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

[Lursa]

and there ya go

say ... why don't you support a woman doing that AFTER birth ? and why don't you support men choosing their best interest too ?

Why did you cut out the rest of that? I answered. Again, your morality is reflected in your lack of credibility and ease of lying. Here's the whole post:

She should choose in her own best interests...like if she wants to risk miscarrying, becoming infertile, dying, etc. It's disturbing that you object to that.​

​

The man can also choose 100% in his own best interests...if he does not and chooses to risk his reproductive status...that is also 100% on him.​

​

Or are men forced to have sex? Are men incapable of controlling themselves? Of course not...why do you make men out to look weak and stupid?​

Please answer the last question: why do you make men out to look weak and stupid?

Dont forget, you're the one that believes men are entitled to sex without consequences. Women never are, and never have been. Why dont you want equality for men and women?

 

[Cope]

" for women to be able to choose in all cases when she becomes a mother."

What's wrong with that?

Context.
Try using it instead of snipping something that ruffled your feathers.

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

my argument hinges on this - and please follow closely because this matters

To you.

first part - #1 a normal pregnancy is a living mother and living unborn child - 100% fact, 100% biology

you have to know that's true - its science

When did I ever say an embryo or fetus isn't alive?

second part -#2 we protect unborn life.

We have laws that protect that living unborn, we make hospitals/insurances cover the treatment of that living unborn. Most women love their unborn when they discover they're preggo, families do too. After birth its protected even more, only a few serial killer type people have no value on human life. This is all true and fact

We also supposedly protect the born. So, why object to that? If the government is going to force a woman into one specific choice, then the government is going to pick up the slack. After the mother's portion and father's portion, according to their means, are assumed.

third part - #3 connecting them

Its just reason and logic to understand now that a 1 minute after birth baby is also the same baby 1 minute before.

What woman have you ever had who had an "abortion" done on a fetus in the ninth month? Or even the eighth?

What doctor do you imagine will perform an abortion at 39 weeks, 6 days?

The overwhelming majority of abortions take place in the first trimester.

The only reason pro-choice people want no restrictions is because one a restriction is placed, more and more and more come. Like Georgia's incredibly reasonable heartbeat law.

Almost everyone agree. SO back it up 5 minutes. Same baby, a little earlier but same. 50 minutes, 5 days, 5 weeks .... same DNA, same blood, same brain and heart .... its literally the same, just a little less developed but in every way the same. It has to be alive/living or it couldn't grow and keep the pregnancy going. Dead things don't do that, women are not pregnant with dead things

Again, when did I say fetuses are dead?

because there is something not quite right with the pregnancy and the unborn living life dies - did you grow up on a farm? some fertilized chicken egg's don't hatch - even though they pipped they'll die in the shell and nothing you can do will stop it. Some kittens die when born, some puppies are dead when they're born. It happens. It happens with humans too and every animal

But you don't understand. *Human* life "has value." If it does, why doesn't biology think so? You don't want to answer why God doesn't think so, but that's on the table too, since the majority of anti-choicers base their view on Christian belief.

If human life, above all other life, has value, why do 40% of embryos and fetuses just get expelled like it's nothing to even blink about?

and there ya go

say ... why don't you support a woman doing that AFTER birth ?

Because that's homicide.

and why don't you support men choosing their best interest too ?

I do. But if what you're saying is that it's in the man's best financial interest to just walk away, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander. In that case if it's in the woman's best interest to stay at home with her baby and not have an income, then, there you go. The man is lightened of the financial load, the woman is lightened of her financial load, and the rest of us pay taxes toward helping the mother and the baby.

Which, again, I don't resent but I know righties do, LOL.

You can't squeeze blood from a stone.

 

[BirdinHand]

We aren't debating the law. The current law allows women to choose for the man when he becomes a father. What you WANT is for women to be able to choose in all cases when she becomes a mother

Actually, you’re wrong.

The law enables the custodial parent of a living child to sue a non-custodial parent for child support and/or compels a non-custodial parent to be forced to pay child support when/if the custodial parent seeks financial assistance from the state.

It compels no one to be a parent.

And it doesn’t specify mother or father. The law only cares about custodial and non-custodial. And provides financial assistance to individuals responsible for the care and upbringing of a living child - regardless of their biological relationship to said child.

So…

Paying child support doesn’t make anyone a parent. And, considering how many billions of dollars there currently are in unpaid child support - we have plenty of dead beats that can’t even pay what pittance they’ve been told to pay by a court.

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

Once again because it's bound to get lost in the shuffle, here is info on Adriana's Celebration of Life:

 

[Lursa]

Actually, you’re wrong.

The law enables the custodial parent of a living child to sue a non-custodial parent for child support and/or compels a non-custodial parent to be forced to pay child support when/if the custodial parent seeks financial assistance from the state.

It compels no one to be a parent.

And it doesn’t specific mother or father.

So…

Paying child support doesn’t make anyone a parent. And, considering how many billions of dollars there currently are in unpaid child support - we have plenty of dead beats that can’t even pay what pittance they’ve been told to pay by a court.

He's just mad that men cant screw and walk away. That's all. He refuses to acknowledge that men can avoid what his posts whine about...just dont have sex then you cant blame the woman for anything.

Apparently he wants to blame women...for something

 

[BirdinHand]

first part - #1 a normal pregnancy is a living mother and living unborn child - 100% fact, 100% biology

There is no “living child” until there is a living independent of the womb child.

Prior to that, there is only the POSSIBILITY of an independent life.

Not the guarantee of one - and hence, not a second life.

I’m sorry you don’t understand that there are physiological processes that occur during and immediately after birth that are NECESSARY in order for there to be a 2nd life.

 

[Gordy327]

100% we are NOT debating law
why?
because if right now the GOP hammered through banning abortion nationwide ... would liberals/pro-abortion people go along with it because it was the law and change their minds on it ?

Yes, we are debating law. Law is the heart of the issue and what is ultimately applicable.

you absolutely can

right and wrong/moral and immoral has nothing to do with the law/legal

I'm not debating morality or what is right or wrong. Morality is subjective and there's nothing wrong with abortion.

OMG I forgot a question mark !!!

There seemed to be confusion about whether it was a question or statement . I clarified it.

they shouldn't nor should women

What choice do women make over mens bodies?

I don't think they ever should
no, nobody has said that

You asked if it was his choice.

because neither the man nor the woman should have the ability to decide to have an unborn baby killed

Why not? The unborn is occupying and feeding off the woman's body. She absolutely has a right to decide if she's ok with that or not!

what I'm showing is that there can be many REASONS to have the unborn killed .. who gets to decide what is really justification and what isn't ?

The pregnant woman gets to decide, obviously.

if the baby has no value does it matter having it killed because DNA said it had blue eyes and mother wanted a baby with brown eyes? or its a girl and she wanted a boy? or she's poor or 1/2 way through college ..... who gets to decide what's justification and what isn't ?

What's its value?

or ... is the unborn baby STILL the same unborn baby regardless ?

It's not a baby if it's unborn.

everyone is free to have to sex and as many babies as they want - babies are blessings, beautiful, wonderful

That's a matter of individual opinion. A woman who does not want children and opts for abortion might feel differently.

oh so you do think its ok for a woman to have her unborn killed because its hair color would be wrong? (if a woman wanted to)

Yes. Or for whatever other reason she chooses. The decision is hers regardless.

so you don't care the reasons behind a woman having her unborn killed at all ?

Not at all. It's no one's business and a woman need not justify her decision to anyone.

no restrictions all the way until birth for whatever reason ?

Exactly! There is no rational or legal reason to restrcit abortion in the least.

so circumstances decides the value of who gets to live and who is killed in the womb ?

The woman doing the gestation decides of course.

 

[BirdinHand]

He's just mad that men cant screw and walk away. That's all. He refuses to acknowledge that men can avoid what his posts whine about...just dont have sex then you cant blame the woman for anything.

Apparently he wants to blame women...for something

What can I say…that Y chromosome is broken.

Literally from in the NICU…those with a Y chromosome rather than an X have different odds and are the weaker sex in many regards Intelligence appears to be one of them.

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

What can I say…that Y chromosome is broken.

Literally from in the NICU…those with a Y chromosome rather than an X have different odds and are the weaker sex in many regards Intelligence appears to be one of them.

I wouldn't go that far...there are many quite brilliant men here on DP. And I'm marrided to a brilliant man.

Remember that there are female MAGAs who are fighting just as hard as the men to keep the government having control over women's bodies.

However, males are in fact subject to worse odds in a number of biological ways...which is sad. It sucks.

 

[Lursa]

What can I say…that Y chromosome is broken.

Literally from in the NICU…those with a Y chromosome rather than an X have different odds and are the weaker sex in many regards Intelligence appears to be one of them.

His posts are the epitome in hypocrisy. He wants single pregnant women who refuse to abort to be denied public benefits and assistance. He's adamant we should do so.

But then he is mad that men cant have consequence-free sex. We're not talking about married guys here (I hope)...he's talking about consensual sex between 2 single people. So he's demanding the right for men to walk away and not pay child support while condemning her and demanding she not get public assistance to help support the kid. WTF?

He wants the govt...or men...to be able to demand women abort. The hypocrisy is...he resents women having the choice, but wants MEN to make that choice for her. His posts are hypocritical to the point of irrational.

 

[BirdinHand]

His posts are the epitome in hypocrisy. He wants single pregnant women who refuse to abort to be denied public benefits and assistance. He's adamant we should do so.

But then he is mad that men cant have consequence-free sex. We're not talking about married guys here (I hope)...he's talking about consensual sex between 2 single people. So he's demanding the right for men to walk away and not pay child support while condemning her and demanding she not get public assistance to help support the kid. WTF?

He wants the govt...or men...to be able to demand women abort. The hypocrisy it...he resents women having the choice, but wants MEN to make that choice for her. His posts are hypocritical to the point of irrational.

In my personal life - the only individuals I’ve ever known to bitch and complain about child support have been men that rarely spend any time with their kids and then complain that they have to hand money over to their ex.

They’re fine with making a kid, they’re fine with even having a kid…but they bitch and moan when compelled to help PAY for that kid - typically after a bitter breakup.

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

His posts are the epitome in hypocrisy. He wants single pregnant women who refuse to abort to be denied public benefits and assistance. He's adamant we should do so.

Because it's about punishing women. It always, always, always comes down to this.

Some men (and some women) are horrified and angered by the fact that women can have sex simply for pleasure, without restrictions except for legal ones, obviously. Men should be allowed to "sow their oats" because "it's natural." Women shouldn't because somehow...that's unnatural?

The success of our species globally from 2 million years ago onward says otherwise; obviously, most humans, male and female, enjoy and pursue sex, or did at one time. But in "civilized" and "organized" locations that's a no-no. Women MUST be punished, either by denying their own very real needs, or by supporting a child entirely on their own should a pregnancy occur.

Some even support this with the Bible. It was Eve who bit the fruit first. Then she TEMPTED Adam.

In centuries gone by rape was blamed on the woman being too attractive. Hell, that even happens today. If she didn't want to get raped why did she wear something that in some way showed she had a figure underneath????

To some people, no matter what, women are born bad and must be contained. Full stop.

But then he is mad that men cant have consequence-free sex. We're not talking about married guys here (I hope)...he's talking about consensual sex between 2 single people. So he's demanding the right for men to walk away and not pay child support while condemning her and demanding she not get public assistance to help support the kid. WTF?

He wants the govt...or men...to be able to demand women abort. The hypocrisy it...he resents women having the choice, but wants MEN to make that choice for her. His posts are hypocritical to the point of irrational.

 

[Lursa]

In my personal life - the only individuals I’ve ever known to bitch and complain about child support have been men that rarely spend any time with their kids and then complain that they have to hand money over to their ex.

They’re fine with making a kid, they’re fine with even having a kid…but they bitch and moan when compelled to help PAY for that kid - typically after a bitter breakup.

There are a few that post like him here and they are, by their own admission or just their bitterness, guys that have been rode hard and put up wet by women. But it's "all the women's fault" So then they resent and blame all women. Hey, some men pick "crazy", some men just want to get laid. They blame all women for their own bad judgement.

He continues to claim that women force men to be fathers. He needs a dictionary for the word "force"

 

[BirdinHand]

There are a few that post like him here and they are, by their own admission or just their bitterness, guys that have been rode hard and put up wet by women. But it's "all the women's fault" He continues to claim that women force men to be fathers. He needs a dictionary for the word "force"

No one can be compelled to be a parent.

Being a parent is a verb. It’s actions. It involves labor and love and putting the needs of a child first.

The problem we have, as a society, in my opinion, is that way too many people aren’t actual PARENTS.

They might have children - but they aren’t PARENTS.

The only thing child support does is help prevent tax payers from some financial liability by making the biological contributors help bear some of the cost for a child they contributed their genetic material to creating. It plugs numbers into a calculator and spits out a % of net income that is designated to go to the actual PARENTS of said child. So that John and Jane Doe taxpayer don’t have to carry the entire burden.

It never has and never will make anyone a “parent”.

 

[stealthycat]

Because that's how I am. That's how I feel.
Not everyone feels as I do. People are individuals. Circumstances are all individual.
Which is why no one person or group can make this decision for total strangers.

I appreciate that but if a woman wanted to kill a day old baby because she realized she didn't have enough money ..... you wouldn't support that would you?

I don't know anyone else's circumstances. If it's okay to have a fetus aborted due to hair color, is that any worse than deciding it's okay for the child to have no support going forward in life, it and the mother can sink or swim, you wash your hands of it?

You're not even choosing based on something superficial. You're choosing unilaterally. ALL the born children can have the life the mother can provide them, you don't descriminate, let them all suffer.

so you are saying any reason the woman wants is good enough - ok, we've established that, that's good.

I don't know. China doesn't think it's okay anymore. They have way too many men and not enough women.
Me...I wasn't in the circumstance of the government literally not allowing me to have any more than one child.
Governmental control over family planning makes people do desperate things.
See how that works?

but you support the Govt protecting human life after a baby is born - we allow Govt to do that don't we ? (USA Govt)

You don't care whether a born child eats? No exceptions?

do you want the Govt to control that? I've never said I don't care in fact I think I care more than any liberal lefties do. Human life matters

No, circumstances have nothing to do with the value of a fetus.

good, we've established that you believe a woman can have her unborn killed for any reason.

do you believe in partial birth abortion ? support it or don't care etc ?

WRONG. I pay VERY high taxes on all levels where I live. I did before, too, on the east coast. I have NEVER resented paying to, among other things, help children and families live and have what they need.

this is good, we're establishing more things.

the responsiblity is on the State/Fed Govt to provide for kids now ---- the very Fed Govt and State you previously said you shouldn't think should be controlling things, right ?

 

[stealthycat]

Why did you cut out the rest of that? I answered. Again, your morality is reflected in your lack of credibility and ease of lying. Here's the whole post:

She should choose in her own best interests...like if she wants to risk miscarrying, becoming infertile, dying, etc. It's disturbing that you object to that.​

​

The man can also choose 100% in his own best interests...if he does not and chooses to risk his reproductive status...that is also 100% on him.​

​

Or are men forced to have sex? Are men incapable of controlling themselves? Of course not...why do you make men out to look weak and stupid?​

Please answer the last question: why do you make men out to look weak and stupid?

Dont forget, you're the one that believes men are entitled to sex without consequences. Women never are, and never have been. Why dont you want equality for men and women?

I cut it our because those few words sums it up perfectly

 

[stealthycat]

To you.

my argument is rock solid - pro-abortion people cannot chip it. The ONLY people that can argue to allow killing unborn life are those who don't care if born life is killed either. Consistency.

When did I ever say an embryo or fetus isn't alive?

I showed it was

We also supposedly protect the born. So, why object to that? If the government is going to force a woman into one specific choice, then the government is going to pick up the slack. After the mother's portion and father's portion, according to their means, are assumed.

why? why protect it at 1 day after birth and not 1 day before ?

What woman have you ever had who had an "abortion" done on a fetus in the ninth month? Or even the eighth?
What doctor do you imagine will perform an abortion at 39 weeks, 6 days?

partial birth has been done yes, later abortions done yes .... the point is, its the SAME unborn baby and you know it is, I know it is, almost everyone does that why such horrific abortions are not allowed anymore

The overwhelming majority of abortions take place in the first trimester.
The only reason pro-choice people want no restrictions is because one a restriction is placed, more and more and more come. Like Georgia's incredibly reasonable heartbeat law.

ok this is a very good point - if I'm reading this right, you'd stop all abortions 3rd trimester, right ?

Again, when did I say fetuses are dead?

its been said on here multiple times (not you I don't think) and I'm using this to build the pillars of my argument

But you don't understand. *Human* life "has value." If it does, why doesn't biology think so? You don't want to answer why God doesn't think so, but that's on the table too, since the majority of anti-choicers base their view on Christian belief.

again talk to them about God because I'm not using religion here at all

If human life, above all other life, has value, why do 40% of embryos and fetuses just get expelled like it's nothing to even blink about?
Because that's homicide.

if you can prove the woman killed the unborn yes its homicide

other than that, its a natural death - happens all the time

I do. But if what you're saying is that it's in the man's best financial interest to just walk away, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

exactly what I'm saying and its NOT for either to walk way/escape the responsibilities, not the man, not the woman

In that case if it's in the woman's best interest to stay at home with her baby and not have an income, then, there you go. The man is lightened of the financial load, the woman is lightened of her financial load, and the rest of us pay taxes toward helping the mother and the baby.

Which, again, I don't resent but I know righties do, LOL.

You can't squeeze blood from a stone.

if you want the Govt to control everything yes the above would work

 

[stealthycat]

He's just mad that men cant screw and walk away. That's all. He refuses to acknowledge that men can avoid what his posts whine about...just dont have sex then you cant blame the woman for anything.

Apparently he wants to blame women...for something

show me a post where I've advocated for that - you can't, you're being dishonest and deceitful because I've shown how wrong you are on your beliefs

EVERY man and EVERY woman who chose/decided sex and a baby came from it should be 100% responsible

can I BE any clearer ?

 

[stealthycat]

There is no “living child” until there is a living independent of the womb child.

then the woman is pregnant with a non-living thing in her womb - 100% fiction and 100% impossible for a normal pregnancy

you cannot believe what you just typed

Prior to that, there is only the POSSIBILITY of an independent life.
Not the guarantee of one - and hence, not a second life.
I’m sorry you don’t understand that there are physiological processes that occur during and immediately after birth that are NECESSARY in order for there to be a 2nd life.

explain a 2nd life ?

never heard of "2nd life" immediately after birth

 

[Lursa]

I cut it our because those few words sums it up perfectly

No but by doing so, you admit you cannot prove it wrong...thank you, it was obvious but it took you awhile.

 

[Lursa]

I appreciate that but if a woman wanted to kill a day old baby because she realized she didn't have enough money

No need to support it because she can leave it at a fire station, she can put it up for adoption. So no violation of her body, consent, or other rights.

Very simple once someone is able to include the woman in the equation. So say "buh bye" to your attempt at that argument (again).

 

[Lursa]

show me a post where I've advocated for that - you can't, you're being dishonest and deceitful because I've shown how wrong you are on your beliefs

I didnt write that you did. OTOH, I did point out that you thought men should be entitled to sex without consequences...remember? I quoted you

EVERY man and EVERY woman who chose/decided sex and a baby came from it should be 100% responsible

can I BE any clearer ?

Sure you can be clearer...you can stop posting that it's not fair that she decides if she needs an abortion or wants to have the kid. Remember? I posted where you wrote that too...about 3 separate examples.

You seem to have a very poor memory. Or you just prefer posting dishonestly

 

[BirdinHand]

then the woman is pregnant with a non-living thing in her womb - 100% fiction and 100% impossible for a normal pregnancy

you cannot believe what you just typed




explain a 2nd life ?

never heard of "2nd life" immediately after birth

A woman is pregnant with a ZEF.

It is not considered another person until after it is born. It is the potential for another person but there is no guarantee at all, even in the best of situations it will become one

While a ZEF is in the womb, it is 100% reliant upon the umbilical cord and placenta attached to the mother’s body to grow. It is not an independent life. There’s no way to say with a 100% certainty that it would EVER become a living person.

It is not a person until a live birth occurs. Meaning the fetus converts from being an organism reliant upon the mother’s body - to being an organism that can support independent life.

There are actual physiological characteristics and requirements for a ZEF to be able to be an organism that can support its own physical life - even with our most advanced medical technology. And even 40 week fetuses who are presumed to be perfectly healthy in utero don’t survive childbirth and become a living baby.

Thats just reality.

Many - in fact the majority of ZEFs - never become independent living organisms that we call humans. Their development arrests - and they die. Then, are expelled from the woman’s body. (In the past, many women died because a ZEF would arrest and NOT be expelled and it would then kill her

Just because some people have an emotional attachment to ZEFs doesn’t make them anymore a living human than it makes a rock a living human.

 

[Lursa]

A woman is pregnant with a ZEF.

It is not considered another person until after it is born. It is the potential for another person but there is no guarantee at all, even in the best of situations it will become one

While a ZEF is in the womb, it is 100% reliant upon the umbilical cord and placenta attached to the mother’s body to grow. It is not an independent life. There’s no way to say with a 100% certainty that it would EVER become a living person.

It is not a person until a live birth occurs. Meaning the fetus converts from being an organism reliant upon the mother’s body - to being an organism that can support independent life.

There are actual physiological characteristics and requirements for a ZEF to be able to be an organism that can support its own physical life - even with our most advanced medical technology. And even 40 week fetuses who are presumed to be perfectly healthy in utero don’t survive childbirth and become a living baby.

Thats just reality.

Many - in fact the majority of ZEFs - never become independent living organisms that we call humans. Their development arrests - and they die. Then, are expelled from the woman’s body. (In the past, many women died because a ZEF would arrest and NOT be expelled and it would then kill her

Just because some people have an emotional attachment to ZEFs doesn’t make them anymore a living human than it makes a rock a living human.

He knows all that. He's just yanking your chain and retreading all his crap. He's been provided with the examples and links that prove the "legal" status. If you try biology, he'll try something else. Try morality...he doesnt have a leg to stand on there...he cant even explain the value of the unborn.