What would abortion laws be like if it were solely up to abortion rights advocates?[W

[Del Zeppnile]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

That you care more about a fictional fetus than an actual human being tells us all we need to know about this. You are willing to force a human being who is a person to endure even painful physical labor for nine months on a 24/7 basis, breaking all of the labor laws in the US and the amendment against involuntary servitude, for the sake of something that doesn't even exhibit human brain waves until the last few weeks and may not even be born alive. But you'll never let anyone do that to you and wouldn't do it even to save a baby's life, and you know it.

 

[choiceone]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

View attachment 67164477

What does this picture of a fetus developed past the point of viability have to do with an RU486 abortion of a 6-week-old embryo? And what does it have to do with a late abortion performed to save a woman from imminent death?

 

[GEIxBattleRifle]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

What are they guilty of?

Read number 27 here please. 60+ Anti-Abortion Arguments Refuted | Fight For Sense

 

[tecoyah]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

What does this picture of a fetus developed past the point of viability have to do with an RU486 abortion of a 6-week-old embryo? And what does it have to do with a late abortion performed to save a woman from imminent death?

It allows one to dishonestly rely on emotion to forward a point, which allows for the avoidance of logical debate and admission of defeat and ignorance.

 

[Removable Mind]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

What are they guilty of?

Glad you asked. It is impossible for any stage of an unborn (conception through the very last week of development) to engage in any interactions or behaviors with any external environments (outside the body of the woman who host it during gestation) that would be required to be declared as innocent or guilty. So in this sense, those terms are irrelevant.

The intent or the absences of intent by any stage of the unborn to cause positive, negative, or unpropitious physical changes or reactions to its immediate environment (which obviously includes the body of its host) is beyond its physical or mental control. Thus guilt or innocence aren't relevant terms.

However, the host is automatically affected from the existence of an unborn until the death of the host or the death of the unborn through its natural life span. Only the host can determine if a pregnancy is in her best interest through gestation, including and up to giving birth and beyond. If she determines it's not in her best interest to sustain a pregnancy, she must comply with laws that set time parameters in which she must terminate the pregnancy.

In some instances medical intervention may determine that a pregnancy isn't in the best interest of a woman.

So the words (terms) guilt or innocents are really non sequitur.

 

[JayDubya]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

The unborn aren't innocent...

Abjectly crazy talk.

 

[X Factor]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

YOUR REPLY TO THE ABOVE...



The above post from you - it should go on David Letter's Top 10 Straw Man post of the Year.

I am going to gracefully ask that you PROVE that "I have no issue with killing born persons" as you have accused me of.

I have NEVER, EVER, in the 3 years that I've posted in DP, advocated for killing born persons - and I am ****ING offended at your accusation.


ALL LIVING THINGS ARE SUBJECT TO DEATH. IT IS INEVITABLE. THAT INCLUDES ALL STAGES OF THE UNBORN.


Question: How many born persons do you believe are exempt from death?

Question: What life forms on this planet are exempt from death?

Question: How many causes of death can born persons experience?

Question: How many causes of death can be experienced by a conception through fully developed fetus?

Question: Are conceptions a sacrosanct event?

Question: Do all conceptions survive to full implantation? If not, why?

Question: Are conceptions subject to natural abortions? If so, why?

Question: Are zygotes, blastocysts, and embryos, and fetuses subject to miscarriage? If so, why?

Question: Do you believe that conceptions exist because of divine intervention or influence for the reason of perpetuating the human species/souls?

Question: Do you believe that preborn are ensouled by a supreme being. If so, at what stage?

Question: Are some unborn malformed and unable to survive through gestation or beyond birth?

Question: Do still births occur among some unborn? If so, why?

Question: Do you believe that once a woman conceives that she loses any or all of her Constitutional rights?

Question: Do you believe that once a woman conceives that she needs to be reported to government?

Question: Do you believe that once a woman conceives that she is not equal to the conception?

Question: Do you believe that once a woman gives birth that taxpayers should be responsible for the welfare of that child until 18 years of age?

Question: Do you believe women should be forced to give birth all reasons - other than their own resulting death from delivery?

Question: Do you believe that a woman who seeks advice and/or treatment with a physician should register with government that she has sought help?

Question: Do you believe that a woman is less equal to you?

Stuff your indignation. There are pro choice people here who see abortion as being sad and regrettable. I don't agree with their ultimate conclusions regarding the issue but we do have common ground on how we'd both like to see it become just as rare as possible. Then there's you and the rest of the extremists that seem to actually revel in it. You defend describing the preborn as criminally insane rapists. That gives us more insight into your thought process than you realize. I don't know about you but I have no heart, no regard, no concern for an insane rapist. I have nothing but contempt for someone like that and if they're killed, I'm glad. I think it's fair then to infer that those are the same ways you feel about the unborn, after all, the imagery is not accidental. Am I supposed to accept that you all of a sudden develope all this compassion for prematurely born infant that, just moments before, you would be only too happy to see torn apart?

If you want to tell me that not all pro-choicers are like you or Choiceone (who I think is borderline sociopathic), I'll agree with that. In fact, I notice that the pro-choicers who frequent this forum are all pretty much the same people and you're all pretty much on the same page. The more reasonable, middle of the road types tend to stay away.

 

[X Factor]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

That is your subjective opinion.

To deny that a killing occurs during abortion is delusional denial. If you're going to support the right to do it, that's fine, but at least be real about what it does.

 

[choiceone]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

Stuff your indignation. There are pro choice people here who see abortion as being sad and regrettable. I don't agree with their ultimate conclusions regarding the issue but we do have common ground on how we'd both like to see it become just as rare as possible. Then there's you and the rest of the extremists that seem to actually revel in it. You defend describing the preborn as criminally insane rapists. That gives us more insight into your thought process than you realize. I don't know about you but I have no heart, no regard, no concern for an insane rapist. I have nothing but contempt for someone like that and if they're killed, I'm glad. I think it's fair then to infer that those are the same ways you feel about the unborn, after all, the imagery is not accidental. Am I supposed to accept that you all of a sudden develope all this compassion for prematurely born infant that, just moments before, you would be only too happy to see torn apart?

If you want to tell me that not all pro-choicers are like you or Choiceone (who I think is borderline sociopathic), I'll agree with that. In fact, I notice that the pro-choicers who frequent this forum are all pretty much the same people and you're all pretty much on the same page. The more reasonable, middle of the road types tend to stay away.

I find it very interesting that you miss the point of being pro-choice: we support the woman's own choice either way regardless of what we ourselves would choose in that situation. There is no reveling in one choice or another.

The unborn are not criminally insane rapists: the comparison is made solely to show the legal basis for the right to choose even when the unborn are claimed to be persons, though it is even more obvious that they are not persons than that they are not insane rapists.

"I don't know about you but I have no heart, no regard, no concern for an insane rapist. I have nothing but contempt for someone like that." Well, just as US law does not take that attitude, neither do I.

It's awful that some persons are insane. That is a function of very serious, often incurable mental illnesses that medicine may not even be able to mitigate, illnesses in which a faulty body actually controls the mind, the exact reverse of what should be, of healthy mind controlling the body. That such problems cause a person to commit violent behavior that so seriously threatens or violates others' rights that he/she has to be killed to protect those rights is sad, because such persons do not even know they are doing something wrong - reason is absent. That's why they're not found guilty in court like other violent criminals

If I'm not comparably sad over abortion, it's because embryos aren't persons and don't have any mind at all. They are nothing but bodies, and they are not even capable of the life of an insane person, let alone the life of a sane person. They can't even take in oxygen without using somebody else's own oxygen.

To force a woman to continue a pregnancy when she doesn't want to is to say that a mindless embryo that is incapable of having its own life apart from her body and her body together have the right to violate her reasoning mind and thus her responsibility, conscience, and sanity, that her reasoning mind, conscience, and sanity don't have the right to rule her own body in accord with responsibility, sanity, and what is right or wrong.

I'm never going to say that, because we are judged by our words. If I use my words to violate the reason, sanity, and conscience of an adult person and force her body to behave in ways she believes with reason and sanity to be wrong, then my just punishment would be to have my reason, sanity, and conscience violated and my body forced to behave in ways that I believe with reason and sanity to be wrong. I don't want to incur that judgment, so I don't do that to other persons.

If you think that is sociopathic, I just feel sorry for you, albeit not as sorry as for a genuinely insane person. You're not going to make me incur that judgment.

 

[choiceone]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

To deny that a killing occurs during abortion is delusional denial. If you're going to support the right to do it, that's fine, but at least be real about what it does.

I do deny it in the case of most abortions because, if an embryo actually had a life, that life would continue without the woman's body, without her oxygen and nutrients. It could be kept alive by scientists in a lab container with oxygen and nutrients that were not from some person's blood. Most abortions merely disconnect the placenta+embryo unit from the woman's body and then eject it from her body.

As long as the embryo and fetus cannot live without being connected to the woman's body and using her life forces, her blood oxygen and nutrients, to extend their life span, they don't have a life of their own and therefore couldn't have a right to life.

You seem to think that the woman's body doesn't belong to her exclusively, that her blood oxygen and nutrients do not belong to her, but are rather public property that the embryo in collusion with the government can commandeer.

The government doesn't have the right to alienate the right of any person to all of his/her own life for the sake of the extension of the life span of another person, let alone an embryo, which is not a person.

 

[Removable Mind]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

Stuff your indignation. There are pro choice people here who see abortion as being sad and regrettable.

X, just where would you like me to stuff my indignation? I know, how about between your posts that are blatantly dishonesty?

I don't agree with their ultimate conclusions regarding the issue but we do have common ground on how we'd both like to see it become just as rare as possible.

Then there's you and the rest of the extremists that seem to actually revel in it. You defend describing the preborn as criminally insane rapists. That gives us more insight into your thought process than you realize.

How long are you going to continue to make accusations that are not related to posts that I make?

**********************************************************************************************************

LET'S GET BACK ON TRACK!​

originally posted by removable mind view post

Why is the unborn exempt from death? The born aren't.

NOW COMES YOUR REPLY TO MY ABOVE POST

quote originally posted by x factor view post
I see, now you have no issue with killing the born. I'm not particularly surprised.

YOUR POST ABOVE - it should go on David Letterman's top 10 straw man post of the year.

I am going to gracefully ask that you prove that "I have no issue with killing born persons" as you have accused me of.

I have never, ever, in the 3 years that I've posted in DP, advocated for killing born persons - and I am ****ing offended at your accusation.

X, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS BELOW?​

All living things are subject to death. It is inevitable. That includes all stages of the unborn.​

Question: How many born persons do you believe are exempt from death?

Question: What life forms on this planet are exempt from death?

Question: How many causes of death can born persons experience?

Question: How many causes of death can be experienced by a conception through fully developed fetus?

Question: Are conceptions a sacrosanct event?

Question: Do all conceptions survive to full implantation? If not, why?

Question: Are conceptions subject to natural abortions? If so, why?

Question: Are zygotes, blastocysts, and embryos, and fetuses subject to miscarriage? If so, why?

Question: Do you believe that conceptions exist because of divine intervention or influence for the reason of perpetuating the human species/souls?

Question: Do you believe that preborn are ensouled by a supreme being. If so, at what stage?

Question: Are some unborn malformed and unable to survive through gestation or beyond birth?

Question: Do still births occur among some unborn? If so, why?

Question: Do you believe that once a woman conceives that she loses any or all of her constitutional rights?

Question: Do you believe that once a woman conceives that she needs to be reported to government?

Question: Do you believe that once a woman conceives that she is not equal to the conception?

Question: Do you believe that once a woman gives birth that taxpayers should be responsible for the welfare of that child until 18 years of age?

Question: Do you believe women should be forced to give birth all reasons - other than their own resulting death from delivery?

Question: Do you believe that a woman who seeks advice and/or treatment with a physician should register with government that she has sought help?

Question: Do you believe that a woman is less equal to you?

MORE THAN LIKELY IGNORE THE QUESTIONS. And that'll certainly be no surprise there! BUT EVEN IF YOU ADDRESS THEM...you'll probably continue to create more straw man arguments. Again, no surprise.

 

[JayDubya]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

Your questions are irrelevant to the last. Of course, regarding those last ones... they are just downright insulting - they not only insult everyone here's intelligence, they suggest that those you disagree with have a bias against women. This bias is not in evidence.

Many humans suffer a natural death. Some are deliberately killed. There is a difference.

Abortion opponents do not view one human as superior to another - it is you, the abortion proponent, who unabashedly celebrates bigotry against the unborn, denying that they have value.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

Well I never thought of it that way. Breast feeding a baby might cause some discomfort too; and maybe even stretch things there too. And while were at it, how about lifting babies out highchairs and car seats? Could damage a lower disk in your back. I'll bet all the worrying and other things over raising children can take years of your life.

Nobody is forced to do any of that. And way to minimise the effects of gestation and childbirth on a woman's body - easy to do when you will never, ever be pregnant, isn't it?

 

[minnie616]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

To deny that a killing occurs during abortion is delusional denial. If you're going to support the right to do it, that's fine, but at least be real about what it does.

Since I do not agree that an embryo or a pre viable fetus is capable of life without the woman's life forces I don't agree that abortion is killing of a person . I believe it is the ending of the pregnancy and the ending of a " potential life/ person.


I do promote birth control and I am very happy the numbers of abortions are being lowered.

Not so very long ago the average number of abortions a year in the USA was about 1.2 million.

In 2009 the CDC reported there were fewer than 800,000 ...still too high but the numbers are better.

In 2010 there were even fewer abortions.

Also more of the abortions are even earlier than in the past.

In fact over 90 percent now take place before 13 weeks gestation and more than 71 percent of those were during the first 8 weeks.

Now that perscription birth control pills and devices will be covered by insurance with no co- pay I am hopeful and I think we will continue to see a big drop in the number of abortions.

I feel that would be a big win for both pro life and pro choice.

 

[minnie616]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

?..There are pro choice people here who see abortion as being sad....

Yes pro choice people see abortions as sad when a wanted pregnancy goes horribly wrong.

We see miscarriages as very sad when wanted pregnancy goes horribly wrong .

We would also like fewer unwanted pregnancies which would lower the number of abortions.

That is what we have in common.

Pro life and pro choice should be working together to prevent unwanted pregnancies from happening.

The fewer unwanted pregnancies the fewer elective abortions.

 

[Del Zeppnile]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

What does this picture of a fetus developed past the point of viability have to do with an RU486 abortion of a 6-week-old embryo? And what does it have to do with a late abortion performed to save a woman from imminent death?

Just so people know what it is they are killing.

 

[choiceone]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

I know what the definition of murder is (unlawful killing of a human being or a fetus). An abortion may not be unlawful, but neither was it once unlawful to kill your slave in this country. Just because there may be a 'law' allowing something, does not make that law right. Laws can be re-written and changed a million times. A "law" is not necessarily a just law.

When you kill a developing human being you may have a legal right to do that currently. The same way you once had the legal right to enslave another human being and kill them at your will. For me personally, I am against the killing of developing human beings. I am against legalized murder.

In most cases, the willful killing of a slave was forbidden by law. Slave codes varied by state, however. See: Slave codes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. That said, there's no doubt that the slave codes were unjust because slavery was.

I don't know the view of every pro-choice person on the thread, but quite a few of us do not think that a human embryo or fetus IS a human being. When "being" is attached to "human," it implies a mental capacity exceeding that of a born non-human primate. Furthermore, when we use the expressions "human" and "human being" as nouns, they are either singular or plural. Though we can speak of "an embryo," an embryo is biologically connected to the body of a woman and functions as part of her body. As it has no separate life, I for one don't think it is even "a" "human." It is merely a human embryo.

 

[tecoyah]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

I know what the definition of murder is (unlawful killing of a human being or a fetus). An abortion may not be unlawful, but neither was it once unlawful to kill your slave in this country. Just because there may be a 'law' allowing something, does not make that law right. Laws can be re-written and changed a million times. A "law" is not necessarily a just law.

When you kill a developing human being you may have a legal right to do that currently. The same way you once had the legal right to enslave another human being and kill them at your will. For me personally, I am against the killing of developing human beings. I am against legalized murder.

I am wondering why you felt the need to create your own definition of murder?

I have never seen it described as you have stated, and feel you DO NOT "Know" the actual definition at all.

mur·der


/ˈmərdər/

noun
noun: murder; plural noun: murders

1.
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
"the stabbing murder of an off-Broadway producer"


synonyms: killing, homicide, assassination, liquidation, extermination, execution, slaughter, butchery, massacre; More
manslaughter;

literaryslaying

"a brutal murder"

•informal
a very difficult or unpleasant task or experience.
"my first job at the steel mill was murder"

synonyms: hell, hell on earth, a nightmare, an ordeal, a trial, misery, torture, agony More
"driving there was murder"

verb
verb: murder; 3rd person present: murders; past tense: murdered; past participle: murdered; gerund or present participle: murdering

1.
kill (someone) unlawfully and with premeditation.
"somebody tried to murder Joe"
synonyms: kill, put to death, assassinate, execute, liquidate, eliminate, dispatch, butcher, slaughter, massacre, wipe out; More

 

[X Factor]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

I am wondering why you felt the need to create your own definition of murder?

I have never seen it described as you have stated, and feel you DO NOT "Know" the actual definition at all.

mur·der


/ˈmərdər/

noun
noun: murder; plural noun: murders

1.
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
"the stabbing murder of an off-Broadway producer"


synonyms: killing, homicide, assassination, liquidation, extermination, execution, slaughter, butchery, massacre; More
manslaughter;

literaryslaying

"a brutal murder"

•informal
a very difficult or unpleasant task or experience.
"my first job at the steel mill was murder"

synonyms: hell, hell on earth, a nightmare, an ordeal, a trial, misery, torture, agony More
"driving there was murder"

verb
verb: murder; 3rd person present: murders; past tense: murdered; past participle: murdered; gerund or present participle: murdering

1.
kill (someone) unlawfully and with premeditation.
"somebody tried to murder Joe"
synonyms: kill, put to death, assassinate, execute, liquidate, eliminate, dispatch, butcher, slaughter, massacre, wipe out; More

There's another story floating around here about a federal lawsuit that got dismissed. The case involves an American teenager in Yemen who was killed during a US drone strike. Would you agree with me that to call that "murder" is also inaccurate?

 

[minnie616]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

Just so people know what it is they are killing.

Not true.

According to the 2010 CDC stats over 90 percent of all abortions in the USA take place before 13 gestation and over 71 percent took place before 8 weeks gestation.

 

[tecoyah]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

There's another story floating around here about a federal lawsuit that got dismissed. The case involves an American teenager in Yemen who was killed during a US drone strike. Would you agree with me that to call that "murder" is also inaccurate?

As this was an American TEENAGER it can very easily be referred to as murder. There is a huge difference between a fully formed and functional Human Being and a fetus.

 

[X Factor]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

As this was an American TEENAGER it can very easily be referred to as murder. There is a huge difference between a fully formed and functional Human Being and a fetus.

Lol, I knew it. I thought your point was that if it's lawful then it doesn't make the definition of murder. Change up the facts a little and the arguments you make fly right out the window don't they?

 

[tecoyah]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

Lol, I knew it. I thought your point was that if it's lawful then it doesn't make the definition of murder. Change up the facts a little and the arguments you make fly right out the window don't they?

As you were incorrect in your assumption of my point, any point you may have been trying to make in also invalid.

 

[X Factor]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

As you were incorrect in your assumption of my point, any point you may have been trying to make in also invalid.

Ok then, do you agree that the term "murder" can be extended beyond its legal definition? That something could be viewed as murder though, legally, it's not?

 

[tecoyah]

Re: What would abortion laws look like if it were solely up to abortion rights advoca

Ok then, do you agree that the term "murder" can be extended beyond its legal definition? That something could be viewed as murder though, legally, it's not?

As murder is a legal term, one must inherently use the legal definition. It is certainly possible for individual opinion to disagree with legal opinion in this, yet this does not effect the definition.