Let's put this myth to rest once and for all: The Republican Party is NOT the "pro-life" party.

At the earliest, 22 weeks post-conception (20 weeks after last menstrual period), so I'd draw the line there, but in reality it's probably later. "The general agreement seems to be that due to the functional immaturity of thalamocortical connections, there is no cortical processing and no feeling of pain before 23 PCW, i.e. 25 weeks of gestation (7)." The development of the subplate and thalamocortical connections in the human foetal brain - Kostović - 2010 - Acta Paediatrica - Wiley Online Library

The bottom line is without the resonance between the thalamus and cortex or precursor structure with a similar function (cortical subplate), there is no consciousness. Without consciousness, there is no subjective experience of pain. Now, there are other kinds of responses to noxious stimuli that need to be accounted for in, e.g. fetal surgery. For example, the body could still have a stress response that causes damage, and this damage could be avoided with anesthesia, but that's not the same as saying it's feeling pain. Nor is movement away from a noxious stimulus, as in a reflex, indicative of consciousness.

 

Most? Really?

I personally do not recall anyone ever claiming the labels pro-life or pro-choice to be about anything other than abortion, but I suppose I could imagine one or even a few people that might say something of this nature (especially when goaded into the conversation with a thread such as this). Yet you claim it is the belief of "most" Republicans and presumably you just had to start this thread in order to clear up this apparent rampant confusion. Interesting.

Do you have any semblance of proof of this claim?

 

Bluesguy said: ↑
It means a right to kill their unborn babies

And the difference is ?????

 

Wonderful! With a very simple and minor adjustment to federal laws you just saved 1% of lives! Same adjustment Republicans made to raise the legal drinking age. Isn't that what a real "pro-life" party would do?

Or would they put at risk the life of a 12 year old whose mother is too poor and ignorant so they take their pregnant child to undergo an ILLEGAL abortion procedure instead?

Being a Republican today requires you to use very... "unique"... concepts of what words like "life", and other words that we used to agree on, actually mean.

 

Not true at all.

 

I appreciate the rationality of your post, but I caution reliance on the precision. Nobody knows the precise time that a fetus develops human brain waves and neural connections, and it likely is individually variable. Most people say something between 4 months and 5-12 months at the extremes. Therein lies the rub although the general idea is correct IMO.

 

The difference is that somebody being killed is not a major concern to Republicans, as demonstrated by the many examples on the OP. But a women having a right to choose over her own body after having sex for any reason other than to procreate (including rape or incest)... that is much more difficult to tolerate by today's GOP leadership.

 

Says the guy that posts a wall of words to define HIS version of "right to life.

 

Really! Read the posts....

Oh... there are many defending that right here and right now in this thread.

Read it! That IS the excuse you will see for opposing abortion. Why else would they oppose abortion?

 

In the sense that "pro life" is a colloquialism denoting one's stance on access to legal abortion ? Yes, they are.

 

You are pointing me to read through your thread, presumably to find a few people being goaded into that argument by you and that constitutes proof of what you claim "most Republicans" believe.

LOL. So you DON'T have proof. Got ya. I suspected as much.

PS- While if there was someone doing so, it most certainly would not constitute "most", I took the time to read through this thread. What Republican are you claiming is making this argument beyond anything related to abortion?

 

Nonsensical or word-game examples not rational discussion points. More like just a unfocused screed against Republicans.

Once again that woman has all the information and supplies available to prevent pregnancy - and, yes I'll stipulate that birth control options are not 100% effect; but that's something the woman has to take into account.

 

MY definition of "right to life" is that you defend the life of people. Which is something Republicans don't do. It never occurred to me that there might be another "definition". So what is yours?

 

Nice try. I'm not stepping on that landmine.

If "it never occurred to you . . ." that your definition might NOT be the one in common use apparently the thorough research you brag about isn't as thorough as you'd like us to believe.

 

ok. Great! That's an honest response. So we are now clear that you are not actually "pro-life". Just anti-abortion.

 

Proof of what? That most Republicans here believe that "pro-life" means what I said. All I have are their posts.

I think all of them. Except one of them just admitted that "life" is not what concerns him. They just oppose abortion...

But, I ask again, if it's not because "pro-life" means that they consider that life should be protected, then WHY do they oppose abortion?

Am I right to assume that they just want to punish the mother for having sex for any other reason than to procreate? Or is it something else?

 

No the real problem is that you can’t have both at the same time. You have to choose one or the other.

 

So you believe a woman should be allowed to abort up until birth for any reason she so chooses. Right?

 

There is no scientific agreement on that. I can find studies that say that it could be as early as eight weeks. If it were your child, would you want to take the chance of causing severe pain? I know I would not.

 

Therefore she must be punished!

See? It has NOTHING to do with "right to life". Exactly what I said!

 

What landmine? If MY definition is incorrect, then what is the correct one? Simple question.

 

You guys always ignore that women choose to NOT have an abortion.

 

What you are saying does not make any sense.

You are claiming that most Republicans believe that the term pro-life refers to anything other than being anti-abortion. As proof you have pointed to this thread. Even if you had one or a few doing so it most certainly would not constitute 'most" Republicans, but even aside from that, who are you claiming is arguing for it meaning anything other than anti-abortion? Cut and paste their words.

This is all just shockingly bizarre.

 

LOL, I was born in the morning, but it wasn't THIS MORNING. Someone mentioned above that the phrase is typically related to abortion. - that's close enough.

 

Facing the consequences of your actions is hardly "punishment.

Nope, just responsibility for one's actions.