Big Lies for Abortion >>MOD WARNING<<

Ridiculous nonsense. I LOVE to debate the science. Its a human at conception and science supports that it STILL does not have a right to life until at least week 24.

 

Are you saying that if the fetus has a heart that does not function properly, it is not a person, so it is OK to abort it? Because I would say brain function is more important than heart function.

 

So you think that because abortions are illegal that they don't happen?


You: "" Women too must take responsibility for their actions.""


They do. If they don't want a baby they have an abortion.

What you want is to force them to accept YOUR idea of responsibility....

 

Like I said, they don't believe the fetus/baby is a living human being, so in their minds the baby cant be killed. They dehumanize the baby, which in their minds allow the horrific act of chopping it up and sucking out through a vacuum as "just a medical procedure". This is the biggest reason why it can't be banned, too many people have fallen victim to this propaganda from those who wished to rid the US of the "undesirables", aka eugenics.

 

If you believe that your morality is sucking. There is a baby in the womb from conception on, and to kill it is immoral murder.

I further believe that both the mother and the abortionist will suffer because of it sometime in the future.

 

You can have your little beliefs but they will never change facts

You care welcome to your beliefs if you mind your own business and let others mind their's....

 

I see most of your issues have been refuted already, but I would like to touch on a couple of these issues as well.

You seem to think it proves something about the fetus because a man can be convicted of murder for killing a fetus without the consent of the mother. The cases you cited were special laws enacted in California, Tennessee, and the UK which make it a crime to kill the unborn fetus without the consent of the mother. The UVVA that others mentioned is a similar law making it a crime in other jurisdictions to kill the fetus without the consent of the mother. None of these laws would be needed if the fetus was the same thing as a person who has already been born, so the very presence of these laws tells us that the politicians who enacted them know very well that the fetus is different. None of these laws prohibit legal abortion (because that is done with the consent of the mother). This is an admission that the fetus is NOT the same as a newborn and different rules can be applied.

You mention that Norma McCorvey is a liar (she claimed she had been raped). That, however, is irrelevant to the court ruling. McCorvey&#8217;s lawyers had never mentioned an alleged rape in court, and it formed no part of their legal argument. Now McCorvey claims abortion is wrong. Should we believe her now?

You claim Margaret Sanger was a racist (based on comments taken out of context) and imply that this makes Planned Parenthood a racist organization, but my experience with Planned Parenthood indicates that it does offer women's health services and it does NOT discriminate against women of any color.

Regarding your timeline: If you believe the zef (zygote/embryo/fetus) is a person from the moment of conception, then it has no right to trespass upon a woman and draw upon her resources without her permission, so in that case the moment of birth removes it from the domain of that woman and places it within the domain of the government. That would make the moment of birth the correct legal threshold.

I personally believe a functional brain is a requirement (not just one that hums background noise on the EEG, but a brain capable of meaningful thought). Medical science tells us that the cerebrum cannot possibly support meaningful thought until the last few weeks of pregnancy, so we know as a scientific fact that meaningful thought is not possible before that point. Many people (including pro-lifer advocates) claim that it takes several months after birth for the newborn to think well enough to be a "person" with meaningful thought. That creates a window of time between the first POSSIBLE incident of meaningful thought (about 6 weeks before birth) and the first KNOWN incident of meaningful thought (some number of weeks after birth).

The facts indicate that up to 6 weeks before birth, there is no person inside the womb to protect. The law should only protect the interests of the mother who may want a child (in which case you prosecute for destruction of her fetus) or the pregnant woman who does not want a child (in which case you facilitate an abortion with NO restrictions). Do you disagree with using brain development as an indicator of personhood?

In the last 6 weeks of pregnancy, some say the fetal brain is still developing and cannot actually begin to construct meaningful thoughts until months after birth, so I would say the point of actual birth is the most logical threshold to use for legal purposes. That allows the newborn the benefit of the doubt. Before birth (in those last 6 weeks or so) the law should allow the pregnant woman the benefit of the doubt. She has already demonstrated her concern for the well-being of this child for several months by that point, so if she is contemplating an abortion the probably has a good reason. Pro-life interference with medical treatment leads to the policies like those in Ireland where they ignore the signs that an abortion is necessary and allow the mother to die (e.g. Savita Halappanavar).

 

Thankfully most of the civilized world does NOT have the same belief as you. You are part of the fringe outliers.

 

However you want to justify the failure of your desire to control women.....is fine, as long as you're admitting you've failed.

- - - Updated - - -

Explain further...."suffer" how? What criminal punishment would you want dealt out to them?

 

There is a potential baby (or some would say a potential person) in the womb. What is your evidence that it is already a person (or baby) before birth?

 

A growing baby with a beating heart is NOT, repeat NOT "brain dead." Your word games always fail when they are
closely examined. The problem is that so few people bother to listen carefully to, and analyze what you Leftists say.
You simply spew out one Liberal Talking Point after another, and then congratulate yourselves on "winning" yet another
argument or debate.

The babies are still dead, and their mothers-to-be will suffer their injuries and mental anguish for the rest of their lives.

 

You're a pro-abortion Leftist. People with real morality, and decency, and integrity don't need to rely on others.
People with courage don't have to look to their right and their left and then march in lockstep with their friends
just because they all fall for Leftist Talking Points, such as "choice" and "a woman's right to choose."

Any decent person would have compassion for babies who, at the very least, could survive if delivered.
Babies in their mothers' wombs for five months have been delivered healthy many, many times.
How many pro-abortionists spewing Talking Points here would agree that all abortions MUST take place before
the fifth month? How many? Very few, I suspect. Once Leftists have joined ranks, they almost never defect.
That would take courage and an admission that they were wrong. I think I saw one liberal do that. Once.

 

If Pro-Choicers were wrong then someone would've proved it by now.....that hasn't happened.

 

Failed at what, trying to save babies from the feminazis who show their "liberation" by killing their unborn children? I guess. I understand that people, especially murderers, are going to do what they want because they have a mental illness that disconnects them from reality. It was the left that had to go through activist judges to get their eugenics plan legal then started setting up 70% of their abortion mills near 12% of the population.

 

Factually based on eeg reading you are incorrect

 

No baby has ever survived at 20 weeks. Sorry

 

Its funny how the left will fight so hard to keep someone like terri shibo on life support when pronounced "brain dead", but will fight so hard to have a mother kill their developing child just because it hasn't reached the same stage in life they have. Terri was "brain dead", and most people don't come back from her state. MOST babies however, DO develop the brain capacity to survive and no longer be considered what you call "brain dead".

 

Geez, way to switch the wording around. 5 months is not the same as 20 weeks. 21 weeks is the record for youngest gestation, which is a tad shy of 5 months. But anyways, if and when science figures a way to save babies under 20 weeks, will it then be called murder?

 

If you do some research you will discover the right-wing conservatives (like Shaun Hannity) were fighting to claim Terri Schiavo still had enough brain function to be considered a person. He was wrong, and so was the "doctor" that he interviewed to support his claim (Dr. Bill Hammesfahr). It was the liberal left-wing view that all of her other doctors declared that her brain was beyond recovery and she should be allowed to die in peace. The autopsy revealed that the injury had reduced her brain to the size of a walnut, so the pro-lifers trying to keep her alive were not protecting anybody.

The fetal brain cannot possibly think a meaningful thought until the end of the pregnancy, and does not have an environment to stimulate thought until birth, so it exists at the other end of the spectrum. No cerebral function yet.

 

Ok, I concede that one. I wasn't much into the news at that point. Thanks for the education

So what? Then do you condone execution of mentally handicapped people? What is the line you draw that says "here is where we call it killing now". Some on the left call for a 2 year trial period of when the mother can chose to kill her kid. What makes them any less sadistic than you?

 

But they are brain dead AND residing inside another person. At that moment the actual person gets to decide what to do with that brain dead human in her body. And don't speak for the left. Plenty of Christian conservatives fought to keep Terri Schiavo stuck on those machines forever.

- - - Updated - - -

Brain dead is brain dead.....that has nothing to do with mentally handicapped people

- - - Updated - - -

Save them from what? Abortion currently is allowed up to 24 weeks in many places and it is not called murder now.

 

What facts? Your crude suggestion that innocent babies in the womb should are as justified human beings as the mother, or you, or the abortioner. In addition, my comment about suffering does not come from just a "belief" It comes from my studies to become a psychologist. Of the women I have counseled, or know, more than half have suffered emotionally because the MURDERED THEIR BABY. The rest CHOOSE to follow the Atheist way and could care less. They have sex WITH THE INTENTION, to murder any child they carry; some several times. I could care less if they survive, get well or in some cases commit suicide. The Mds who do the abortion is an immoral person just wanting to get rich.

To me, the Atheist beliefs about abortion are disgusting and not justified. In addition, as a humanist I definitely have business condemning opinions like yours and mothers who murder their children.

 

As a psychologist I honor that last sentence. Bravo!

- - - Updated - - -

Abortion for convenience is evil, even to us humanists.

- - - Updated - - -

There are no PROOFS, either way, so your high horse just dumped you.

 

I await to see your peer reviewed study doctor. You do have a study rather than anecdotal evidence......don't you?

- - - Updated - - -

Abortion for convenience is as moral as getting a tooth pulled.