Yes, because there can be serious late term complications, and having them decided by legislators and prosecutors is just plain NOT acceptable. Remember that in the past Republicans passed a bill against late term abortions that totally ignored whether the woman was going to die. That was corrected after court inspection, but that DOES show the bottom line: Republicans have far more concern for a fetus than for pregnant women. The only direction here is to keep Republicans away from control of the healthcare of women.
Even if it was deemed a "person" ( and let's see you get an SSN for a fetus ) what does that mean? Did you mistakenly think that a "person" can use another's body to sustain it's life? YOU can't , nobody can, so why should a fetus have that super right? Did you think this "person" can harm another without their consent? YOU can't, nobody can....why do you want a fetus to have more rights than any other "person"? Quit dodging
The great flaw in your arguement is that the baby did not put itself inside the mother, the baby had no say in the matter, the baby bears no blame. The situation was created by the woman, she did it to herself (with the exception of rape, but >95% of abortions in the USA are for convenience, not rape/insect/life of the mother).
FoxHastings said: ↑ Even if it was deemed a "person" ( and let's see you get an SSN for a fetus ) what does that mean? Did you mistakenly think that a "person" can use another's body to sustain it's life? YOU can't , nobody can, so why should a fetus have that super right? Did you think this "person" can harm another without their consent? YOU can't, nobody can....why do you want a fetus to have more rights than any other "person"? Quit dodging She did it herself !!!!!!!! Gosh , you don't seem to know much about biology or science if you think women get pregnant by themselves..LOL AND even IF she "did it to herself " IT IS NOT A CRIME TO BECOME PREGNANT LOL Duck and dodge the questions LOL UNANSWERED : Even if it was deemed a "person" ( and let's see you get an SSN for a fetus ) what does that mean? Did you mistakenly think that a "person" can use another's body to sustain it's life? YOU can't , nobody can, so why should a fetus have that super right? Did you think this "person" can harm another without their consent? YOU can't, nobody can....why do you want a fetus to have more rights than any other "person"? Quit dodging
The great flaw in your "argument" is that you have no "argument"....not if you can't address questions about it
I addressed your arguement. The baby did not create itself and place itself in the mother. The mother is responsible for that outcome. The baby is totally innocent and cannot be punished.
No, you didn't....what you posted here has nothing to do with my questions....and if you can't answer THEM you haven't got an "argument" I bet you can't even answer why you think getting pregnant is a crime... UNANSWERED : Even if it was deemed a "person" ( and let's see you get an SSN for a fetus ) what does that mean? Did you mistakenly think that a "person" can use another's body to sustain it's life? YOU can't , nobody can, so why should a fetus have that super right? Did you think this "person" can harm another without their consent? YOU can't, nobody can....why do you want a fetus to have more rights than any other "person"?
. There is no "baby" YES she is... YOU are NOT!!!!! NO one is punishing a "baby"... WHY do YOU want to punish women for getting pregnant?????? THERE I answered YOUR post now why can't you address mine ? UNANSWERED : Even if it was deemed a "person" ( and let's see you get an SSN for a fetus ) what does that mean? Did you mistakenly think that a "person" can use another's body to sustain it's life? YOU can't , nobody can, so why should a fetus have that super right? Did you think this "person" can harm another without their consent? YOU can't, nobody can....why do you want a fetus to have more rights than any other "person"?
You should consider psychology. A woman can try and abort by herself, with a good probability to damage her genital system. It's better a medical abortion with a woman still capable to get pregnant in the future, than an "artisan" abortion with a woman no more capable to get pregnant in the future. If a woman is enough stressed ... you will never be able to avoid that she will try and abort in some way. Forget about that.
I never wrote that getting pregnant was a crime. The baby is not harming the mother without her consent. She consented when she had intercourse (and this is about abortion for convenience, not rape). She knew there was a risk of pregnancy and took the risk.
FoxHastings said: ↑ No, you didn't....what you posted here has nothing to do with my questions....and if you can't answer THEM you haven't got an "argument" I bet you can't even answer why you think getting pregnant is a crime... UNANSWERED : Even if it was deemed a "person" ( and let's see you get an SSN for a fetus ) what does that mean? Did you mistakenly think that a "person" can use another's body to sustain it's life? YOU can't , nobody can, so why should a fetus have that super right? Did you think this "person" can harm another without their consent? YOU can't, nobody can....why do you want a fetus to have more rights than any other "person"? Then why TF should she be punished with the loss of her rights??? The FETUS IS harming the woman without her consent unless the woman GIVES her consent. When she consented to intercourse she consented to intercourse not everything else in the world. AND consent may be withdrawn at anytime....another right YOU have that you don't want pregnant women to have as if they committed a CRIME Totally irrelevant AND ILLOGICAL ....we all take risks but that isn't a crime and we shouldn't lose our rights because we risked something
Not necessarily Abstinence only is still being taught in schools https://www.kff.org/womens-health-p...n-funding-and-impact-on-teen-sexual-behavior/ Many women face attempts to “trick” them into having sex and even face issues like “stealthing”
KFF is left and political, it was a big proponent of Obamacare, and it always seems to come down on the side of big govt. But I looked at the report, and it isn’t clear, even the chart you posted seems to contradict itself. A few years ago I was a proponent of sex Ed in high school, no longer. Too many teachers are far left wackos who push transgender, LGBT, and other crap. Not to mention the Covid experience has exposed public education and the teachers unions as political brainwashing institutions.
It is not just KFF Look around but please THIS time stay away from sites that push disinformation Mutters to self I have yet to see ONE just ONE iota of proof to support this right wing conspiracy theory that children are being “groomed”
FoxHastings said: ↑ LOL, duck and dodge duck and dodge I see you must hate logic .we all take risks but that isn't a crime and we shouldn't lose our rights because we risked something YES, I know Anti-Choicers think women having rights is a fanatical idea and outdated.....how very ignorant and primitive of THEM..... LOL, duck and dodge duck and dodge I see you must hate logic .we all take risks but that isn't a crime and we shouldn't lose our rights because we risked something
KFF is disinformation, just dressed up in expensive clothes. When Obamacare was being rammed down our throats Kaiser was right them pushing it. It’s always on the side of big govt, never on the side of the individual. Grooming? That’s not what I meant at all, but now that you mention it, grooming is another good reason to keep sex Ed out of public schools. In fact grooming alone is a good reason to purge the teachers of all the loons. Or just remove kids from public school and send them to private school or homeschool. I see you are in Australia, why do you give a hoot about grooming in the USA? Didn’t Covid reveal your govt to be total tyrants? Don’t you think that’s a little more important for Australians than USA internal issues?
Interesting logic. Would you accept that given the prospect of said recipient also being irresponsible that the society could also then push that out to include the woman asking for one?
That's the beauty of a pure democracy. Once we go down that path we can kill whoever we want as long as the majority approves of doing so.
The claims of "grooming" are clearly no more than political BS. Where you want to go from there is absolutely not justified by such nonsensical claims.
