- Joined
- Aug 19, 2020
- Messages
- 27,199
- Reaction score
- 14,222
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Not all agree that a fetus has zero value.
I’m sure. And those folks get to keep their fetuses if they so choose.
Win/win.
Not all agree that a fetus has zero value.
You’ve gotten scientific arguments, but to lefties like you, no amount of evidence will convince you. At least half of the patients in abortion die, and sometimes the woman dies too, or becomes seriously injured, or sterile.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not all agree that a fetus has zero value.
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
Is stealing a loaf of bread to feed your family immoral?
You gotta admit: it’s just pure *swagger* to insist *having* a vagina and *having* an abortion would *disqualify* me from speaking on it. I appreciate the stye.
Notice how it was someone without a uterus saying that to you....
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
It’s always a male. Always. It’s always a male lecturing me about my body - whether it’s who I was ****ing when I was straight, and certainly who I was ****ing when I learned that peens are for suckers.
You guys worry about your inability to make women orgasm or maintain an erection, you let us worry about how to best care for our own bodies.
There is no scientific argument against a safe and effective medical treatment.
Pro-lifers have as much right to consider using their religious beliefs when arguing against abortion as you have using bogus “scientific” ones.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
Safe for whom? Certainly not the baby.
Well, except the vast majority of the pro-life movment are women. Sorry to bust the phony lying narrative.
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
You can't really separate morality from religion. And abortion at its heart is a moral issue. You change hearts and minds by showing people abortion is immoral.
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
I thought by now someone would have offered a coherent argument for the "secular pro-life" stance. I guess I'll have to live with being disappointed.
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
That's fine. Religious people dont have to separate their 'morality' from their position on abortion.
Religious women are free to choose according to their beliefs.
That's the great strength and moral foundation of 'choice,' each woman may choose what is best for her needs, or according to her beliefs. No woman is forced to have an abortion OR have a baby.
As always however, the religious are not legally or morally allowed to force their beliefs on those women (on this issue) that dont believe the same.
And yet, if a woman cant afford or care for a child, why should she stay pregnant and go thru childbirth, which is so much MORE dangerous?
Abortion is 14 times safer than pregnancy
Abortion safer than giving birth: study - Reuters
Please note that I included a quote from the link that supports my position. I recommend this technique in discussions.
You can't really separate morality from religion.
This is the latest push from the Republican politicos. Religious anti-abortion rhetoric has simply gotten so shrill, so accusatory and so. ........ just plain dumb that even Republicans have left the movement. Leaders of the Republican Party fearful of losing the political clout of the religious right have demanded that anti-abortion groups turn down the decibels and at least act like there are other people in the organization besides the usual suspects: women screaming obscenities and praying at women entering clinics and old, white, misogynistic males harrumphing over women keeping their knees closed.
And so now we have Secularists for Life, Atheists for Life, Scientists for Life, Compute programers for Life, Short Order Cooks for Life, all in the interests of conservative political support. It looks good on paper but most of the new recruits are high school girls who don't vote and haven't been yet faced with an unwanted pregnancy that will halt their opportunity for college and career.
And new arguments, scientific arguments, logical arguments except they are the same old arguments as before just dressed up in scientific jargon and philosophical jibber jabber.
It can still all be swept away with one word: Pro-Choice.
If you don't like abortions don't get one.
This is nonsense. Abortion leads to death 100% of the time. Prengancy hardly ever leads to death unless a woman has health issues and is morbidly obese.
And AGAIN, because Mashmont never heard of an ectopic pregnancy.
If you're a 350-pd chick with diabetes, then yes, you should probably avoid sex until you get yourself in condition to get pregnant.
Previous ectopic pregnancy. If you've had this type of pregnancy before, you're more likely to have another.
Inflammation or infection. Sexually transmitted infections, such as gonorrhea or chlamydia, can cause inflammation in the tubes and other nearby organs, and increase your risk of an ectopic pregnancy.
Fertility treatments. Some research suggests that women who have in vitro fertilization (IVF) or similar treatments are more likely to have an ectopic pregnancy. Infertility itself may also raise your risk.
Tubal surgery. Surgery to correct a closed or damaged fallopian tube can increase the risk of an ectopic pregnancy.
Choice of birth control. The chance of getting pregnant while using an intrauterine device (IUD) is rare. However, if you do get pregnant with an IUD in place, it's more likely to be ectopic. Tubal ligation, a permanent method of birth control commonly known as "having your tubes tied," also raises your risk, if you become pregnant after this procedure.
Smoking. Cigarette smoking just before you get pregnant can increase the risk of an ectopic pregnancy. The more you smoke, the greater the risk.
What does that have to do with an ectopic pregnancy? The things that increase the risk of an ectopic pregnancy are:
Nothing in there about obesity.
Obesity is the biggest cause of women’s death in childbirth. Girls, if you are a candidate for “600-lb Life” OR you resemble Stacey Abrams weightwise, it is irresponsible to have sex.