Ohio passes Issue 1 ballot measure enshrining abortion protections

The blood vessels of the two separate human beings intertwine in the placenta where nutrients and oxygen and waste pass through the WALLS of those vessels. And when the one is killed it is the killing of a human being, the taking of that highest right when have in our lives, that very life. Can a mother at home refuse to provide the sustenance to a one day old child because it requires her to use her body to do so and puts her out of her way? If the baby will not take to formula and will only take nourishment at her mothers breast can the mother choose not to nurse and instead let the baby die?

 

There is no medical standard of "viability" nor does it define your humanity. The human being is as "viable" as every human being every was at that stage of their human existence. But I see you seem to have abandoned your previous position that it is simply "goo".

It is a HUMAN BEING no specious adjective you try to place in front of that changes that nor can you provide anyway to measure that exact moment in time. Give me the test a doctor can administer that would show the exact moment of this viability.

Why when one has nothing to do with the other? And I'm not the one advocating killing another human being denying them their body here.

 

The majority of the population in Ohio leans moderately conservative, by today's standards.
It is a "Rust Belt" state, so a lot of the people seem to have the mentality of working class old-style "blue dog" Democrats.

Only around Cleveland (in the northeast along Lake Erie) is the majority of the population made up of progressive Democrats. Maybe a little bit in Columbus too, the capital in the middle of the state.

But most of the Republican voters in Ohio do not feel very strongly about the abortion issue. Only in the far south of Ohio do the views get more socially conservative, but it does not matter too much since only a small percentage of the state's population lives in the southern third of the state.

 

And there's the difference that you cannot/will not recognise. A one day old is a legally identified human being...it is subject to a whole host of laws concerning its care and protection...a foetus is not.

 

personhood with 'rights' can only be established in law, either by legislation or judicial decree. Thus far it has not been established either way.

any talk otherwise is 'belief' 'philosophy' etc.

 

Well, apparently they did, they just passed the ballot initiative by a strong majority vote.

 

Unborn babies are recognized under the law but I am asking about what you are desperate to ignore is born or unborn a HUMAN BEING and you just admitted that under the law a mother CAN be require to provide that sustenance, thank you very much.

 

WHAT...have you never read our founding documents. Where does it say we are endowed by the government with our right to life.

 

Oh, I see...then why are you gnashing your teeth and rending your garments...!? Surely then, you should be able to have every abortion result in a murder/manslaughter charge, if that's the case...??

Good luck with that...

 

In the absence of any other evidence, ALL human rights are endowed by other humans...

 

Yes NATURAL law.

 

A PHILOSOPHICAL term.

 

The founding fathers allowed for that in their statement which established that your right to life comes from you heritage, your linage, your existence as a human being which flows from your creation by whomever you believe was your creator. My right to my life comes from my parents who got it from theirs who got it from theirs who got it from theirs..........it's our humanity.

 

Why are you so focused on that term which describes a mere fraction of the deaths of human beings? Are you desiring that when an unborn human being is killed it be classified as a murder? How does it not being classified as a murder under the law change any of the scientific facts I have presented which prove a human being is killed in an abortion?

 

Because YOU are focused on regarding a foetus as a “human being”! If you’re right, then shouldn’t you be clamouring to have that “human being” receive justice like any other…??

Like I said…good luck with that.

 

Well DUH our rights are based on our humanity not the government did you not ever study American History? Are you not an American therefore not familar with fundimemtal rights upon which this country is founded? And science tells us that the new human being is created at conception and our founding documents tells us were are created with that self evident right to light and it is NOT the government that endows it. Why aren't you speaking out against those lives being indiscriminately ended because another person simply did not want them to live?

 

Yes, as I've already stated...rights are endowed by other HUMANS..

Yes, so what...?

No, so what...?

That would be "fundamental"...and yes I am familiar....so what?

Nope...it describes the germinal phase (zygote) developing into an embryo and then into a foetus.

The document to which you refer states that "all MEN" are created equal and that these rights are endowed by a capital C "Creator", obviously referring to some form of supernatural influence. So, you're on pretty dodgy grounds on a couple of counts...

"Indiscriminately"..?? Except in the case of a miscarriage, I'm pretty sure that all other terminations are not indiscriminate...? They are determined...

Simply...?? Is that the ONLY reason you could offer for a woman deciding to terminate..? That she "simply" wanted to see a foetus die...? You might want to run that one past Mrs Bluesguy....!

 

Our HUMANITY or linage if that is what you believe..................NOT the GOVERNMENT.

Because I wonder where you learned this ideas about American and it's government and the founding of both.

Are they to be ignored?

Yep a human being at the embryo then fetus stage of a human life having been created at conception, your creation where your self evident fundamental right to life began.

23.2: Germinal Stage

This newborn baby is just starting out in life. They have their whole life ahead of them!

Actually, that’s not really true. While most of their life is still ahead of them — including life stages of infancy,
childhood, adolescence, and adulthood — this newborn baby is not just starting out in life. They are already nine months old, and what happened to them during those nine months will help shape the rest of their life. Some of the shortest — but most important — life stages occur before birth. These stages include the germinal, embryonic, and fetal stages. This concept focuses on the earliest of all human life stages: the germinal stage.


"The germinal stage of development is the first and shortest of the stages of the human lifespan."
https://bio.libretexts.org/Bookshel...n_Growth_and_Development/23.2:_Germinal_Stage

Yes "men" is the generic for everyone. And the founding fathers left open to each interpretation of THEIR Creator. Had they meant only a god or in particular the Christian God they would have said so. You are endowed simply because you were CREATED as a human being.

Killed because the mother simply did not want it to continue living for personal indiscriminate reasons, with exercising the discriminate judgement about our right to life.

"The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman's education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%)."
https://www.guttmacher.org/journals...ons-quantitative-and-qualitative-perspectives

Yes I would call that the indiscriminate killing of a human life.

Oh they don't want to see it after they have killed the baby but perhaps that should be a requirement. I listed reasons above.

 

Yes, there are a variety of reasons that a woman may choose to terminate a pregnancy. Compare those with your assertion that...

, or your assertion that it is done on "a whim"...

Dishonesty in your arguing does your case no good...

In my 70 years, I have not known many women who have had to choose to terminate a pregnancy, but those that I have known approached the matter very seriously and soberly. They certainly didn't arrive at their decision on a "whim" as you charge; they certainly didn't do it "simply chooses to kill"... in most cases, there was a degree of anguish and doubt.

Your disregard for women is showing...

 

Can a woman kill a rapist?

 

I hope you refuse to vote for any candidate not promising to propose a federal abortion ban.

 

It is certainly one of many issues but then why should I demand a federal ban when I supported letting the states and the people decide.

And I note you could not refute the science as I posted so I hope you don't support candidates who do wish to have little babies killed.

 

Go look it up.

 

You don’t care if little babies are killed, you just said so.