[W:913]Us pro-lifers have got to stop using the religious argument for being against this...

[Aunt Antifa]

Abortion was made legal after it was illegal. What's legal can change.

You don't like my example of assisted suicide? Fine. Appendectomy is legal, but I can't have it removed even if I am a cash-paying customer. The first question they would ask me what's wrong with it. Nothing, it's my body and I want it out. Like that pregnant woman and her "fetus" on the floor below. No special reason.

A fetus can kill a woman. An appendectomy is ordered for infections, usually.. So the reasoning is actually similar. So when a doctor asks me, if I’m pregnant, I can absolutely say “I’m carrying a ticking time bomb that I do not need to risk my health for. Please rip it the **** out. Thx” this is both legal, and well within my rights as a human being to protect my health independent of your prying opinions.

 

[Novichok]

A fetus can kill a woman. An appendectomy is ordered for infections, usually.. So the reasoning is actually similar. So when a doctor asks me, if I’m pregnant, I can absolutely say “I’m carrying a ticking time bomb that I do not need to risk my health for. Please rip it the **** out. Thx” this is both legal, and well within my rights as a human being to protect my health independent of your prying opinions.

I apologize in advance for getting perosnal so don't complain to the mods.

If you see what brings joy to the millions of women as ticking bombs, avoid sperm in any and all forms.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

I apologize in advance for getting perosnal so don't complain to the mods.

If you see what brings joy to the millions of women as ticking bombs, avoid sperm in any and all forms.

Right, yes. Your response to a constitutional argument is to get personal because you’re having an emotional reaction to this subject or you’re trying to egg one out of me.

So? Whether you or I drink or bathe in buckets of sperm, it’s not important. You might spend all day guzzling the stuff, dunno. None of my business.

Why can’t I have the same courtesy from you about how I handle sperm that I give you and all the sperm you handle?

 

[Bodi]

I never said, "killed", so you are arguing with somebody else.

So when you said :

have been cut up into smaller pieces, discarded

What did you mean if not 'killed'?




Some reason you ignored this?

You have some strange ways of viewing child birth... and I already answered when a baby becomes a baby.

 

[Lursa]

There is no such thing as "at births" as a moment. Giving birth is a gradual process from conception until the cord is cut.
To perform an abortion, the abortionist needed to dehumanize what it's inside by giving it a name - fetus. They even argued where life begins. Then, thanks to science, we saw a beating heart and the rest.

So, back to my question.

As the fetus emerges, at what moment does it stop being a fetus and becomes a newborn? Like: fetus, fetus, fetus, fetus, newborn, newborn, newborn....

What definition do you want? You've gotten legal and scientific definitions.

Just because they dont allow you to make the useless point you are attempting to make doesnt mean they are invalid. They are, actually, the ONLY things that are valid on the issue.

Your question has been answered and your argument attempt based on it has failed.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Lursa]

Abortion was made legal after it was illegal. What's legal can change.
.

Yeah...it wasnt illegal in all states. And it was examined by the courts and determined that there are many of women's Const rights that would be violated if it remained illegal in those states.

What legal justifications would you have SCOTUS examine to reconsider RvW? Why would they decide it was ok to violate those rights for women (but not for men?). There is no distinction any longer in the Const re: men's and women's rights.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Lursa]

There is no law saying a doctor cannot remove a healthy appendix. In fact, some doctors do remove it when doing a hysterectomy.

Some do it for mountain climbers and the scientists that go to Antarctica, etc that dont want to risk appendicitis.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Lursa]

I apologize in advance for getting perosnal so don't complain to the mods.

If you see what brings joy to the millions of women as ticking bombs, avoid sperm in any and all forms.

Why should any woman who practices responsible sex have to avoid the joy of sex? That's ridiculous.

Pretty sure that sex brings joy to millions MORE people than kids.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[Novichok]

Why should any woman who practices responsible sex have to avoid the joy of sex? That's ridiculous.

Pretty sure that sex brings joy to millions MORE people than kids.

I meant being pregnant, not being banged.

 

[Lursa]

I meant being pregnant, not being banged.

And the only way to avoid the sperm is to not have sex :doh

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[weaver2]

And the only way to avoid the sperm is to not have sex :doh

Those men, poor dears, who won't look up information that is readily available are doomed to abstinence. so sad. :2rofll:

 

[OceanBlues1]

Ah there it is finally: "Women who abort cause people I don't like to move into my white country"

Yep. It didn't take that long for his (or her) racial bias to show up, did it.

 

[OceanBlues1]

So, back to my question. As the fetus emerges, at what moment does it stop being a fetus and becomes a newborn?

Again, it becomes a newborn when it is BORN. In other words, at BIRTH. There's no other way to answer this question.

 

[OceanBlues1]

If you see what brings joy to the millions of women as ticking bombs, avoid sperm in any and all forms.

Not every woman wants pregnancy or children, myself included. As to the whole "avoid sperm" thing, women can do that by using reliable birth control -- assuming they can afford it -- to make sure they don't end up pregnant when they don't want to be. Thankfully, my BC never failed, but some women aren't as lucky.

 

[OceanBlues1]

I meant being pregnant, not being banged.

Being pregnant would NOT have brought joy to me, it would have brought the opposite. Which is why I always used reliable birth control, to avoid the unwanted and unwelcome outcome of pregnancy.

Oh, and just because a woman may never want children doesn't mean she must remain celibate for life, no matter what pro-lifers say. Celibacy, like having children, is also a choice, not a lifetime obligation or requirement.

 

[Novichok]

Being pregnant would NOT have brought joy to me, it would have brought the opposite. Which is why I always used reliable birth control, to avoid the unwanted and unwelcome outcome of pregnancy.

Oh, and just because a woman may never want children doesn't mean she must remain celibate for life, no matter what pro-lifers say. Celibacy, like having children, is also a choice, not a lifetime obligation or requirement.

Are all of you women here unmarried and childless?

 

[OceanBlues1]

Are all of you women here unmarried and childless?

Personally, I call myself happily single and childFREE, rather than "unmarried and childless." That's so 19th-century, don't you think?

But I still stand by what I said in Post #841. Which was: "...just because a woman may never want children doesn't mean she must remain celibate for life, no matter what pro-lifers say."

 

[D_NATURED]

We should include all people because not everybody is going to respond to religious arguments. Maybe use some scientific studies. Or even include sources like this one below...

Home | secularprolife

All you've got is the threat of damnation. Don't abandon your only argument. Any rational consideration of abortion rights must confront the TRUTH that women are already rights-endowed and their bodies and ANYTHING within are THEIRS to adjudicate however they like.

Besides, religion in America is largely a fools game. If you want to please Jesus, forgive women, don’t rule them.

 

[weaver2]

There is no such thing as "at births" as a moment. .......... As the fetus emerges, at what moment does it stop being a fetus and becomes a newborn?

Go to the Sistine Chape, look up, your answer is there.

 

[Atreus21]

We should include all people because not everybody is going to respond to religious arguments. Maybe use some scientific studies. Or even include sources like this one below...

Home | secularprolife

The best argument against abortion need not invoke religion. Increasingly though, I find the final redoubt of abortion proponents is to deny that human beings should not be needlessly killed, and no secular argument can defeat that. The claim that human beings are precious is dogmatic, not scientific (there is no scientific basis for it). If they have regressed so far that they must defend clear murder if it means saving abortion, then the debate can proceed no further - we can't arrive at any common starting point.

 

[Scrabaholic]

The best argument against abortion need not invoke religion. Increasingly though, I find the final redoubt of abortion proponents is to deny that human beings should not be needlessly killed, and no secular argument can defeat that. The claim that human beings are precious is dogmatic, not scientific (there is no scientific basis for it). If they have regressed so far that they must defend clear murder if it means saving abortion, then the debate can proceed no further - we can't arrive at any common starting point.

Abortion.is.not.murder. FACT

 

[Phys251]

So we can discount your opinion due to obvious biases based on self justification.

So we can discount your opinion due to obvious biases based on male entitlement.

 

[Dayton3]

So we can discount your opinion due to obvious biases based on male entitlement.

What are you thinking that I believe I'm entitled to?

 

[weaver2]

What are you thinking that I believe I'm entitled to?

I believe the maudlin emoting about tiny unborn babies of anti-abortion men is transferred anger at women who make independent decisions that in the past men made for women.

 

[Dayton3]

I believe the maudlin emoting about tiny unborn babies of anti-abortion men is transferred anger at women who make independent decisions that in the past men made for women.

Why do you think anti-abortion men do not care about the "tiny unborn babies"?

Sometimes things are simply the way they appear to be.

And why would I or any man for that matter give a rats ass about wanting to make decisions for women?