• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats overwhelmingly vote against BornAlive Abortion Survivors Protection[W:244]

Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Okie dokie, I see you won that argument you were having with yourself, kudos

is winning an argument with yourself really winning? probably not.

I agree if this even happens to 1 child it is one to many.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A




wait, you want me to trust planned parenthood's numbers as opposed to unbiased cost estimates?


"Nationwide, it can cost up to $1,500 for abortion in the first trimester, but it's often less."

I love the scare tactic "but hospitals can cost more"


Point is moot as we are all required to have Obamacare and under obamacare abortion is covered.

"in clinic" ****, that would cost you $50 bucks...


SOOOO much disinformation....
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A


#1 are you saying the poor person is covered by Obamacare and gets free abortions?

#2 Do you think that all smartphones are Iphones?
I still am using my smartphone I bought several years ago for $49. My monthly is cheap. People need phones. Smartphones increase access to the world and job potential. Many people have given up landlines. Do you consider a phone a luxury or necessity?
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

H.R.3504 - Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act

Democrats in the House today voted 177 to 5 against keeping clinics from simply letting children who are born and are alive outside the womb as the result of a botched abortion procedure die of exposure instead. These are living, crying, babies, outside the womb.

Text:

President Obama, who has a history of opposing protection for newborn infants, has issued a veto threat, claiming that asking doctors not to abandon living children qualifies as "chilling" access to abortion.

How, exactly, does not killing children who are living outside the womb chill access to abortion? WTF have you been doing if this is going to create significant problems with your work practices?[/LEFT]

There are probably 2 reasons this was rejected, and both are good reasons.

1. The 20-week limit that would place women's lives in danger. Many abortions after 20 weeks are medical situations. You can say you'll make an "emergency" exception all you like, but in practice all this does is force doctors to deny women care until they are actively dying, as it does in Ireland. Alternatively, it forces them to spend days traumatically stillbirthing. That's not acceptable. On top of that, it is Constitutionally illegal to place that limit according to the Roe ruling.

2. There is no need for this. There is no currently practised abortion procedure which can result in a live fetus. Late term abortions are usually performed by dismemberment to reduce trauma to the woman's body (like I said, these are often medical situations, so her body is often already under distress). So... how are you going to get a live fetus out of that situation? Prior cases of "born alive" were a result of instillation abortions, which fell out of favor decades ago because of how unsafe they were, and how much better modern procedures are. I have never heard of any clinic that still used instillation abortions, despite a decade as an active advocate. And even with instillation, a fetus being born alive was incredibly rare. There are only a couple confirmed cases.

And even if that weren't the case, the idea that this would result in a "living, crying, baby" is absurd. A 20-week fetus has no lungs (well, it has lumps of tissue that will become lungs, but they cannot take in air). It doesn't really have any skin either, or a working brain. And it is medically impossible to save them. They are not physically capable of either crying or living. It has never happened anywhere in the world in all of human history. That is pure fantasy, and taking advantage of uneducated and ignorant people's vulnerability to nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

#1 are you saying the poor person is covered by Obamacare and gets free abortions?

Nope

#2 Do you think that all smartphones are Iphones?
I still am using my smartphone I bought several years ago for $49. My monthly is cheap. People need phones. Smartphones increase access to the world and job potential. Many people have given up landlines. Do you consider a phone a luxury or necessity?



iphone, smartphone, whatever. data charges for that phone over a year would easilly cover a deductible.


most people who have cable (most all poor people in usa have cable) and often the land line reduces the price of the overall bill.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Abortion procedures don't always kill the child. In that case, children are born living. They come out kicking, crying, like any other baby.

Abortion Survivors.

That's bull****. And a heaping pile at that.

Over 95% of abortions are performed 12 weeks and under. At this stage and under - embryos and early stage fetuses don't have the ability to cry, kick etc like any other baby.

It's extremely rare that there is an abortion performed at a stage where the fetus is even capable of crying, kicking, scream. What dishonest, frickin dramatics you've injected into this vote. Gezzzzzzzzus Gawd. :doh
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Nope





iphone, smartphone, whatever. data charges for that phone over a year would easilly cover a deductible.


most people who have cable (most all poor people in usa have cable) and often the land line reduces the price of the overall bill.

What deductible? We are talking about poor people. Poor people get Medicaid. Are you saying Medicaid covers abortions?
Are you saying everyone is covered by Obamacare?

In terms of the cost of the phone...I paid cheap up front for the phone and pay about $300/year for my minutes/unlimited text and data.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

That's bull****. And a heaping pile at that.

Over 95% of abortions are performed 12 weeks and under. At this stage and under - embryos and early stage fetuses don't have the ability to cry, kick etc like any other baby.

It's extremely rare that there is an abortion performed at a stage where the fetus is even capable of crying, kicking, scream. What dishonest, frickin dramatics you've injected into this vote. Gezzzzzzzzus Gawd. :doh

It's actually even more ridiculous than that.

Even a 20-week fetus isn't capable of any of that. No lungs.

Even some fetuses that survive, born around the 24-week mark, have so little lung tissue that they can't breathe without extensive intervention. They sure as hell can't cry. They barely even have skin. They're only a few weeks past being more gelatinous than solid.

The amount of fantasy anti-choicers resort to always makes me roll my eyes and laugh simultaniously.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

There you go again. make an asinine false statement then argue it as fact.




Overview: Fetal Development | First Trimester | Pregnancy.org

My bad, 40 days....

Day 40: Brain waves can be detected and recorded.

week 8 baby starts responding to stimuli:

Week 8: Now a little more than an inch long, the fetus has everything found in a fully developed adult. The stomach produces digestive juices, the kidneys are functioning and genitals have begun to form. Forty muscle sets operate in conjunction with the nervous system and the fetus responds to touch.


I'll hold at 8 as a compromise, but 40 days really.

The brain wave claim is.. well, not accurate.

http://www.svss-uspda.ch/pdf/brain_waves.pdf
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

There you go again. make an asinine false statement then argue it as fact.




Overview: Fetal Development | First Trimester | Pregnancy.org

My bad, 40 days....

Day 40: Brain waves can be detected and recorded.

week 8 baby starts responding to stimuli:

Week 8: Now a little more than an inch long, the fetus has everything found in a fully developed adult. The stomach produces digestive juices, the kidneys are functioning and genitals have begun to form. Forty muscle sets operate in conjunction with the nervous system and the fetus responds to touch.


I'll hold at 8 as a compromise, but 40 days really.

That doesnt answer the question of 'why that' is a more important milestone than developments later. It's what 'you' chose. Great. But how is that weighted more heavily than, say, awareness?
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

There you go again. make an asinine false statement then argue it as fact.

Overview: Fetal Development | First Trimester | Pregnancy.org

My bad, 40 days....

Day 40: Brain waves can be detected and recorded.

week 8 baby starts responding to stimuli:

Week 8: Now a little more than an inch long, the fetus has everything found in a fully developed adult. The stomach produces digestive juices, the kidneys are functioning and genitals have begun to form. Forty muscle sets operate in conjunction with the nervous system and the fetus responds to touch.

I'll hold at 8 as a compromise, but 40 days really.

All of this is nonsense. Someone already posted a link about the brain wave thing -- basically, that's complete and utter BS.

A 40-day fetus has cells with a charge, like all cells do. It will respond to having electricity put through it from an external source. So will the cells in your leg, or the cells of a plant. It has nothing to do with the brain, it's just a property of all living cells. They have no brain activity whatsoever. That doesn't start until the very end of the second trimester. Even a super-premie born around 24 weeks only has irregular, uncoordinated activity -- no regular patterns. But prior to 20 weeks, nothing whatsoever. There are no functional neurons in the brain at all before that point, therefore it is physically impossible for them to have "brain waves." Unless you believe brains run on magic, I guess.

The organs thing is also bunk. An 8-week embryo has no organs that function in the way required for sustained human life. Some don't work at all or aren't even present, like the lungs. Others do perform functions, but not in the way a developed human body would require for life. The intestines do contract and make fluid, for example, but couldn't handle human milk, let alone food. They serve a completely different purpose more similar to an early ancestor of a fish than a human. The role they play at 8 weeks is to output into the amniotic sack.

The genitals are still generic, and have not differentiated at all. Differentiation doesn't even start until the end of the first trimester, around 11 or 12 weeks. At 8 weeks, the required hormones often aren't even active.

If any of the things you were saying were true, we'd be able to save an 8-week miscarriage. They would have all the systems required for us to put them on life support. Just make smaller tubes. Problem solved.

And yet, we have never saved any fetus born younger than about 22 weeks, because any younger and they wouldn't have the organs required to receive life support.

This is the reason we can't save embryos or early fetuses. In order to put someone on life support, they have to have formed human organs to receive the support. An embryo doesn't. Not at 8 weeks, or 12, or 16, or even 20.

The pure ignorant fantasy of this is just insane.
 
Last edited:
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Of course baby killers oppose letting a baby get away with some loophole and actually live.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

WTF is born alive after an abortion?
Butthurt.

Because not all abortions are the 'bring me another lover' like abortions in pro-lifer propaganda.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

The brain wave claim is.. well, not accurate.

http://www.svss-uspda.ch/pdf/brain_waves.pdf



No idea what that site is or what makes that chick from "about.com" an authority.


oh wait, google translate, pro abortion activist site.....


unbiased sites:
Fetal Brain and Nervous System | What To Expect
Fetal development timeline | BabyCenter
Fetal development: The 1st trimester - Mayo Clinic



but, no, your activist site from sweden quoting an about.com blogger must be more accurate. /facepalm
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

That doesnt answer the question of 'why that' is a more important milestone than developments later. It's what 'you' chose. Great. But how is that weighted more heavily than, say, awareness?


Now you are moving goal posts.

Do you realize this goalpost of yours you are now for infanticide up until about 18 months now?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/great-kids-great-parents/201211/self-awareness
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

All of this is nonsense. Someone already posted a link about the brain wave thing -- basically, that's complete and utter BS.

A 40-day fetus has cells with a charge, like all cells do. It will respond to having electricity put through it from an external source. So will the cells in your leg, or the cells of a plant. It has nothing to do with the brain, it's just a property of all living cells. They have no brain activity whatsoever. That doesn't start until the very end of the second trimester. Even a super-premie born around 24 weeks only has irregular, uncoordinated activity -- no regular patterns. But prior to 20 weeks, nothing whatsoever. There are no functional neurons in the brain at all before that point, therefore it is physically impossible for them to have "brain waves." Unless you believe brains run on magic, I guess.

The organs thing is also bunk. An 8-week embryo has no organs that function in the way required for sustained human life. Some don't work at all or aren't even present, like the lungs. Others do perform functions, but not in the way a developed human body would require for life. The intestines do contract and make fluid, for example, but couldn't handle human milk, let alone food. They serve a completely different purpose more similar to an early ancestor of a fish than a human. The role they play at 8 weeks is to output into the amniotic sack.

The genitals are still generic, and have not differentiated at all. Differentiation doesn't even start until the end of the first trimester, around 11 or 12 weeks. At 8 weeks, the required hormones often aren't even active.

If any of the things you were saying were true, we'd be able to save an 8-week miscarriage. They would have all the systems required for us to put them on life support. Just make smaller tubes. Problem solved.

And yet, we have never saved any fetus born younger than about 22 weeks, because any younger and they wouldn't have the organs required to receive life support.

This is the reason we can't save embryos or early fetuses. In order to put someone on life support, they have to have formed human organs to receive the support. An embryo doesn't. Not at 8 weeks, or 12, or 16, or even 20.

The pure ignorant fantasy of this is just insane.




I keep posting links from legitimate sources including the mayo clinic, you all have posted a link to an about.com blogger on a pro-abortion swedish site.


You are also making **** up that I never proposed. I am simply talking about brain activity, So your post really doesn't apply to what I said, sorry.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Every child we can save, we should save.

Sure. Do so.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

No idea what that site is or what makes that chick from "about.com" an authority.


oh wait, google translate, pro abortion activist site.....


unbiased sites:
Fetal Brain and Nervous System | What To Expect
Fetal development timeline | BabyCenter
Fetal development: The 1st trimester - Mayo Clinic



but, no, your activist site from sweden quoting an about.com blogger must be more accurate. /facepalm

Gosh, and you know one thing.. NOT ONE of the links you pointed to countered the points this woman made. NOT one!
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Gosh, and you know one thing.. NOT ONE of the links you pointed to countered the points this woman made. NOT one!



Sure they did, your lack of comprehension, given I believe you to be at or above average intelligence, I believe you are being purposefully obtuse.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Sure they did, your lack of comprehension, given I believe you to be at or above average intelligence, I believe you are being purposefully obtuse.

Actually, I see, rather than extracting any information from any of those raw links that demonstrate I am wrong, you go for the personal attack. You are being blinded by your position, rather than, well, actually show the evidence. Yes, there are some neurological activity, but, as was pointed out, that is not 'brain waves'. Do you now what brain waves are? It is not merely a bit of electrical activity. That is the point that 'pro-abortion' paper was making. It was also pointed out that the claims were based claims people who were not qualified made, or were made before we had the technology to actually test. You did not counter that point.

None of your links countered that, nor did they actually discuss when 'brain waves' developed. As was pointed out, there is a difference between neural activity and that activity being organized.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Actually, I see, rather than extracting any information from any of those raw links that demonstrate I am wrong, you go for the personal attack. You are being blinded by your position, rather than, well, actually show the evidence. Yes, there are some neurological activity, but, as was pointed out, that is not 'brain waves'. Do you now what brain waves are? It is not merely a bit of electrical activity. That is the point that 'pro-abortion' paper was making. It was also pointed out that the claims were based claims people who were not qualified made, or were made before we had the technology to actually test. You did not counter that point.

None of your links countered that, nor did they actually discuss when 'brain waves' developed. As was pointed out, there is a difference between neural activity and that activity being organized.


Medical Controversy – When Does Life Begin? | Brain Blogger

even your side has to admit by week 14....

Week 8
The eighth week of pregnancy is a special one, because at this point the precursors to all organs have been formed. Philosophers therefore argue that with the beginnings of a brain, the fetus now has the ability to think and react, and that marks the onset of life. Opponents argue that the rudimentary nervous system is not functional at 8 weeks, and the fetus cannot process information or move in response to a stimulus, therefore not making the fetus alive.
Quickening
Those same groups which argue against the week 8 model suggest that life begins with the “quickening,” which is when the fetus begins to exhibit voluntary movement inside the womb, usually around 14-16 weeks. At this point the fetus is able to react to external stimuli, which is held as the standard for life.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Medical Controversy – When Does Life Begin? | Brain Blogger

even your side has to admit by week 14....

Week 8
The eighth week of pregnancy is a special one, because at this point the precursors to all organs have been formed. Philosophers therefore argue that with the beginnings of a brain, the fetus now has the ability to think and react, and that marks the onset of life. Opponents argue that the rudimentary nervous system is not functional at 8 weeks, and the fetus cannot process information or move in response to a stimulus, therefore not making the fetus alive.
Quickening
Those same groups which argue against the week 8 model suggest that life begins with the “quickening,” which is when the fetus begins to exhibit voluntary movement inside the womb, usually around 14-16 weeks. At this point the fetus is able to react to external stimuli, which is held as the standard for life.


Yes, it can react, but that does not mean that there are brain waves. It reacts in much the same way that a hydra will react. We were specifically discussing brain waves.

This particular article has a lot of information about fetus consciousness.. While it's main concern is pain for animals, it is using human fetal development to make it's case.

The title is
Fetal 'awareness' and 'pain': What precautions should be taken to
safeguard fetal welfare during experiments?

http://altweb.jhsph.edu/wc6/paper79.pdf
 
Last edited:
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

Yes, it can react, but that does not mean that there are brain waves. It reacts in much the same way that a hydra will react. We were specifically discussing brain waves.

This particular article has a lot of information about fetus consciousness.. While it's main concern is pain for animals, it is using human fetal development to make it's case.

The title is
Fetal 'awareness' and 'pain': What precautions should be taken to
safeguard fetal welfare during experiments?

http://altweb.jhsph.edu/wc6/paper79.pdf




I note according to your paper that it claims that "the fetus" can not enter a conscious state of feel pain even during birth.

"However, three lines of evidence, taken
together, strongly support the view that even when
they have matured neurologically fetuses do not
normally exhibit conscious awareness before or
during birth (Mellor and Gregory, 2003; Mellor et al.,
2005, Mellor and Diesch, 2006)."



Given this, are you for elective abortion up to and including during birth?

yes or no please.
 
Re: Democrats overwhelmingly vote against Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection A

I note according to your paper that it claims that "the fetus" can not enter a conscious state of feel pain even during birth.

"However, three lines of evidence, taken
together, strongly support the view that even when
they have matured neurologically fetuses do not
normally exhibit conscious awareness before or
during birth (Mellor and Gregory, 2003; Mellor et al.,
2005, Mellor and Diesch, 2006)."



Given this, are you for elective abortion up to and including during birth?

yes or no please.


Personally, I do not like that idea of elective abortion after viability, using the term 'elective abortion' as any that is done for anything other than a medical reason. There are medical reasons after that, but what those reasons are is a matter between a woman and her doctor. Even before the viability mark, I would be disturbed if there isn't a personal set of ethics on the part of doctors for anything , for example beyond 20 weeks. There are doctors that won't do abortions after 12 weeks, and I can appreciate that. However, if there is a good enough medical reason, such as the health of the woman, or a malformed fetus, then that is between the woman and her doctor.
 
Back
Top Bottom