Official Abortion Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do these hypocrites oppose death penalty? Do they oppose wars?

I guarantee you at least a few of these hypocrites have pressured or supported a mistress to have an abortion, or abandoned a kid they fathered in college (or later). I absofrickinglutely guarantee it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you think Alabama Abortion law, when signed by the governor, could be called Christian Sharia Law for women of childbearing age.

Nonsense! Only the Muslims are barbaric -- they're good Christian men doing the lord's work! Praise be!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Abortions performed that end a persons life for no other reason than convenience isn't healthcare - change my mind....

A fetus who cannot live outside the mother is not a life. We can debate when life begins. But those are religious arguments. And we don’t live in a society of theocracy rule by a repressive minority.

Or, we didn’t use to.

A child cannot live without it's mother when it's an in fact and is still 100% incapable of sustaining it's life without adult support. that's why Spartans use dto leave their babies out in the sun to die.

They aren't religious arguments they're common sense.

Sure it can. Its father, or grandmother, or aunt, or sibling, or foster parent can feed it and take care of it. Doesn’t need the one woman who birthed it to keep it alive. You obviously didn’t take logic in college, did you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok so if the government can order women to go through pregnancy and L&D against their will, in the name of “saving lives,” it should be able to harvest your body for parts after your death against your will in order to save lives. After all you’ll be dead and it will be of no consequence to you if the government takes your kidneys, liver, eyes, or limbs to save or improve the lives of others. And also everyone should be forced to give blood regularly and to be in a bone marrow databank to be available to donate if the government finds a match. After all, giving blood and bone marrow is a temporary inconvenience and doesn’t harm you. Exceptions can be made for the sick and children, but once you turn 18 you need to register for the blood bank and bone marrow database.

Anti-abortion folks, you call yourself pro-life so are you with me? I would assume you will agree with both these proposals

Red Herring and nothing to do with the Abortion debate. One is talking about saving innocent babies from being killed for convenience, the other is your futile attempt to be an authoritarian.

^^^Would let an innocent child die rather than take a body part from a corpse that didn’t sign a donation form. Shame on you for not caring about babies. Friends of mine lost their baby while waiting too long on a transplant list. She could have been saved by such a law.

Adults die waiting for transplants too. This has nothing to do with abortion and your attempts at comparison is intellectually dishonest at best.

And I call BS. There is no way a young child would be able to have an adult organ transplanted into them. It's just not going to be possible.

https://www.texasheart.org/heart-health/heart-information-center/frequently-asked-patient-questions/can-a-child-receive-a-heart-transplant-from-an-adult/

So not only are you an idiot - you're a liar as well.

Who said she was waiting for an adult’s heart? Oh that was you. She was waiting for a child’s heart, and none arrived before she died. You obviously know nothing about the transplant world.

If the state can take over a pregnant woman’s body, it should be able to take over the bodies of corpses, of any age, and use those bodies to save lives. If you are anti abortion but disagree with harvesting dead bodies without permission to save innocent lives because of “autonomy” then you are a huge hypocrite. Own it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


These women should be very unconcerned about rape and pregnancy.

Men rape 5 year olds, and men rape 85 year olds. Doesn't matter how you act or what you look like.

Rape is about power. And now Alabama rapists will have to power to force women to raise kids conceived with rapist DNA, possibly leading to more rapists.

5 year olds and 85 year olds do not get pregnant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cancer cell in a man or woman is human life. It's alive, it's made of human DNA. Maybe your lifestyle choices caused it - so why should you be allowed to pursue medical treatment?

An embryo cannot exist without being completely and totally physically dependent on a woman - therefore it is not a "being" - it has no capacity to independently exist. It is therefore not an individual.

By all means make your own moral/religious decisions for yourself, but to force any person to remain pregnant and to give birth, is to take away HER sovereignty. But we all know white males in America don't believe women should have sovereignty in the first place.

Cancer cells differ from normal cells in many ways that allow them to grow out of control and become invasive. One important difference is that cancer cells are less specialized than normal cells. That is, whereas normal cells mature into very distinct cell types with specific functions, cancer cells do not.

Cancer is a broad term. It describes the disease that results when cellular changes cause the uncontrolled growth and division of cells.

Most of the body's cells have specific functions and fixed lifespans. While it may sound like a bad thing, cell death is part of a natural and beneficial phenomenon called apoptosis.

Human embryos have a specific function: life.

There are different categories of cancer cell, defined according to the cell type from which they originate.[2]

Carcinoma, the majority of cancer cells are epithelial in origin, beginning in the membranous tissues that line the surfaces of the body.
Leukaemia, originate in the tissues responsible for producing new blood cells, most commonly in the bone marrow.
Lymphoma and myeloma, derived from cells of the immune system.
Sarcoma, originating in connective tissue, including fat, muscle and bone.
Central nervous system, derived from cells of the body and spinal cord.
Mesothelioma, originating in the mesothelium; the lining of body cavities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer_cell

Any way you want to spin it, an embryo is still not a human being. If cannot exist and function to "life" within its own cellular development, alone or by itself. It is not a person. It is not a being.

The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."
[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]

Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M?ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]

Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]

Why do people think human life does not begin at conception?

The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.”
Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010)

Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.


I expect you to be an anti-vaxxer, flat earther, climate change denier, as well.

You are denying basic science and have no shame.

It's cute how Trumpsters suddenly believe in science.

It’s cute how you suddenly don’t!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Copy, paste, copy, paste... who's the one who has no shame?

I notice you won’t acknowledge the science addressed within the copy/paste. Because?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With these new laws, are women subject to imprisonment and/or death penalty or not?

Or just doctors?

In Alabama, just the doctors, not the women.

Also, in Georgia, despite the hysteria, the law stating that a woman can’t be prosecuted for terminating her own pregnancy has not been changed or overturned. And the much-repeated claim about pursuing women across state lines is just made up. It’s not in the bill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do these hypocrites oppose death penalty? Do they oppose wars?

Are you equating harden criminals to innocent babies?

most people abhor war but realize it's necessary in some cases (WWII for example)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok so if the government can order women to go through pregnancy and L&D against their will, in the name of “saving lives,” it should be able to harvest your body for parts after your death against your will in order to save lives. After all you’ll be dead and it will be of no consequence to you if the government takes your kidneys, liver, eyes, or limbs to save or improve the lives of others. And also everyone should be forced to give blood regularly and to be in a bone marrow databank to be available to donate if the government finds a match. After all, giving blood and bone marrow is a temporary inconvenience and doesn’t harm you. Exceptions can be made for the sick and children, but once you turn 18 you need to register for the blood bank and bone marrow database.

Anti-abortion folks, you call yourself pro-life so are you with me? I would assume you will agree with both these proposals

Red Herring and nothing to do with the Abortion debate. One is talking about saving innocent babies from being killed for convenience, the other is your futile attempt to be an authoritarian.

^^^Would let an innocent child die rather than take a body part from a corpse that didn’t sign a donation form. Shame on you for not caring about babies. Friends of mine lost their baby while waiting too long on a transplant list. She could have been saved by such a law.

Adults die waiting for transplants too. This has nothing to do with abortion and your attempts at comparison is intellectually dishonest at best.

And I call BS. There is no way a young child would be able to have an adult organ transplanted into them. It's just not going to be possible.

https://www.texasheart.org/heart-health/heart-information-center/frequently-asked-patient-questions/can-a-child-receive-a-heart-transplant-from-an-adult/

So not only are you an idiot - you're a liar as well.

Who said she was waiting for an adult’s heart? Oh that was you. She was waiting for a child’s heart, and none arrived before she died. You obviously know nothing about the transplant world.

If the state can take over a pregnant woman’s body, it should be able to take over the bodies of corpses, of any age, and use those bodies to save lives. If you are anti abortion but disagree with harvesting dead bodies without permission to save innocent lives because of “autonomy” then you are a huge hypocrite. Own it.

By your own quote above the sick and the children are exempted.....go back and read or take you ADHD meds.

[Anonymous]

Those arguing it's only men against abortions - it's not. Almost half of women are against abortion as well

https://news.gallup.com/poll/244709/pro-choice-pro-life-2018-demographic-tables.aspx

So.....it's not like its a decision overwhelmingly supported by men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A cancer cell in a man or woman is human life. It's alive, it's made of human DNA. Maybe your lifestyle choices caused it - so why should you be allowed to pursue medical treatment?

An embryo cannot exist without being completely and totally physically dependent on a woman - therefore it is not a "being" - it has no capacity to independently exist. It is therefore not an individual.

By all means make your own moral/religious decisions for yourself, but to force any person to remain pregnant and to give birth, is to take away HER sovereignty. But we all know white males in America don't believe women should have sovereignty in the first place.

Cancer cells differ from normal cells in many ways that allow them to grow out of control and become invasive. One important difference is that cancer cells are less specialized than normal cells. That is, whereas normal cells mature into very distinct cell types with specific functions, cancer cells do not.

Cancer is a broad term. It describes the disease that results when cellular changes cause the uncontrolled growth and division of cells.

Most of the body's cells have specific functions and fixed lifespans. While it may sound like a bad thing, cell death is part of a natural and beneficial phenomenon called apoptosis.

Human embryos have a specific function: life.

There are different categories of cancer cell, defined according to the cell type from which they originate.[2]

Carcinoma, the majority of cancer cells are epithelial in origin, beginning in the membranous tissues that line the surfaces of the body.
Leukaemia, originate in the tissues responsible for producing new blood cells, most commonly in the bone marrow.
Lymphoma and myeloma, derived from cells of the immune system.
Sarcoma, originating in connective tissue, including fat, muscle and bone.
Central nervous system, derived from cells of the body and spinal cord.
Mesothelioma, originating in the mesothelium; the lining of body cavities.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer_cell

Any way you want to spin it, an embryo is still not a human being. If cannot exist and function to "life" within its own cellular development, alone or by itself. It is not a person. It is not a being.

The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."
[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]

Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M?ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]

Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]

Why do people think human life does not begin at conception?

The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.”
Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010)

Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.


I expect you to be an anti-vaxxer, flat earther, climate change denier, as well.

You are denying basic science and have no shame.

It's cute how Trumpsters suddenly believe in science.

It’s cute how you suddenly don’t!

Who said I don't? People who believe in science know there are nuances and multiple theories. Just quoting someone doesn't mean that it is an opinion of fact set in stone. Cherry-picking and copy and paste doesn't make you suddenly intelligent, or an authority. Cute to watch, though.

[Anonymous]

If a woman shows up at a hospital, losing her pregnancy - how will you determine who is having a miscarriage and who deliberately ended it? Pregnancy loss from taking an abortion pill is indistinguishable from miscarriage.

[Anonymous]

Negligent Insemination laws today!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a woman shows up at a hospital, losing her pregnancy - how will you determine who is having a miscarriage and who deliberately ended it? Pregnancy loss from taking an abortion pill is indistinguishable from miscarriage.

this. this right here is the part that terrifies me about all of this. Women in countries with abortion bans get thrown in jail for miscarriage.

It has happened right here in this country, too. In states with personhood and fetal homicide bills. Women imprisoned for miscarriage/stillbirth.

This shit is scary and is why I am terrified for my daughters to grow up in a country like this.