How could you kill your own baby ?

I was trying to make the point how I can be against the abortion of normal healthy fetuses, but in favor of euthanasia of severely retarded/deformed babies. There is not necessarily any inconsistency.

 

No no inconsistency and ho hypocrisy - I was not so much talking to you as outlining the burden of health that baby would probably have

 

So why don't we talk about when it is not a severely retarded fetus, and the woman's life is not in danger. Because that's what the situation is the vast majority of the time when there is an abortion.

 

When women choose to give birth, are they doing it for the best interest of a child, or just for themselves?

 

Why do you support eugenics so much?

 

As you have absolutely no idea of the reasons each individual woman has for getting an abortion then you broad brush strokes tarring the majority is nothing more than BS.

BTW, that picture you posted is not of a DS newborn .. try this one



This is the type of newborns YOU advocate killing.

 

Anders Hoveland always posts graphic, offensive, or shocking and strange stuff. Have you ever noticed this before, Fugazi? Especially with that baby face which is above, which is just a fake Photoshop image.

And here's another thing which I feel like saying a lot. Fugazi, two wrongs does not make a right. Just because Anders Hoveland believes in eugenics, this does not justify you believing in the other Nazi-like philosophy of abortion.

 

If it were up to choicers, women would only ever give birth when they had something to gain.

I guess Fugazi should consider me a "moderate". He wants these defective babies to be aborted too... and then some !
Imagine all the pro-choice outrage if aborting retarded babies was banned. And yet here I am being criticized for supporting it. Some of these choicers on this forum will criticize you either way, whatever position you hold.

Can we focus on the normal healthy fetuses now? Because that's what abortion kills the vast majority of the time, even with the "later"-term abortions at 16-24 weeks. Focusing on the retarded diverts too much attention from the main issue at hand. Maybe I should have titled this thread "How could you kill your own perfectly normal healthy baby?" Because that's really terrible. "Woman's health" is another diversionary tactic used by choicers.

 

Neither does it justify you believing in another Nazi-like philosophy of making certain people less than others - BTW I usually hate using Goodwins law, but in this case it is warranted. oh and BTW don't bother coming back with the usual unproven response of "you make fetuses less than others", until a fetus is born it is not a person.

 

Fortunately that has not happened you say? Why use the word "fortunately" ? You mean it would be unfortunate should you become pregnant? For whom? Is there something wrong with abortion Pasithea?

 

Not at all women should have the final decision as to when or if they give birth it shouldn't be decided by any one else let alone the government.

When you start a comment with a false premise the rest is just plain BS, would you care to provide any post of mine that states that I "want" defective fetuses aborted, or any fetuses aborted at all, whereas you have stated quite categorically that you support killing newborns who don't meet your criteria.

I criticize you because you have very little insight into abortion, relying on sensationalism and hypothetical arguments, and because you are a woman hating racist ... remember the sandpaper, what was it ... something about shoving it up their vaginas.

yeah its amazing how you want to draw attention away from your racist ways, guess what it isn't going to happen, and let us not forget that it is you and CM who constantly bring each thread round to late-term abortions with the usual fallacy of them being elective.

 

Godwin's law again

No, unfortunately I doubt that photo HAS been photoshopped - because of the presence of what looks to be a trachy

 

No, sorry but a) it is not the "retarded" that are the core problem but those babies that are non-viable, or that will suffer multiple, multiple interventions to even begin to have a "normal" life.
B) this is a core consideration of abortion
c) it actually shows the opposite of what you contend - that women DO consider more then themselves when they face abortion

 

All women who get abortions are evil people that care more about their own sex life than their own baby's life, first of all. Second of all, I strongly believe that there should be laws which state that any women that gets an abortion should require counseling.

 

What about the millions of babies all around our world the US has deliberately killed in military operation? Where is your concern for those babies? Iraq, our war killed over 1 million, over half of whom were children. Where is your concern for those babies? And the babies you want to save, are you prepared to care for them all?

 

We have drones hundreds just in Afghanistan alone. While Obama has there were no innocents killed. I guess the six month old baby were terrorist also.

 

I think people who have the audacity and the hubris to believe they should have control over the inside of another's persons body are the ones desperately in need of counseling.

It could easily be done with two simple pictures.

One that shows your entire body, and one that shows the entire body of someone else.

The caption underneath the photo of your body would read "Yours".

The caption underneath the other photo would read "NOT yours".

It's really that simple. That's how you distinguish between what you have a right to control and what you do not.

 

Nobody has the rights to use their body to harm somebody else, which is exactly what abortion does.

 

In those photos, where is the fetus?

Is it separate from the woman? Is it independent?

Of course not.

It's inside the woman, meaning SHE has control of all decisions regarding it, not you or anyone else.

 

Abortion is woman worship. Some pro choice women are even into new age goddess spirituality.

 

Allowing women to make their own medical decisions is woman worship?

 

Has nothing to do with woman worship at all. If men got pregnant, all of my posts would be written to the effect that you have no right to tell the MAN what he can do with his body. The gender here isn't the issue, it's the idea that you have a right to set laws about how a person operates the inside of their bodies. That's my main motivation for being pro-choice, but it's buttressed by other factors including the damage that oppressive reproductive laws can cause.

 

Thank you? As if that is a bad thing.

 

Giving women the power of life and death over their own children, which happens in the context of medicine, IS woman worship.

Not to mention the fact that some pro choice women are actually into new age goddess worship spirituality.

 

Giving a fetus ownership of a woman's fetus is fetus worship. Embryos are not children.

Is everyone supposed to worship your god? What does this have to do with anything?