Is Roe v. Wade at Risk???

What does one do with a dead embryo?

 

On this particular matter, I can. What's up with the triggering anyways? I thought only LeFtIsTs were supposed to be triggered by language.

 

That it would not make one lick of sense to have a run of the mill person with bipolar to be hospitalized for the length of their sentence. There is an enormous difference between insane (which would require constant hospitalization), and someone that has situational temper problems and occassionally gets manic, but is mostly normal for the overwhelming majority of their life. With that mindset, you may as well send all of the depressed people to a hospital as well.

 

Because if man was merely an animal living by his instincts and according to the laws of nature, we would stiill be living in caves.

Whoever is in charge of the plug is in charge of their death. Do I really have to repeat this?

I doubt a ZEF has any form of consciousness at all.

What do you mean? I have been saying that it is not physically individuated a trillion times now.

That's what it literally means, yes.

A fetus is not a baby. As far as fetal development goes, it is not actualised until it is born.

 

You support third trimester abortions. I oppose them. *0% support my position. 20% support yours. I guess by definition that makes you an extremist, which is most certainly your right.

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

There is a direct analogy to be drawn between serial killers and late term abortions. They are both exceedingly rare, and their rarity in no way impacts whether you support or oppose. Bringing up rarity is therefore a red herring in deciding whether you do or do not support something.

I think we have more than adequately covered this topic. Please stop acting as if you are confused.

 

Please see above about extremists.

 

First of all, rights only apply to human beings so the only life relevant to this context is human life. Plants are lives too, but it is not what we are disccusing. If you have a problem with this you are welcome to answer the question I asked many pages back; Define rights and life.

Much like you are potential fully dead corpse. Yet, I cannot bury you alive because rights do not apply to potentials.

Roflol all you want, but the joke is on you. When it is born, it is afully developed human life. Before that is only a lump of protoplas that - in the first weeks - cannot even breathe on its own.

Yes and?

I am not going to address this line-drawing fallacy agian.

Potency and actualisation.

Si.

Good. Now you get it.

With 2000 years of Christianity and other evil, altruistic philosophies, it is no wonder that most people - much like you - have a negative view of selfishness and always misinterpret what it means. Selfishness siumply means you do something for yourself. Your life is your life to live and you should not live your life for someone else.

No one owes the State their offspring.

The State for writing a crappy law.

 

my point is that life and heartbeat is not what grants us rights. Frogs have heartbeats too and the Corona-virus is a life too. Yet I doubt your position is that these organisms should have rights.

 

Your logical fallacy of attacking the source is noted. But here are the primary sources.

Tabulation of reports on “Induced Termination of Pregnancy” from Florida[1998-2020], Louisiana [1996-2018], Minnesota [1999-2019], Nebraska [2001-2019], South Dakota [1999-2019], and Utah[1996-2018].

 

I thought you Conservatives were supposed to be all "fAcTs dOn'T cArE aBoUt yOur fEelings" kind of guys, but apparently I was wrong.

The 6 year old girl who plays with her dollies "feels like a mommy" too, I am sure. But, a mother has a child, That is the definition of the term. You cannot be a mother before you have a child. I will say it again; do not conflate potency with the actual.

Of course, in day-to-day-speech, "mother" may be used more openly, but the fact of the matter is that the pregnant woman is not a mother until she has given birth. The correct term to describe her would be expecting mother.

 

Again, context matters. In day-to-day-speech, a more loose usage is acceptable, but just because it is sometimes called a baby in such contexts, does not mean that it is the proper description of it.

Another way in which context matters is whether the woman is willingly or unwillingly pregnant. If she is willingly pregnant, she is more likely to call it a baby because she hopes to one day hold it in her arms.

Lovers sometimes call their partner "baby", does this make them babies?

 

Don't be so sure. What if one day you have a partner who is pregnant and you are told the baby will be born with a severe handicap preventing it from living anything close to a normal and decent life? What if you find yourselves in a position where you already have 20 kids and cannot afford one more? What if a woman in your family or a woman you care about is in a bad life situation and gets pregnant?

A ban on one service/good often leads to shortages in other related fields too. What if the ban on abortions leads to worse maternal care and slows down the development of ultra sounds and other screenings? Heck, banning abortion might even lead to the research that could prove that an embryo actually has volitional consciousness is hampered.

 

Thankfully.

 

The fetus is what it is regardless of what you call it. I see the fetus as very important and strongly favor top quality free medical care for pregnant women.

 

Nope, Fox was right. Selfishness is concern with one's own interests.

Very true. Righties are as anti-capitalist as the Lefties.

Because otherwise you would be bringing children to Earth not because you wanted it but rather out of conformity and self-sacrifice.

Undead corpse, unboiled boiled egg... Stupid concepts.

An unborn is not brought to the world.

 

Anti-abortionists be like "Happy unbirthday!"

 

Maybe there are things you don't understand.

 

Obviously, you don't live in the United States.

 

Words escape me. Why can't men be supportive instead of controlling?

 

Relevance?

 

You're wearing out the bipolar thing. I have bipolar relatives and friends and I'm quite aware they aren't crazy.

We lock up people we can't afford to have running around. Predators.

 

Oh, the US State governments don't have Departments of Health?

 

I understand that you would have felt pretty much the same way even though you didn't consider it a person.

 

Which fits perfectly with this:

"Lacking consideration for other people; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure." https://www.lexico.com/definition/selfish

In what situation are you saying would be bringing children to Earth "out of conformity and self-sacrifice?"

Yes, they're VERY silly concepts. I just don't see what the relevance of them are in this discussion.

That's why I said to FoxHastings, "apparently YOU think that a woman (and a man) are responsible for how their unborn kid feels about being "brought it into the world!""

 

Why do you see the fetus as very important if it's not a life?