Is Roe v. Wade at Risk???

Regardless of how many times it happens, when the child is viable outside of the womb that is wrong. I would not support killing an 8.5 month deformed child, nor would I support a Ralph Northam style after birth they will decide whether to kill the child method. At that point, whether or not the child is deformed is irrelevant.

At some point, humanity must prevail.

 

Do you consider yourself to be a "meme intellectual"?

Nope, I am not joking about access. It is more than adequately available in the United States, regardless of how fancy the meme maker made their eye catching graphics. I suppose anything short of abortion doctors making housecalls is going to satisfy your meme makers.


BTW...How about you donate rides to these people? Arent you the one that showed the meme and then said if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem?

 

Most of those aborted will never live beyond a couple of possibly pain filled days



There is a reason why nature is called a mother

Remeber these are WANTED desired pregnancies that have gone tragically wrong

 

The obvious commanality being that they are both viable outside of the womb. I apologize for not sufficiently dumbing this down so that you can follow along.

 

Most?

What about the rest?

 

No real research just case studies. But once again these are WANTED and desired pregnancies otherwise they would have been terminated earlier.

 

They may or may not be sad, but they're violating the law and are in almost every instance having severe mental difficulties.

 

There are virtually none of "the rest."

 

You do realize that you are arguing a position that is supported by only a TINY minority of the population, do you not?

"79 percent rejected late-term abortion, and 80 percent opposed day-before-birth abortion."
https://apnews.com/article/dec1f82c4c630cb97ab7cefc58cf0866

Whenever one finds themselves amongst the 20%, it can legitimately be argued that they are swimming in the whackjob pool.

 

So maybe their profound sadness is not the issue after all? Killing a child that is viable outside of the womb should be a sad occasion.

 

Virtually none?

Out of curiosity, if you see this as so rare that it hardly warrants a mention, why then did you say "I can't imagine the sadness most women experience around a decision to terminate a late-term pregnancy, only in this approach to have it compounded by a court proceeding. This thinking is disrespect for and abuse of women."

Apparently it is frequent enough for you to express pity for the women making that decision. In that same spirit, I expressed pity for the related children that were viable outside of the womb and had their lives terminated.

 

She did. We discussed it at length because we were both teaching sex ed at the time. I got some of the sex ed classes in a conservative community because I was a newbie teacher. Sex ed was considered a hot potato by a lot of teachers.

 

As well as social endangerment - we are talking either abusive relationship (I.e. father daughter) or homeless or both. These women are also in danger themselves with no post natal care

 

And what would drive a woman to do that? They have almost invariably birthed alone, have had no peri natal care are at grave risk of post partum infection and haemorrhage and were probably very young and abused by a relative.

 

I don't think we can conclude absolutely every woman committing infanticide is mentally ill, but I would guess the vast majority are.

We almost instinctively protect a small child. How many children have ever been dropped accidentally?

 

You do realize that you are arguing a position that is supported by only a TINY minority of the population, do you not?

"79 percent rejected late-term abortion, and 80 percent opposed day-before-birth abortion."
https://apnews.com/article/dec1f82c4c630cb97ab7cefc58cf0866

Whenever one finds themselves amongst the 20%, it can legitimately be argued that they are swimming in the whackjob pool.

 

I dont necessarily disagree about the mental illness part, but we do not set laws based upon the mental acuity of the perpetrator. There are an awful lot of mentally ill people in prison and/or locked in hospitals.

 

You're talking about a woman terminating a late-term pregnancy with an abortion for reasons other than the health of the fetus. Extremely rare. I was talking about pregnancies where the fetus is fatally flawed.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
A late term abortion has nothing to do with throwing a BORN baby in a dumpster.

So you don't know what a late term abortion has to do with a born person so have to resort to trite, unimaginative insults...hey, Anti-Choicers always do

 

What TF does "sad" have to do with rights or laws or ANYTHING pertaining to the topic????????????????????

 

Well, considering how passionate you are about adoption, I would assume and expect you to take full responsibility of all of them and adopt all of'em.

 

Prison isn't the place for mentally ill people.

 

Even in that instance though, humanity still should prevail. When a child with fatal flaws is born, we do not suffocate it out of convenience, regardless if it will likely only live a short time. I personally believe in euthanasia in appropriate circumstances, and that situation would likely qualify for such a law if it existed, but if you from a blanket perspective allow late term/viable baby abortions, you are opening the door to instances where a theoretical euthanasia law would not apply and the baby would still be aborted.

 

It depends upon the specific mental illness I suppose. It is not a place for a truly insane person that does not know right from wrong, but it is the right place for a person with bipolar that is violent due to impulse control issues related to their illness.

 

If you are going to jump into another conversation, it is encumbant upon you to read that conversation. It is not my job to keep you abreast of everything the other person has said during that conversation.

Try the scroll function. It works!