As I said to you before, fertilized eggs don't always become embryos and it doesn't happen at the same time for everyone. Per WebMD: "After the egg is released, it moves into the fallopian tube. It stays there for about 24 hours, waiting for a single sperm to fertilize it. All this happens, on average, about 2 weeks after your last period." Average, meaning the average of a range of different numbers. Similar to, if not, exactly like the range of different amounts of weeks before a fetus is able to survive without its host. So are you are a state law guy or a federal law guy? You want there to be a federal average or a state average?

 

Look at it like this, whether you want to accept it or not, you have to because abortions/terminations of pregnancy will happen one way or the other, so wouldn't it be best to allow a safe process that doesn't kill both the thing you think is a baby AND the mother? Isn't the mother still important, or "of value", as you would put it? Giving a person a chance to first realize they're pregnant (which these laws don't) and then giving them a deadline of a couple months to decide whether they want to go through with it or not before the embryo becomes viable outside of the womb sounds more than rational to both me, and the majority of the country, but for what's supposed to be a democracy, there are lot of unpopular laws and policies that are put in place without the say of the people.

 

If the woman were to drop dead at any moment, could the embryo survive? The answer is no because before a certain amount of weeks, it is a newly grown part of the woman's anatomy. In the same way that the dead woman can't perform sign language with her attached hand, the organism inside of her cannot continue to grow. It is not a human because humans do not need to physically feed off of other humans to survive. So the over-complication of all this seems indicative of other motivations than "preserving human life".

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/emrobinsonnn/status/1129565533211365377

 

Just a clump of cells. Yeah right.

This is more damaging for your argument than helpful.

 

Bro gummy bears are not humans. This cherry-flavored fruit snack does not have constitutional rights, it doesn't even have opposable thumbs. This is the Snapchat ghost after a sunburn, not a baby. It cannot survive like this because it is not in the womb, feeding off the host, otherwise known as, the pregnant woman. Not viable to live on its own or even with medical tubes and incubators etc. Why are you placing more importance or "value" on this bloody loogie than an actual living, breathing, developed human being? If you think that is a baby, do you also refer to caterpillars as butterflies?

 

So this potential life is not important the same way a new born baby is? Because a new born child can't survive on its own outside the womb either without the parents or some able adult caring for it. Bullshit argument. Also the caterpillars comparison was just awful.

 

Bdon, Bdon, Bdon, I'm disappointed man. If you go back and look, I said "It is not a human because humans do not need to physically feed off of other humans to survive." I said that purposely because I knew someone would try this hacky argument. Did I really have to say "literally" for you to know exactly what I meant? That newborn child can survive exponentially longer than that embryo The_Shape posted because as soon as it is DETACHED from the womb it dies, meaning it is not viable. No one else can keep it alive. That's not the same for a baby, who can be taken care of by its mother or by someone else, which you pointed out.

 

Importance in this context is not important to me, but if you want me to answer your question, my answer is yes. You literally said "potential life". I don't really have to say anything here, you hurt your own argument. Most "potential" things take a backseat because they haven't happened yet or they may never happen. I think a viable fetus is more important than a non-viable one.

 

Also, I meant for the caterpillar comparison to be taken at face value. A caterpillar can become a butterfly but until it does, it is a caterpillar and only a caterpillar. That embryo can be a baby, but it until it is, it's an embryo, which is why it's not called a baby.

 

For the side of the argument that's all about "facts over feelings", you guys sure are often placing relative morals and subjective importance and how they feel over scientific facts, and in this case, it's when deciding what another human should do with their body. Not a good look if you ask me. This is the same side that often argues "no matter what you do, people are still gonna get guns" but yet you can't apply the same logic to abortions, which affects no one but the mother while a gun can and is meant to affect multiple people. Go ahead and tell me how they're different. Be consistent with the pro-lifeness.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

In other related news, GA prosecutors are pledging not to enforce this law. I'm young but I've never even heard of something like that happening before. It's unpopular. It infringes on women's freedoms. And before I get "what about the baby's freedom?!", that non-viable fetus doesn't have the freedom to do anything without the woman it's inside of being alive.

[Generations]

 

I know the difference and you're both. I've seen your posts. The sad part about it is, it's who you are and who you are on this forum. Everyone is just getting used to it by now. You dodge a lot sure, you dismiss others opinions, but you're still hostile at the same time.

 

 

Ah...the classic "who you are". Yes...tell me more about how close we've been since I was child. We're practically brothers, you and I. I bet you could write my memoirs.