Brain-dead woman must carry fetus to birth because of abortion ban, family says

[hecatmoggie]

There are anti abortion laws, which are rather completely arbitrary too. But they do not provide the "protection" you seem to think they do. Women can still have abortions without due process. That's hardly "protection."

regardless there are laws in place giving protection to unborn life - you have indicated that didn't exist and you're wrong on multiple levels as I've proven

 

[hecatmoggie]

Have you gone through any pregnancies?

Childbirth?

I'm guessing "no."

And they're not without their risks. I had preeclampsia with my first son. I was on bed rest for four weeks because I could as easily as not have a blowout due to preeclampsia blood pressure. That kills.

And I've already described one of my three childbirth experiences.

During the pregnancy the woman is experiencing a number of effects, to varying degrees; hyperemisis (puking until you think you're going to bring up your stomach with the next heave), exhaustion, tenderness, overextended ligaments (DSP) that cause pain each time one walks, shortness of breath as the fetus gets bigger and so on.

But a woman should...just go ahead and take all those risks, and then give the baby up for adoption where it may or may not be adopted out during its "cute" period, after which its "value" (that word you seem to enjoy) depreciates significantly because it's not a tiny newborn anymore?

men cannot do that - which is why a man will never ever EVER be a woman. Ever. this fantasy that men can be women that liberals/Democrats support is a fantasy and nothing more, agreed ?

and a woman will never experience all that a man does - you're right, its two separate experiences and I agree a woman goes through a lot more which is why women should be very careful in having sex and the chances of getting pregnant.

yes, if a woman chooses sex, gets pregnant, .... I believe there is an obligation to the consequences of those actions and giving that child life yes. Killing human life because its an inconvenience ..... that's horrible

 

[hecatmoggie]

Well then you are saying that a fertilized egg is a living human.

if its part of a normal pregnancy yes - if not? then debate that, I encourage you to. Its not something I debate

See above. Isn’t that your argument that a fertilized egg in a Petri dish is a living human. ?
Please explain

no, that's not my argument

Sure you do. You brought up life during pregnancy and value of life but then aren’t able to coherently articulate how those concepts work.
What is the worth of a fertilized egg.?

good question, if its part of a normal pregnancy invaluable imo

Well first you have to explain how you measure this value . You toss out “ value of life” but gave no objective measure of it”.

you don't think life has value either ? think of the people you love the most in your life - its that kind of value

Second you have to then explain why the value of the life of the baby inside the womb is more valuable than the value of the woman’s life that the baby effects

nobody has ever said more valuable

Well, when you say that a woman shouldn’t have the choice to abort , it means that you value the life of the unborn more than the life etc of the mother.

negative

Sure they do. If a person is trying to kill you or cause grave bodily harm you certainly have a right to kill them.
In addition if a loved one is suffering on lifesupport you also have the right to kill them.

oh that's the argument , that an unborn baby is trying to kill the mother?

So a fertilized egg has the same value as a 10 year old?
Interesting. So should a women who uses chemical birth control like the Pill or uses an iud be prosecuted for multiple murders for killing those 1day old fertilized eggs ( 1 day old babies) just like if she killed 12 10 year olds a year?

I've never said that

Well you have to explain this “ babies value” thing.
I do not think a women should be convicted of murder because she uses an iud or a chemical birth control that kills a fertilized egg by preventing it from implanting.
I don’t see that a fertilized egg is the same as a 10 year old.

if there is no pregnancy, there is no unborn living human in the womb - I've been very clear on that

So you explain why they are exactly the same.

again, I've been clear on normal pregnancy HAS TO HAVE a living unborn mother and a living unborn baby in the womb. Why is that confusing ?

That’s interesting. Why do you believe that?
I certainly didn’t suggest it.

why wouldn't it be ok? all the reasons women have their unborns killed can absolutely be applied to a 1 day or 3 year old ... why is that born baby more valuable than unborn ? pro-abortion people I think have to prove they born makes a living human valuable or admit human life has no value at any stage

Well because once the child is borne , they become an autonomous individual capable of being tgeir own individual.

a newborn baby isn't capable of anything - its not viable, it'll die unless someone cares for it 24x7

If so , then when do we start arresting g women who use birth control for murder.

normal pregnancy ?

If not why not since killing a fertilized egg is the same as killing a 10 year

that's not my argument

No . I do not want it to protect human life.

you don't believe that. You want the Govt/society to remove all laws on hurting/killing other people ? seriously ?

That would mean that I could not remove my mother from lifesupport when she is suffering g. It would mean that I could not defend myself from a person trying to kill me. Etc.

you want the Govt/society to have laws on things like that, don't you ?

 

[BirdinHand]

Killing human life because its an inconvenience ..... that's horrible

See, the thing is?

No one asked your opinion.

Not your body, not your choice.

You can sit at your keyboard and slam keys as much as you want - and no one cares what you think.




Adriana’s funeral was held yesterday.

 

[hecatmoggie]

See, the thing is?

No one asked your opinion.

Not your body, not your choice.

You can sit at your keyboard and slam keys as much as you want - and no one cares what you think.




Adriana’s funeral was held yesterday.

how's Roe looking ?

you see .... my side votes, my side funds, my side dictates changes and my side keeps winning and has for several years now as more and more people wake up

and when people say "You can sit at your keyboard and slam keys as much as you want - and no one cares what you think." an a debate forum ? that translates to "I lost the discussion so I'm going to just go with "nobody cares what you think"


a normal pregnancy is a living human woman and a living human unborn male or female - fact

if a person puts value on a 1 day old baby put the same value on a 1 day before birth - its literally the same baby or admit human life has no value and kill it anytime its an inconvenience, right?

 

[TamleeB]

See, the thing is?

No one asked your opinion.

Not your body, not your choice.

You can sit at your keyboard and slam keys as much as you want - and no one cares what you think.




Adriana’s funeral was held yesterday.

Wait….I thought this forum was for people to share their opinions?

 

[Gordy327]

regardless there are laws in place giving protection to unborn life - you have indicated that didn't exist and you're wrong on multiple levels as I've proven

If laws protect the unborn, then women would not be able to have abortions without due process. The only one proven wrong repeatedly here is you!

how's Roe looking ?

you see .... my side votes, my side funds, my side dictates changes and my side keeps winning and has for several years now as more and more people wake up

And yet, most states allow abortion. Some even expanded or enshrined abortion rights in their state constitutions.

a normal pregnancy is a living human woman and a living human unborn male or female - fact

So? No one is arguing that.

if a person puts value on a 1 day old baby put the same value on a 1 day before birth - its literally the same baby or admit human life has no value and kill it anytime its an inconvenience, right?

What is its value?

yes, if a woman chooses sex, gets pregnant, .... I believe there is an obligation to the consequences of those actions and giving that child life yes. Killing human life because its an inconvenience ..... that's horrible

Your opinion is noted. No one is bound to folow or honor your opinion. Others have differing opinions on the matter.

 

[Lursa]

we've already established laws doesn't matter - if the laws changed right now that unborn babies were considered the same, pro-abortion wouldn't accept that. Right?

So then you attempting to use the law to make a point about the value of the unborn or is useless...since it's "never" a set standard and can change at a whim.

So stop using it. If it changed again, it could always change back again...your attempt use fetal homicide laws fails.

what criminal charge is tacked on ? the death of the unborn baby

Yup, just like there are criminal charges in some cases for the death of endangered species, death of livestock owned by someone else, etc.

you can't tap dance around that nor can Gordy

Nothing to tap dance around at all...you attempts at using fetal homicide laws dont make any argument against abortion or the human DNA of the unborn.

You need to explain what the value of the unborn is. And why abortion is wrong, since you dont have the law on your side. I do really, because "at the moment" Dobbs is very clear that, by enabling the states to allow women/their doctors to kill their unborn with no due process...the unborn have no federal legal status, are not persons, and have no rights recognized

 

[Lursa]

You seem bound and determined that a human life be terminated. If the baby is born more or less healthy and viable, I am sure that at some point, it will appreciate having not been aborted.

Nope....that's how poorly you understand the pro-choice view. It means I believe that every woman may choose what is the best course for her needs.

Does every woman, do most women, want to end their pregnancies? Every year, by far, during RvW and since Dobbs, more women BY FAR chose/choose to give birth. See how stupid your post is? (The tan text is the stupidest part of the post)

 

[MAGAnificent]

Nope....that's how poorly you understand the pro-choice view. It means I believe that every woman may choose what is the best course for her needs.

The woman in question happens to be brain dead as your librul cohorts are reporting. She is not in a position to make that choice. I suppose what you are asking for is to give her family the choice of whether or not to terminate a viable pregnancy. I choose life. The alternative is to eliminate an entire lifetime.

 

[Lursa]

The woman in question happens to be brain dead as your librul cohorts are reporting. She is not in a position to make that choice. I suppose what you are asking for is to give her family the choice of whether or not to terminate a viable pregnancy. I choose life. The alternative is to eliminate an entire lifetime.

Yes...what about it? And in the case of all medical decisions when the patient is not competent/unconscious, his or her legal representatives make their legal and medical decisions for them. So of course the family should have had that decision. Why would that be different than any other medical decision regarding a man or woman? Please explain.

 

[jaeger19]

if its part of a normal pregnancy yes - if not? then debate that, I encourage you to. Its not something I debate

There you go. When do we start prosecuting women for taking birth control?

no, that's not my argument

Why not it’s all living human tissue with living dna.? Please explain.

good question, if its part of a normal pregnancy invaluable imo

Explain the difference in the above.

you don't think life has value either ? think of the people you love the most in your life - its that kind of value

No I don’t don’t ascribe a whole value of life to people. Thats your schtick which you of course can’t define or measure.

nobody has ever said more valuable

But your beliefs do. Your position puts you in the position that the value of tge entity in the womb is greater than the woman’s value. Thats why woman in Texas and other area with abortion bans are dying .

negative


oh that's the argument , that an unborn baby is trying to kill the mother?

Trying? No intent.
But actually killing the mother? Yes potentially. Women dying in childbirth or from pregnancy still happens in the us. Less so in the last few decades because we have abortion and birth control but you want to turn back the clock to a time where it was more common for women to die from pregnancy.

I've never said that

But it’s your logic is it not? Unless you are willing to explain how you arrive at this “ value” they have. You just said that a fertilized egg in a woman is a living human just as a 10 year old is a living human.

if there is no pregnancy, there is no unborn living human in the womb - I've been very clear on that

There IS A UNBORN LIVING IN THE WOMB
You said a fertilized egg is a living human.

again, I've been clear on normal pregnancy HAS TO HAVE a living unborn mother and a living unborn baby in the womb. Why is that confusing ?

You seem confused. You said a fertilized egg is a living human. A fertilized egg in the mother constitutes that.
Chemical birth control and iud”s kill that fertilized egg.
So when do we arrest women taking birth control for murder?

why wouldn't it be ok? all the reasons women have their unborns killed can absolutely be applied to a 1 day or 3 year old ... why is that born baby more valuable than unborn ?

Who said anything about “ value” . It’s about self determination once the baby is outside the womb.

pro-abortion people I think have to prove they born makes a living human valuable or admit human life has no value at any stage

No they don’t. They simply have to show that there is a right to self determination. Once the baby is outside the womb it stops affecting the mother and potentially causing her to die.

a newborn baby isn't capable of anything - its not viable, it'll die unless someone cares for it 24x7

Actually it’s capable of breathing on its own, of crying for help etc. it’s essentially off life support

normal pregnancy ?


that's not my argument

You don’t relive it is.

you don't believe that. You want the Govt/society to remove all laws on hurting/killing other people ? seriously ?

Nope. See I don’t believe in right to life. If the government protects just life. Then it means when my dad is suffering on lifexsupport I can’t remove life support. Because the government must “ protect life “
What tge government protects or should protect is the right to self determination.
If someone murders my son, he is prosecuted because he took away my sons ability to determine his own life.

you want the Govt/society to have laws on things like that, don't you ?

See above.

 

[hecatmoggie]

If laws protect the unborn, then women would not be able to have abortions without due process. The only one proven wrong repeatedly here is you!

laws do protect the unborn - I've proven that

some states allow killing the unborn too. If a man beat a woman badly and she lost her 6 months old baby in the womb .... or if the woman decided it'd get in the way of college and had that 6 months old killed by an abortion doctor ....

what's the difference ? if its not valuable life, if its not protected ... why did it matter who killed it or why? arrest the man for beating the woman yes, but the baby's death is 100% irrelevant isn't it ?

So? No one is arguing that.

several here have argued its not

What is its value?

I think we know you give unborn life zero value

 

[hecatmoggie]

So then you attempting to use the law to make a point about the value of the unborn or is useless...since it's "never" a set standard and can change at a whim.

me doing that is when people say "well we have no laws saying an unborn baby is life" when we actually do

So stop using it. If it changed again, it could always change back again...your attempt use fetal homicide laws fails.

only to counter a point will I

Yup, just like there are criminal charges in some cases for the death of endangered species, death of livestock owned by someone else, etc.

death - a good word meaning something was alive when it was killed or died

and a good point - criminal charges for animals .... but not for human life. Crazy isn't it ?

Nothing to tap dance around at all...you attempts at using fetal homicide laws dont make any argument against abortion or the human DNA of the unborn.

its addition to - absolutely

You need to explain what the value of the unborn is. And why abortion is wrong, since you dont have the law on your side. I do really, because "at the moment" Dobbs is very clear that, by enabling the states to allow women/their doctors to kill their unborn with no due process...the unborn have no federal legal status, are not persons, and have no rights recognized

no, actually all I have to do is show the an unborn is a living human life, same as when its born and all the value you and others put on it? its there before birth as well

if law was changed today you'd change your views on the value of unborn life, wouldn't you? to align with the law, right ?

 

[Lursa]

me doing that is when people say "well we have no laws saying an unborn baby is life" when we actually do

Who says the unborn isnt "alive?" Or "life?" Coral reefs, wildlife, and livestock, etc are "life" and protected by laws. Again, you have no point

Quote where a poster wrote that the unborn isnt "life."

only to counter a point will I

You cant anymore, all you can do is acknowledge it can just change again.

When it comes to fetal "personhood," the question is...why would Congress change/amend the Constitution to recognize that?

death - a good word meaning something was alive when it was killed or died

and a good point - criminal charges for animals .... but not for human life. Crazy isn't it ?

There are plenty of criminal charges for causing human death...now your posts are making no sense at all. "Crazy isnt it?"

its addition to - absolutely

How so, be specific?

no, actually all I have to do is show the an unborn is a living human life, same as when its born and all the value you and others put on it? its there before birth as well

No you dont. We've asked you...who says the unborn has value? Who says it should have rights recognized? What "authority?"

And physiologically it's not the same. This is a biological and medical fact. Nor is its status compared to the woman's which you ignore all the time.

Inside the woman, HER status as a consenting individual with rights IS what makes a difference. The unborn inside her cannot be protected or acted on by the govt without violating HER life and rights and status as a person.

Once outside her, born, a baby can be cared for without violating her life, rights, and status as a person. THIS clearly shows that the unborn human life cant be valued or considered the same...the woman must always be considered in that equation and you continually refuse to do so. So you just keep lying as if this isnt true and that you cant refute it so you ignore it and complain over and over we havent explained it.

if law was changed today you'd change your views on the value of unborn life, wouldn't you? to align with the law, right ?

The law can change anytime, remember? Why would that affect my views on the value of the born and unborn?

 

[hecatmoggie]

There you go. When do we start prosecuting women for taking birth control?
Why not it’s all living human tissue with living dna.? Please explain.
Explain the difference in the above.

you can do all that - and if you can prove its living human individual life like I can with a normal pregnancy? fantastic, glad you did it

No I don’t don’t ascribe a whole value of life to people. Thats your schtick which you of course can’t define or measure.

oh wow .... so human life has no value. Ok, well at least you're consistent, Gordy is too. I think its horribly wrong but at least its consistent.

But your beliefs do. Your position puts you in the position that the value of the entity in the womb is greater than the woman’s value. Thats why woman in Texas and other area with abortion bans are dying .

show me the post where I said that or admit your accusation is a lie

I've never said the above - have I ? I've maintained all along the woman is very valuable, the unborn is very valuable. Both can be at the same time

Trying? No intent.
But actually killing the mother? Yes potentially. Women dying in childbirth or from pregnancy still happens in the us. Less so in the last few decades because we have abortion and birth control but you want to turn back the clock to a time where it was more common for women to die from pregnancy.

yes women die in childbirth - you'd think having sex would be a really big deal huh ? its a big big deal being pregnant

But it’s your logic is it not? Unless you are willing to explain how you arrive at this “ value” they have. You just said that a fertilized egg in a woman is a living human just as a 10 year old is a living human.

a normal pregnancy HAS to have a living unborn and a living mother - what part of that don't you understand ?

There IS A UNBORN LIVING IN THE WOMB
You said a fertilized egg is a living human.

what post did I say that ? I've been VERY clear in what I've said

You seem confused. You said a fertilized egg is a living human. A fertilized egg in the mother constitutes that.

a pregnancy does

Chemical birth control and iud”s kill that fertilized egg.
So when do we arrest women taking birth control for murder?

was she pregnant when the unborn died and the pregnancy ended ?

Who said anything about “ value” . It’s about self determination once the baby is outside the womb.

you think a 1 day old has "self determination" ???

No they don’t. They simply have to show that there is a right to self determination. Once the baby is outside the womb it stops affecting the mother and potentially causing her to die.

you think a mother isn't affected anymore ? wow you are so wrong

you are right that once the pregnancy end and she's back to normal there isn't a risk anymore to her really. Pregnancy is a big deal

Actually it’s capable of breathing on its own, of crying for help etc. it’s essentially off life support

but doesn't really fit viable and is 100% parasitic still yes

Nope. See I don’t believe in right to life

wow

Ted Bundy didn't, Dennis Rader didn't, Hitler didn't ..... you want grouped with them ?

. If the government protects just life. Then it means when my dad is suffering on lifexsupport I can’t remove life support.

no it means there are laws saying I can't go pull the plug on your Dad but you can

Because the government must “ protect life “
What tge government protects or should protect is the right to self determination.
If someone murders my son, he is prosecuted because he took away my sons ability to determine his own life.

your argument is your son has no value and me killing him is no different than a woman having an abortion - right ? nothing really is lost because human life doesn't matter, has no value

right ?

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

it is homicide - but again laws are not what make a pro-abortion person pro-abortion or not, is it?

It is not homicide. Homicide is killing someone who has already been born.

but not after birth, right? that's be wrong wouldn't it?

Yes. Homicide.

why? its literally the same baby 1 day before

Are you trying to pretend women choose to have "abortions" at 39 weeks, 1 day?

Can you show me even one instance of an "abortion," a legal one in the U.S., that happened even in the last 4 weeks of pregnancy? 6 weeks?

At that point, if it's an emergency a c-section is performed. NO woman is carrying a fetus for 36 weeks and then saying, "Okay, abort it now." Show me ONE instance.

No doctor is going to do it, either.

The *whole reason* for no restrictions is that restrictions are a slippery slope to more restrictions, and more...for instance, the GA heartbeat law.

but you say over and over you want Govt to take care of the mother and unborn - you actually WANT Govt involved right ?

Yes, in a society, people take care of one another.

You want the Govt involved then ?

Yes. Not over what people physicially do to their own bodies, though.

Do you want the government involved in fixing your roads? Having police available? Taking someone to justice if they shoot you?

Yes? No?

Everyone wants government involved in some way, unless they're living in a cave and taking their lumps against the elements.

I've never said that - and the USA has social care systems for single mothers. you make it sound like we don't which isn't the truth

You keep saying "social" care.

You know that's not what I'm talking about, but you're clinging to it. Why?

Spilling the tea with my bestie feels great, but if I were down and out I sure wouldn't expect it to be feeding my child.

You do realize there's a difference?

we've established that


after the baby is born the woman can do all the above - is that the type of person you believe should be forced to parent a child ?

Um, that is exactly the point I was making.

Do you want this woman doing all that during her pregnancy, being forced by law to have the baby...then continuing to do all that, while parenting the child?

ok so now we're establishing that the life of a child hinges on what kind of mother there is - right ?

No. The ending or continuing of a pregnancy hinges on what the woman decides.

I was giving an example.

You still haven't answered. Do you feel such people should be forced to give birth to and parent children? Or even give birth to. Imagine what all that is doing to the fetus.

poor kids should be killed in the womb kinda thing or blacks have a harder time in life so we need to kill them in the womb to "save" them from a bad life

LOL keep trying for that angle, but it still doesn't match a single thing I've said.

As for "blacks have a harder time in life," are you saying you're for DEI, then?

right ?


no no

be consistent - you said about a woman can end pregnancy at her whims - that would include partial birth.

I am being consistent. I've been consistent all along. No, it can not include partial birth. Partial birth is flat-out illegal in the U.S. It has been for decades. It's not an option for any pregnant woman.

So no. I'm not for partial birth abortion. Or anything illegal.

unless such a procedure is so horrid to you that you'd agree to ban it, right ?

Say what? *I* didn't ban it. The U.S. government did.

so you only want a social system funded by those who are pro-life ?

What the heck? No, if a woman is forced by the government to give birth, then it is on the government to help her once the baby is born. Well, partially. The gov't comes first for the mother's and father's contributions, then picks up the slack. Badly and inadequately, but it picks up the slack.

As long as that help is overall shitty, of course even women who want their baby might consider, and may have abortions. Who wants to live that way and have their children grow up that way?

***

Now.

***

Once and for all. What is the "value" of a human life? Who assigns that value? Please be specific or nobody can answer on the "value" of a human life. What value, specifically, does a human life have?

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

men cannot do that - which is why a man will never ever EVER be a woman. Ever.

Ergo, this is happening to the mother's body *only* and yes, she can, indeed must make a decision if she finds out she is pregnant.

this fantasy that men can be women that liberals/Democrats support is a fantasy and nothing more, agreed ?

So again, you're underscoring that only a woman can make decisions about her own body because it can only happen to her?

and a woman will never experience all that a man does - you're right, its two separate experiences and I agree a woman goes through a lot more which is why women should be very careful in having sex and the chances of getting pregnant.

LOL so...the man doesn't need to be careful?

There are consequences for him too once a child is born.

yes, if a woman chooses sex, gets pregnant, .... I believe there is an obligation to the consequences of those actions and giving that child life yes.

The "consequences" being punish the child by allowing it to live and grow up in poverty, in an abusive parental relationship (and perhaps be abused itself), being raised by someone who is way too immature to parent and who parties, or whatever? What consequences exactly are you saying here?

Killing human life because its an inconvenience ..... that's horrible

Ending a pregnancy isn't horrible.

Killing a person? A baby, middle schooler, adult? Yes. That's horrible. It's also illegal for those who haven't gotten the memo that it's horrible.

 

[hecatmoggie]

Who says the unborn isnt "alive?" Or "life?" Coral reefs, wildlife, and livestock, etc are "life" and protected by laws. Again, you have no point

think about what you just said .... coral reef's and livestock have more value than unborn babies. How horrible is that ?

Quote where a poster wrote that the unborn isnt "life."

fantastic - we all can agree now the unborn is alive and abortion is killing it, right ?

You cant anymore, all you can do is acknowledge it can just change again.
When it comes to fetal "personhood," the question is...why would Congress change/amend the Constitution to recognize that?
There are plenty of criminal charges for causing human death...now your posts are making no sense at all. "Crazy isnt it?"

except in certain cases women get to decide to have unborn babies killed in the womb - you support that, I do not

How so, be specific?

it literally is specific - read the laws and why unborn babies are protected

No you dont. We've asked you...who says the unborn has value? Who says it should have rights recognized? What "authority?"

so you're agreeing with others now and saying human life has no value at anytime ?

And physiologically it's not the same. This is a biological and medical fact. Nor is its status compared to the woman's which you ignore all the time.

different DNA?
different blood?
different gender?

no - its the same baby 1 day before birth as one day after. You think its different ?

Inside the woman, HER status as a consenting individual with rights IS what makes a difference. The unborn inside her cannot be protected or acted on by the govt without violating HER life and rights and status as a person.

consent? you are wanting the baby to get a letter of consent to be in the pregnancy? did the woman as the baby for consent to conception ? I mean if you're asking for consent be fair

read the fetal protection laws

Once outside her, born, a baby can be cared for without violating her life, rights, and status as a person. THIS clearly shows that the unborn human life cant be valued or considered the same...the woman must always be considered in that equation and you continually refuse to do so. So you just keep lying as if this isnt true and that you cant refute it so you ignore it and complain over and over we havent explained it.

The law can change anytime, remember? Why would that affect my views on the value of the born and unborn?

we agree - laws don't matter when it comes to when life is and when life isn't, we agree on that, right ?

a woman's right doesn't extend to killing the unborn innocent baby in her womb - we disagree on that

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

how's Roe looking ?

you see .... my side votes, my side funds, my side dictates changes and my side keeps winning and has for several years now as more and more people wake up

and when people say "You can sit at your keyboard and slam keys as much as you want - and no one cares what you think." an a debate forum ? that translates to "I lost the discussion so I'm going to just go with "nobody cares what you think"


a normal pregnancy is a living human woman and a living human unborn male or female - fact

if a person puts value on a 1 day old baby put the same value on a 1 day before birth - its literally the same baby or admit human life has no value and kill it anytime its an inconvenience, right?

You keep saying that a "normal" pregnancy is a living human.

So if it has any disabilities then it's not living? Not a human? Which?

Who's the one who is selectively for the "best possible" fetuses, again? Seems like that's you.

Since 93% of abortions occur before the 13th week, the pregnant woman almost certainly doesn't even know whether there are any issues with the fetus yet unless they're drastic and immediately discernable on an ultrasound. So no, greater than 93% of the time the pregnant woman is not aborting due to a non-"normal" fetus. That is *your* stance. So own it.

When couples decide to abort well into the third trimester, the only reasons ever given in the U.S. have been severe issues incompatible with life (not just some random issue that won't, you know, kill the baby slowly after a painful short life of tubes sticking everywhere), or emergency removal of the fetus due to the physical and immediate health of the mother. And even then, 0% of abortions have occured in the United States after the 29th week.

After that gestational age, the U.S. performs literally zero percent of abortions. At that point, if the mother suddenly doesn't want her fetus after months of carrying it, NO doctor is going to say "Okay, let's abort this fetus because you don't want it," they're going to say "Let's deliver this healthy child via C-section or induced birth."

YOU are the one carefully sidestepping around your repeated assertion that "normal fetuses" are "human life" with value, by adding, "But I'm not willing to debate that."

Hmmm.

 

[Gordy327]

laws do protect the unborn - I've proven that

You've proven nothing, especially any "value" of the unborn.

some states allow killing the unborn too. If a man beat a woman badly and she lost her 6 months old baby in the womb .... or if the woman decided it'd get in the way of college and had that 6 months old killed by an abortion doctor ....

Most states allow a woman to choose to end her pregnancy, as is her right.

what's the difference ? if its not valuable life, if its not protected ... why did it matter who killed it or why?

It doesn't. The only issue is harm inflicted against the woman.

arrest the man for beating the woman yes, but the baby's death is 100% irrelevant isn't it ?

Correct. Fetal (not baby) homicide laws are absurd and nothing more than the result of knee jerk emotionalism.

several here have argued its not

Whom?

I think we know you give unborn life zero value

You know nothing, especially when you make presumptions, such as claiming the unborn have value, which you cannot even quantify or explain.

 

[Gordy327]

think about what you just said .... coral reef's and livestock have more value than unborn babies. How horrible is that ?


fantastic - we all can agree now the unborn is alive and abortion is killing it, right ?


except in certain cases women get to decide to have unborn babies killed in the womb - you support that, I do not

Then don't have an abortion. Problem solved.

so you're agreeing with others now and saying human life has no value at anytime ?

You have yet to explain the value.

different DNA?
different blood?
different gender?

no - its the same baby 1 day before birth as one day after. You think its different ?

Yes, 1 day before, it's a non-person fetus occupying and feeding off someone's body. 1 day after, it's a born individual autonomous person and no longer a gestational parasite.

consent? you are wanting the baby to get a letter of consent to be in the pregnancy? did the woman as the baby for consent to conception ? I mean if you're asking for consent be fair

No baby during a pregnancy. And since it feeds off the woman, it's the woman who must consent to have it there.

read the fetal protection laws

Based around harm inflicted against aa pregnant woman. They do not establish rights or personhood for a fetus and does not apply to women who have an abortion.

we agree - laws don't matter when it comes to when life is and when life isn't, we agree on that, right ?

a woman's right doesn't extend to killing the unborn innocent baby in her womb - we disagree on that

You are free to be wrong!

 

[hecatmoggie]

It is not homicide. Homicide is killing someone who has already been born.

google says -

• In New Hampshire, a man was recently charged with murder for the death of a fetus in a case involving the death of the pregnant woman.
  
  
• In Alabama, a woman who was shot while pregnant was initially charged with manslaughter in the death of her fetus.
  
  
• The Unborn Victims of Violence Act in the US allows for separate charges for harm to a fetus during violent crimes against a pregnant woman.

did you not know these things?

Are you trying to pretend women choose to have "abortions" at 39 weeks, 1 day?

if its not a living unborn baby at 10 weeks isn't it still not a living unborn baby at 39 weeks 1 day ??

Can you show me even one instance of an "abortion," a legal one in the U.S., that happened even in the last 4 weeks of pregnancy? 6 weeks?
At that point, if it's an emergency a c-section is performed. NO woman is carrying a fetus for 36 weeks and then saying, "Okay, abort it now." Show me ONE instance.
No doctor is going to do it, either.
The *whole reason* for no restrictions is that restrictions are a slippery slope to more restrictions, and more...for instance, the GA heartbeat law.

I'm confused - you DO support women having their unborn babies killed at anytime right? why do dates of pregnancy mean anything ??

Yes, in a society, people take care of one another.

except unborn babies - we allow women to have them killed right?

Yes. Not over what people physicially do to their own bodies, though.
Do you want the government involved in fixing your roads? Having police available? Taking someone to justice if they shoot you?
Yes? No?
Everyone wants government involved in some way, unless they're living in a cave and taking their lumps against the elements.

right and when you have the Govt involved there are rules and regulations, things you can and cannot do. I DO want the Govt involved when it comes to protecting human life. Not just when it suits me either like pro-abortion people

You keep saying "social" care.
You know that's not what I'm talking about, but you're clinging to it. Why?
Spilling the tea with my bestie feels great, but if I were down and out I sure wouldn't expect it to be feeding my child.
You do realize there's a difference?

here this is a start

list of programs for single mothers

 

[hecatmoggie]

Um, that is exactly the point I was making.
Do you want this woman doing all that during her pregnancy, being forced by law to have the baby...then continuing to do all that, while parenting the child?

its better than killing the child - many kids escape poverty/drug families etc. Not a single killed in the womb baby escapes the death

No. The ending or continuing of a pregnancy hinges on what the woman decides.
I was giving an example.
You still haven't answered. Do you feel such people should be forced to give birth to and parent children? Or even give birth to. Imagine what all that is doing to the fetus.

a woman doesn't decide when life begins

yes to giving birth and the baby life - I can't force them to be good parents.

But wait - why are you concerned for "what it would do to the fetus" ???

LOL keep trying for that angle, but it still doesn't match a single thing I've said.
As for "blacks have a harder time in life," are you saying you're for DEI, then?

are you for getting rid of all the people who doesn't meet your expectations for a "good life" ???

I am being consistent. I've been consistent all along. No, it can not include partial birth. Partial birth is flat-out illegal in the U.S. It has been for decades. It's not an option for any pregnant woman.
So no. I'm not for partial birth abortion. Or anything illegal.

but morally you'd be ok with it ?

Say what? *I* didn't ban it. The U.S. government did.

in your opinon was that a good thing? the banning ?

What the heck? No, if a woman is forced by the government to give birth, then it is on the government to help her once the baby is born. Well, partially. The gov't comes first for the mother's and father's contributions, then picks up the slack. Badly and inadequately, but it picks up the slack.

we have that system - but you're right, its on the mother and father primarily

As long as that help is overall shitty, of course even women who want their baby might consider, and may have abortions. Who wants to live that way and have their children grow up that way?

what "way"? and dead is better than growing up poor is your argument ?

Once and for all. What is the "value" of a human life? Who assigns that value? Please be specific or nobody can answer on the "value" of a human life. What value, specifically, does a human life have?

the value of an unborn baby is equal to and no less than the value of the moment its born. How's that?

if a person places no value on born life then they can say unborn has no value too

if a person DOES places value on born life, then that value must extend to the unborn because its literally the same living human life

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

google says -

• In New Hampshire, a man was recently charged with murder for the death of a fetus in a case involving the death of the pregnant woman.

State's rights, and all that.

• 
  
  
• In Alabama, a woman who was shot while pregnant was initially charged with manslaughter in the death of her fetus.

States rights, and all that.

• 
  
  
• The Unborn Victims of Violence Act in the US allows for separate charges for harm to a fetus during violent crimes against a pregnant woman.

Yes, ABUSE of a fetus is against the law.

So is abuse of an animal, FWIW. Abuse of any living being is against the law.

NONE of the above you have listed have been abortions.

did you not know these things?

Yup.

if its not a living unborn baby at 10 weeks isn't it still not a living unborn baby at 39 weeks 1 day ??

I never said it was not alive or not human.

You are the one who won't commit to, if it's not a "normal" (as you keep saying) "pregnancy" (all of a sudden it isn't a "baby" anymore? What happened there?), it's still living and human.

Is it or isn't it?

I'm confused - you DO support women having their unborn babies killed at anytime right? why do dates of pregnancy mean anything ??

Did I not explain this many times already?

NO woman opts for abortion after the 29th week, and if the fetus must be removed by emergency C-section, chances are high to near-100% that the born baby will be put into the NICU.

If it is an actual abortion at that stage, it is because the fetus has already died, or has issues incompatible with life, in which case it isn't aborted (stats show that), it's an induction or C-section, but in that case, since its issues are incompatible with life (anencepholy, for example), yes, it will die.

except unborn babies - we allow women to have them killed right?

We allow women to end pregnancies, and fewer than 2% choose to do that after the 2nd trimester. Again, for reasons stated above.

right and when you have the Govt involved there are rules and regulations, things you can and cannot do.

Yes. Those are called laws.

I DO want the Govt involved when it comes to protecting human life.

You "want."

Not just when it suits me either like pro-abortion people

Does it suit you to have one or another procedure performed on your body, even if it's not necessary? What about a vasectomy? Plastic surgery? Deviated septum that definitely isn't going to kill you?

here this is a start

list of programs for single mothers

Have you lived this life?