NYT story: Trump administration could strike abortion almost immediately using Comstock law

[Anonymous]

PS: I mean, you were talking about bodily rights. I didn't think anyone would say you have fewer rights if people don't love you, and more rights if they do. Especially about children.

Hopefully your mind is extending this to wanted and unwanted pregnancies, as well. You will be tempted to make one conclusion, but you really should think about it more.

[Anonymous]

Women are not the problem in this scenario. Men are the problem. Women could have what one unwanted child a year while then could literally father hundreds if that thousands of unwanted children. They are the ones that need to be stopped

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is the potential for life. It is not a human being.

I could lay before you the million parts that make an automobile. But that is not a car, even though every piece that would make it a car is there.

The baby inside the mother is alive. Only a human baby can develop inside a human woman.

At the moment of fertilization, an unborn baby possesses all the DNA-coded information it needs to be and is a totally separate person. At conception, “ethnicity, hair color, eye color, and other traits are already determined.”

So does a teratoma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to go ahead and guess that the bodily rights of the unborn babies (i.e., the right to actually keep their body) are not going to be given much consideration in this thread.

Do you think the bodily rights of embryos and fetuses take prominence over other considerations in any cases, such as forcing the raped 10 year old in Ohio to carry to term?

If not, why not?

Why didn’t the raped 10 year old child’s mother report the rape to police? Didn’t the mother’s boyfriend rape the girl at age 9 and impregnate her, and the child’s mother allow her daughter to be raped because she was covering for her pedophile boyfriend?

Stop changing the subject. Do you or do you not believe a raped 10 year old should be forced to go to term with the pregnancy that resulted the rape?

A 10 year old child of an illegal immigrant mother is repeatedly raped at age 9 by the illegal immigrant mom’s illegal immigrant pedophile boyfriend and your opinion is the innocent baby wasn’t killed quickly enough?

The “innocent” in this scenario is the 10 year old. That is what you fundamentally misunderstand. There is no baby in this scenario, because the child was allowed to abort a fetus.
I hope that clears things up for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to go ahead and guess that the bodily rights of the unborn babies (i.e., the right to actually keep their body) are not going to be given much consideration in this thread.

Do you think the bodily rights of embryos and fetuses take prominence over other considerations in any cases, such as forcing the raped 10 year old in Ohio to carry to term?

If not, why not?

Why didn’t the raped 10 year old child’s mother report the rape to police? Didn’t the mother’s boyfriend rape the girl at age 9 and impregnate her, and the child’s mother allow her daughter to be raped because she was covering for her pedophile boyfriend?

Stop changing the subject. Do you or do you not believe a raped 10 year old should be forced to go to term with the pregnancy that resulted the rape?

A 10 year old child of an illegal immigrant mother is repeatedly raped at age 9 by the illegal immigrant mom’s illegal immigrant pedophile boyfriend and your opinion is the innocent baby wasn’t killed quickly enough?

Yes pregnancy can kill that innocent 10 year old baby, glad you realize that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is the potential for life. It is not a human being.

I could lay before you the million parts that make an automobile. But that is not a car, even though every piece that would make it a car is there.

The baby inside the mother is alive. Only a human baby can develop inside a human woman.

At the moment of fertilization, an unborn baby possesses all the DNA-coded information it needs to be and is a totally separate person. At conception, “ethnicity, hair color, eye color, and other traits are already determined.”

So does a teratoma.

PS: if your mind immediately goes to " that doesn't count, because it's different DNA!", then once again you should think more. Are financial twins in utero the same person, it -- does it "not matter" in that case because of some other things you made up on the fly to avoid cognitive dissonance?

Maybe you'll just avoid the question and say something else you find emotionally relevant but logically is a non sequitur.

[Anonymous]

*identical twins

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is the potential for life. It is not a human being.

I could lay before you the million parts that make an automobile. But that is not a car, even though every piece that would make it a car is there.

The baby inside the mother is alive. Only a human baby can develop inside a human woman.

At the moment of fertilization, an unborn baby possesses all the DNA-coded information it needs to be and is a totally separate person. At conception, “ethnicity, hair color, eye color, and other traits are already determined.”

So does a teratoma.

A teratoma is a congenital (present prior to birth) tumor formed by different types of tissue.

The cause of most teratomas is not completely understood. Teratomas are often associated with a number of inherited defects that affect the central nervous system, genitourinary tract, and lower spine.

As usual, adult women who want elective abortion on demand use a child who was the victim of her own abusive, pedophile enabling mother and her mother’s pedophile boyfriend to pretend they are victims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to go ahead and guess that the bodily rights of the unborn babies (i.e., the right to actually keep their body) are not going to be given much consideration in this thread.

Do you think the bodily rights of embryos and fetuses take prominence over other considerations in any cases, such as forcing the raped 10 year old in Ohio to carry to term?

If not, why not?

Why didn’t the raped 10 year old child’s mother report the rape to police? Didn’t the mother’s boyfriend rape the girl at age 9 and impregnate her, and the child’s mother allow her daughter to be raped because she was covering for her pedophile boyfriend?

Stop changing the subject. Do you or do you not believe a raped 10 year old should be forced to go to term with the pregnancy that resulted the rape?

A 10 year old child of an illegal immigrant mother is repeatedly raped at age 9 by the illegal immigrant mom’s illegal immigrant pedophile boyfriend and your opinion is the innocent baby wasn’t killed quickly enough?

Yes pregnancy can kill that innocent 10 year old baby, glad you realize that.

10 year old children are not considered babies. 10 year old children are emerging adolescents. They are definitely children, but not babies. A baby is only a baby until they turn one year old. They are then a toddler.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to go ahead and guess that the bodily rights of the unborn babies (i.e., the right to actually keep their body) are not going to be given much consideration in this thread.

Do you think the bodily rights of embryos and fetuses take prominence over other considerations in any cases, such as forcing the raped 10 year old in Ohio to carry to term?

If not, why not?

Why didn’t the raped 10 year old child’s mother report the rape to police? Didn’t the mother’s boyfriend rape the girl at age 9 and impregnate her, and the child’s mother allow her daughter to be raped because she was covering for her pedophile boyfriend?

Stop changing the subject. Do you or do you not believe a raped 10 year old should be forced to go to term with the pregnancy that resulted the rape?

A 10 year old child of an illegal immigrant mother is repeatedly raped at age 9 by the illegal immigrant mom’s illegal immigrant pedophile boyfriend and your opinion is the innocent baby wasn’t killed quickly enough?

The “innocent” in this scenario is the 10 year old. That is what you fundamentally misunderstand. There is no baby in this scenario, because the child was allowed to abort a fetus.
I hope that clears things up for you.

Fetal development is an orderly and intricate process. It begins before you even know you’re pregnant and ends with the birth of your baby. Between conception and delivery, there are many detailed steps that have to occur.

There are three stages of fetal development: germinal, embryonic and fetal.

The start of pregnancy is actually the first day of your last menstrual period (LMP). This is the gestational age of the fetus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Women are not the problem in this scenario. Men are the problem. Women could have what one unwanted child a year while then could literally father hundreds if that thousands of unwanted children. They are the ones that need to be stopped

Ironically you want to control men’s bodies.

[Anonymous]

The ability to breathe on your own is really what makes a fetus viable. So if the baby’s lungs aren’t developed enough to pass air through them ithat determines the viability level. It has nothing to do with feeding as that is understood as something babies need. It has to do with the ability to breathe air.

If you are ready to stop being a fish you can be viable.
Do some research people before you form your “not science based” opinions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to go ahead and guess that the bodily rights of the unborn babies (i.e., the right to actually keep their body) are not going to be given much consideration in this thread.

Do you think the bodily rights of embryos and fetuses take prominence over other considerations in any cases, such as forcing the raped 10 year old in Ohio to carry to term?

If not, why not?

Why didn’t the raped 10 year old child’s mother report the rape to police? Didn’t the mother’s boyfriend rape the girl at age 9 and impregnate her, and the child’s mother allow her daughter to be raped because she was covering for her pedophile boyfriend?

Stop changing the subject. Do you or do you not believe a raped 10 year old should be forced to go to term with the pregnancy that resulted the rape?

A 10 year old child of an illegal immigrant mother is repeatedly raped at age 9 by the illegal immigrant mom’s illegal immigrant pedophile boyfriend and your opinion is the innocent baby wasn’t killed quickly enough?

The “innocent” in this scenario is the 10 year old. That is what you fundamentally misunderstand. There is no baby in this scenario, because the child was allowed to abort a fetus.
I hope that clears things up for you.

Fetal development is an orderly and intricate process. It begins before you even know you’re pregnant and ends with the birth of your baby. Between conception and delivery, there are many detailed steps that have to occur.

There are three stages of fetal development: germinal, embryonic and fetal.

The start of pregnancy is actually the first day of your last menstrual period (LMP). This is the gestational age of the fetus.

So what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to go ahead and guess that the bodily rights of the unborn babies (i.e., the right to actually keep their body) are not going to be given much consideration in this thread.

Do you think the bodily rights of embryos and fetuses take prominence over other considerations in any cases, such as forcing the raped 10 year old in Ohio to carry to term?

If not, why not?

Why didn’t the raped 10 year old child’s mother report the rape to police? Didn’t the mother’s boyfriend rape the girl at age 9 and impregnate her, and the child’s mother allow her daughter to be raped because she was covering for her pedophile boyfriend?

Stop changing the subject. Do you or do you not believe a raped 10 year old should be forced to go to term with the pregnancy that resulted the rape?

A 10 year old child of an illegal immigrant mother is repeatedly raped at age 9 by the illegal immigrant mom’s illegal immigrant pedophile boyfriend and your opinion is the innocent baby wasn’t killed quickly enough?

The “innocent” in this scenario is the 10 year old. That is what you fundamentally misunderstand. There is no baby in this scenario, because the child was allowed to abort a fetus.
I hope that clears things up for you.

Fetal development is an orderly and intricate process. It begins before you even know you’re pregnant and ends with the birth of your baby. Between conception and delivery, there are many detailed steps that have to occur.

There are three stages of fetal development: germinal, embryonic and fetal.

The start of pregnancy is actually the first day of your last menstrual period (LMP). This is the gestational age of the fetus.

So what?

So an unborn baby isn’t a tumor or a parasite. How are you the party of science?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The ability to breathe on your own is really what makes a fetus viable. So if the baby’s lungs aren’t developed enough to pass air through them ithat determines the viability level. It has nothing to do with feeding as that is understood as something babies need. It has to do with the ability to breathe air.

If you are ready to stop being a fish you can be viable.
Do some research people before you form your “not science based” opinions

A human fetus is a living human developing where he or she is supposed to be developing.